You realise it's pretty stupid to say Democrats are Communists, don't you. I mean, their respective names highlight how incredibly different their political ideology is.

It's also ridiculously stupid to say all [insert opposing view] is this/that.

Like saying all right wing voters are neocon, libertarian,corporatists. You have just thrown together words you don't even understand but have been lead blindly to hate.

You have just thrown together words you don't even understand but have been lead blindly to hate.

thank you ^

It's all basically words, right? American communists don't vote republican.

American communists don't vote republican.

Which is true, but you can also say American nazis don't vote Democrat, it doesn't mean that all Republicans are then Nazis, does it?

We can both recognize the mistake of using all but the progressive march of the center to the left brings communist idealism closer to mainstream. Even the right has moved so far left that it's indistinguishable to a principled over-50 conservative.

Equality, racial equality.

So you oppose racial equality on the grounds that it is communist? I actually thought I was going to get at least a half intelligent response, jesus fucking christ.

So you oppose racial equality on the grounds that it is communist?

no, he opposes communism on the grounds that it preaches racial equality.

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

I'm confused about what this post is about.

It's about waking up to Tyranny.

Whjte supremacy, national socialism... Sounds awefully familiar.

The problem with white supremacy is that it is an ideology based on fallacies. Patterns truely exist within racial/ethnic parameters, otherwise stereotypes would all be made up. However, intelligence, achievements, and all the other things you imply whites are supreme at know no color. These attributes are human attributes, disseminated throughout the races. Ethnicity does not intrinsicly prescribe any of those attributes. Rather, these attributes are dependent upon many different variables.

Socialism, on paper, is apparantly a good idea. But thats as far as this pidgeon flies. Whenever you introduce the human element into an idealistic situation, you will end up with errors. With socialism, this error results in despotism. Add white supremacy with socialism and you get something resembling the Nazis.

Throughout history, those who harbored freedoms achieved more, and those who harbored freedom were happier. Those who lived in shackles and under oppression suffered the worst. When the People own the their own sovereignty, the People profit. When any other entity owns the sovereignty of the People, the People suffer.

Those are the facts im interested in. Not the crime/ethnicity statistics.

I disapprove of many of the doings of Israel. But i suspect it is for different reasons than you.

With brevity in mind, would you care to define "National Socialism"?

So ive looked at your history, and one of your subs that you mod (nationalsocialism) and i have a question:

You claim that national socialists are, "We are the ONLY group that truly defends our nation's way of life now reduced to a memory," yet, you advocate for an america of one race (i.e. whites)? Do i get thst right?

Because if so, and i dont want to judge you yet until you answer, how do you deal with ghe fact that one of the founding principles of this country is thst all Men are created equal, and has always been a metling pot of immigrants?

I support your right to believe whatever it is thst you believe, no matter if i may disagree. But it feels like your goal is to turn america into something it never was meant to be, while claiming you are turning it into exactly what it was always supposed to be. If this is true, itd be better if you amd your group created your own nation, where only you and your race could live (wherein if any other race resides in, they must be treated as second class when compared you to your race).

But then, wouldnt that make you exactly the same as that which you claim is evil?

Correct me where you think im wrong. Alledgedly, national socialists are proponents of open and honest debate. Lets see...

Naturalization Act of 1790

and?

Exactly what are you confused about? This was founded as a white republic

The nation was founded in 1790?

There weren't literally more than a dozen amendments to the constitution and then a further half dozen modifications to the Naturalization act?

When at any point did I say we were founded 1790?

When you said this

Exactly what are you confused about? This was founded as a white republic Crystal clear

Why do you have to jew a discussion up just do your downvote and move on

Huh?

Reducing a discussion to your small minded pettiness is not working anymore

Nonsequitors and dodging the question

"Representatives are to be elected by free persons excluding Indians non taxed three fifths of other persons"

Actually doesn't say that at all.

And the third clause was later amended.

The constitution codified it and the Naturalization Act even further solidified it

Did it?

Because those were all changed. Unless of course you're trying to pretend that any changes after a convenient date, a date that you've decided, don't matter.

No one wanted the immigration reform act of 1965 except the Anti Defamation League

Hearsay.

Not really but you deliberately misunderstand simple phrases and come out saying "we be founded in 1790? Shieeeeeet"

Which you went on to make the statement of:

I said we were founded as a white republic and thats the truth

and then used an article from 1790 as evidence. That's your misunderstanding, not mine.

Article 1 Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution

Ammended.

Naturalization Act of 1790.

Modified.

The changes to immigration law are two things, 1 unpopular and forced,

More of that hearsay.

they are completely detrimental.

Hearsay. I don't think I've seen a single statement of fact from you.

There is absolutely nothing positive about mass third world immigration that makes up for the death/crime/rape/drug trafficking/organ trafficking/human trafficking/child grooming.

What does that have to do with anything?

I'd rather have White America where you could speak your mind,

Like in Nazi Germany!

not stress out because you forgot to lock your house/car door,

I grew up in a minority white neighbourhood and never had these issues. Meh.

and enjoy a neighborhood community that has a lot in common culturally

A black man threw a bbq for the whole street every year and ran most of the school's volunteer extracurricular activities. Sounds like you are just suffering from having a shit childhood.

rather than people working third world wages and live prisoners in their own homes.

Hey I wonder if that has to do with third world wages and absurdly expensive cost of living?

It's the truth.

Citation needed. Hart Cellar was quite popular; specifically because it pertained to job-placement ability and familial ties over arbitrary quota.

They tried to change our immigration laws before, but it didn't work because the politicians weren't all blackmailed/controlled/coerced into agreeing.

Everything is a coverup with you people, isn't it?

You what? An article from 1790? Or our nations' first Immigration law from 1790?

Not America's first immigration law. Laws regarding immigration didn't start showing up until the 19th century. The 1790 article regarded citizenship.

The irony is hilarious though, you say Germans have no right to German land, but that Khazar converts to Judaism have a right to Palestine.

Show me where I said that?

If you accept the label of anti semite then that's like another 6,000,000 because you rely on people going on the defense instead of saying "yes I am, now how am I wrong?"

Huh?

Against the will of the people "WE THE PEOPLE"

Hearsay.

By a gang of Jews who have absolute hatred for "goyim" (non jews) who they view as livestock/slaves.

Hearsay.

Please juden, show me the seas of Americans protesting and demanding that the third world flood America, and that politicians were responding to the will of the people and not the Anti Defamation League. Please prove me wrong.

Your claim stands in stark contrast to what history shows. So you're going to have to start backing up your moronic assertions

National Socialist Germany, it would literally kill you to not use a term invented by Communist Jew Konrad Heiden to be derogatory to National Socialism

And in Nazi Germany, it probably would literally kill me.

Thanks Jewish backed Free Trade policies and immigration.

Citations needed.

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2013/05/joe-bidens-faux-pas/

Doesn't mention Hart Cellar once.

The occidental observer. Really?

http://www.kevinmacdonald.net/CofCchap7.pdf

Right, Macdonald's paper shows Jewish involvement in shaping immigration policy.

Tell me again how any of that relates to what you were saying that no one wanted the 1965 act?

You mean like George Lincoln Rockwell's assassination

What does he have to do with anything? Was his murder a coverup?

General Patton's assassination?

Yup. Everything is some kinda secret coverup with you people.

Israel using white phosphorous, Israel's nuclear arsenal.

What about Israel? I never mentioned Israel.

The fact Israel won't sign nuclear non proliferation treaty unlike Iran a peaceful nation.

You sure are eager to bring up Israel at every possible junction

You said Hitler invaded Poland

Yes. I said that. I never made any insinuations about Israel.

nstead of the reality which is he defended Germans from Poland

Yes, by invading Poland.

Rydz Smigley boasted that in two weeks Poland would win and annex all of Prussia.

So? Of course the commander of the Polish army would feel confident in his prowess. Poland was certainly confident in her ability to repulse an attack, or at least, like the rest of the world, underestimated Germany's skill.

However, you seem to have the desire to reduce the conversation to tired old talking points of "but churchill and roosevelt didn't start le ww2 XdddDDD, Hitler was out to conquer the universe!11"

I'm not sure you understand what reductionism is, but you've been the only one here doing so.

It's hearsay to state the fact subversive politicians that didn't run on a campaign of importing third worlders but did it anyway?

What? Huh? It's nonsense to state "it was against the will of the people" or somesuch

It's hearsay to state the fact Americans would have said no?

it's hearsay to state that the changes to the various naturalization acts were done "By a gang of Jews who have absolute hatred for "goyim" (non jews) who they view as livestock/slaves."

Yeah, that's right kid. What of it?

Op-ed pieces don't really count as citation regardless of whatever goofy internet rag they take place on

General Patton was assassinated.

Same goes for...whatever those crazy links are.

Douglas Bazata ADMITTED assassin of Patton.

who? So some loonie bin can just claim something and it's suddenly true?

As a Jew I'm also going to ignore the fact you mentioned his desire to take German territory including Prussia and focus instead on some bullshit about confidence!"

Yes, the statement you referred to about taking Prussia doesn't really have much to do with Germany's own aggression. This statement (if such a statement is indeed factual, something that your whole truthseeker copypasta doesn't sourc) is quite clearly in response to the possibility of German aggression. That's the whole point of such a boast.

It was against the will of the people

Another unsubstantiated statement.

Americans even today are vastly opposed to any kind of amnesty and want an end to illegal immigration,

Yes. Most people are in favour of reducing illegal anything. So now this is about illegal immigration?

but the Jew run Federal Government

clever

No it's not, the Anti Defamation League of Bnai Brith had tried as Ted Kennedy Said "For over half a century" when the Immigration Reform Act of 1965 was done.

And? What does that have to do with the statement you made?

It doesn't.

That doesn't count, something something goofy internet rag" Thankfully these conversations are more for the silent observer than a Jew who only wants to poison discussion with superfluous trash.

If the "silent observer" wants to take in a poorly written tabloid as fact that's their prerogative.

That's all you can do bud isn't it? Disagree for the sake of disagreeing and just claiming that nothing counts because you "feeeeeel" like it doesn't.

The historical community generally doesn't accept unsourced, anonymous webpages.

If you want to create some kind of precedent for what's acceptable based on that metric, I can easily pull up any number of paranoid geocities websites with all kinds of claims and use them as reasonable evidence.

"I know you've given me these sources on these facts....but...I FEEEEEL this way!!"

You haven't really provided anything. One single paper with any kind of academic practice.

"The statement you made about Poland's aggression doesn't have to do with Germany's aggression!

I don't remember saying that.

Germany doesn't have a right to defend itself/it's people only Israel does!" - You the Jew

Can you quote where I said that? You sure have an obsession with Israel.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/august_2014/voters_strongly_oppose_obama_s_amnesty_plan_for_illegal_immigrants "Unsubstantiated claim" and this is present time America.

You're all over the place with this. You reply to one statement with something completely different. I never mentioned anything about "amnesty for illegal immigrants". You're replying to yourself.

In 1965 Americans would have said

Unsubstantiated hearsay.

No politician ran on a campaign of "I will change America's culture by importing millions of third worlders!"

That's correct

"You haven't really provided anything" Translation, "I will not accept what you provide because of my dogma!"

No, because geocities websites don't count.

You said that by saying Germans don't have the right to reunify with Germany and instead must be forced to live under foreign occupation.

And where did I say anything, just one thing about Israel?

Whining about Jews is the same thing as whining about the Jewish state, they are one in the same.

I don't remember saying anything about jews. That was you doing the whining.

Jews have their tribal mentality of pushing communism in the west yet those same jews will be ultra nationalistic for Israel.

Hey more nonsequitors about Israel

Israel Israel Israel.

There, I finally mentioned Israel for you.

for saying the concrete truth that Whites built the western world and it's culture and deserve to dominate in those areas then yes I am a supremacist.

Fortunately, we don't base our entire culture or contemporary value system on the past. While "us whites" built something (most often directly on the backs of others), that doesn't mean in any way there's reason for it to stay that way. Just because something was done a certain way in the past doesn't mean it was the best way- only that it occurred as such.

Fortunately what we've learned in our permissive libtarded communist society is that skill and capability is not determined by skin colour. Nothing is given based on some arbitrary quality.

National Socialism is freedom for the white race, and in their short time as a free people Germany

What about all those white Germans killed or imprisoned?

Germany brought jet

Allied Jet aircraft had been in development since the 1930s.

electronic computer,

Computer systems were all considerably more advanced in both the US and England.

The Germans employed remarkably complex Dehomag analog systems for codebreaking.

Zuse, who developed one of the fist programming languages in Germany was not, interestingly enough, ever a member of the NSDAP. The German government also didn't show much interest in supporting him, either.

Self-Guided missiles were first developed by the US Navy.

Navigation systems, ground mapping, radar ferrets and electronic warfare packages, computerized fire control packages were all done first or done better by those libtarded socialist scum freedom hating allies.

space faring rockets,

Yes, the V2 was the first man made object in space. However, both rocket technology and "space programs" existed before the NSDAP took power inside and outside of germany.

Soviet Russia for some time also had the most advanced technology in regards to rocketry and space flight. So what? What is that an indicator of? I'm not sure who in their right mind sees that as an acceptable justification for well... Soviet Russia.

nuclear energy (Werner Heisenberg)

Who had been conducting good research well before the Nazis took power.

Otto Hahn (not a Nazi, was public about his criticism of the Nazi party) discovered fission in 1938; which of course was built on piles and piles of research conducted by scientists from other nations- some of whom actually had to flee german persecution. It was replicated (and later perfected) a few months later in the US.

Why is it so many people of different nations joined the Waffen SS

I think that's pretty clear.

Why did Germany have more "non white" allies than Germany's enemies?

Well mainly, they didn't.

Why is it vastly more Allies/Comintern personnel defected to Germany and not the other way around?

Also untrue. Hugely untrue.

"built on the backs of others" Sorry bud no matter how many times you lash a slave they Won't build space faring rockets or discover DNA

That actually does nothing to address the point. Slaves were never employed by Nasa or Celera afaik- at least not in direct capacity.

That's the whole thing about slaves. You whip them and keep them uneducated so they never will.

Your logic is just Jewish talking points

Translation "I'm too lazy, uneducated or full of shit to bother speaking to any of them"

Serve the will to do what?

huh? what?

Build an advanced western civilization?

Doing anything is really quite difficult when enslaved.

What were they doing before slavery? Being hunter gatherers

Eh not really.

Pretty much the same as today

There aren't many hunter gatherer societies left in the world- much less in North America.

"Eh not really" But yeah, really though, despite you saying eh not really.

Very substantiative.

They are hunter gatherers, they form gangs and go out to hunt for iphones/white people's wallets and lives/steal food and swisher sweets from 7/11.

I see.

Quality retort. Even using that goofy metric, hunter-gatherer isn't even a correct definition. But I'll give you a pass on this one and assume that's just your propensity for non-sequitors and hyperbole and not simply your gross misunderstanding of anthropology.

They are so equal! Clearly diversity is so wonderful!

Poverty is a bitch

Anyone who disagrees MUST secretly want to exterminate alllllll the jews using gas!

It's unfortunate you have such a cartoonish, binary view of the world

"Very substantive" That holds so much water with your ironclad record of "and?"

Pretty much. You can't just drop one liners and rely on insinuation.

Yeah, that coming from someone who thinks third world immigration is all good and no bad is pretty hilarious.

See, there you go. Didn't really ever say that.

Poverty doesn't make blacks beat 7 year old girls in Sebring Florida to death

Well, it appears it may.

poverty doesn't make blacks/mexicans kidnap and torture girls for days pouring bleach down their throat and setting them on fire alive.

Well, it appears that it does.

Please, make your next post about Jared Diamond and guns germs and steel, that would be the cherry on top of this pitiful discussion.

Why? Jared Diamond makes a few good points wrapped in some very poor understanding of history. What does that have to do with anything?

To his credit; he appears a lot more intelligent and understanding of societal changes through time than you. So sure-

Jared Diamond's work is a flawed and simplistic view of the evolution of power and civilization but provides a good starting point to understand how conflicts resolve themselves over large timescales.

Of course, all the criticism I've ever encountered about Diamond comes from Historians and Anthropologists who question some of his basic understanding of mesoamerican politics and his general eurocentrism. I haven't yet come across a single neo-nazi with anything resembling a reasonable refutation or even synopsis of Diamond or even Mcneil's work.

But I didn't mention Diamond. You did.

Left of where? My left? Your left? Is left and right really a thing?

[deleted]

Leftists will have your "businesses boycotted" for disagreeing with their beliefs. Firstly as you seem to be classing everyone left of Nazi as communist then surely there wouldn't be private business? Also have you ever heard of Kristalnacht? Or any of the early nazi things against the Jews (such as boycotts).

I do believe in free speech and I am fairly left wing. Your turn

Declaration of war?

Hundreds of Jews murdered 30k sent to concentration camps, synagogues destroyed Jewish businesses looted and destroyed.

I don't believe he has made a film about it. According to every reputable historian you mean

Well I didn't even mention the thousands of years of discrimination suffered by the Jews. I agree that israel is shitty but they have come very close to peace and it is very difficult now with Netanyahu and Hamas

So are the Jews some hive mind or are they sub human? Standard logical fallacy for nazis

Give me names of historians who deny hundreds of Jews being murdered.

Are Jews subhuman or planning world domination?

Also how do they plunder the poorest and most ignorant? They are discriminated against because they are a different religion, banked and had a different culture

Answer my question.

The holocaust did happen, even if the exact numbers are wrong it was still a terrible crime. Not the worst crime during WW2 but it would have been had the nazis conquered the soviet union

There would be more than 40 million dead. Genocide of the Jews came about because the nazis were losing the war. They wanted to murder millions of Slavs (eastern Europeans and Russians). Heard of the hunger plan? Planned to wipe out 1/3 of soviet union pop in one winter.

So you really think that Germany would have not made nukes and had another cold war?

Germany was actually close to the nuke at the end of the war. Many nuclear scientists were Germans (our germans vs their Germans was commonly said about this)

The nazis would have killed millions, more than stalin or mao and also done all of it intentionally

What part? The nazis viewed the slavs as complete untermenshen

The states under the soviet union hated the soviet union and there is a decent argument that if the nazis had come as liberators then the manpower could have tipped the balance.

The hunger plan was written down by the nazis. They wanted to turn the Slavs into a slave race and settle Germans in the east (the whole idea of lebensraum)

Because they needed to win the war, after they would have turned. Quite funny how I know more about the nazis then a new nazi

How did Bolshevik Jews turn in the Russians?

Stalin was a raging anti semite.

Also how is soviet power waning if they are coming to power?

I shouldn't even try to argue with idiots. They bring you down to their level and beat you on experience (though you aren't beating me)

Anyone who believes in sub humans cannot claim any moral high ground

What "Nazi supervillain futures"

Well I have already given an example of their plan. Also the nazis did go back on allies and betrayed, nazi soviet pact? Saying they wouldn't expand further?

Well it doesn't make sense at all then why the Russians fought so fiercely against the nazis does it. Also the first poison gas trials were on Russian PoWs

The hunger plan is well documented. As is trying poison gas in POWs.

I don't understand your third paragraph at all

The soviets were bad yes. However the nazis I believe we're worse

I am not. I know that more were killed by communists however those were not industrial slaughter and had the nazis won they would have killed many more.

On the other hand you have no compassion towards Jews and seem to think that anyone left wing is evil (even though benefits stop people starving)

No. I am saying that how it was so systematic makes it awful. The other crimes by Mao and Stalin are terrible too

Says the person who thinks the nazis were great guys

6million, 3million still more people than I could possibly imagine. Let me guess you deny gas chambers?

No I am not. I also do know that not all the deaths in the holocaust were Jewish deaths and am much more grounded in reality not in some fantasy land were npthe nazis did nothing wrong.

Can I just ask how much of a nazi you are? You seem to missed the main hatred of Slavs, obsessing over Jews

The camps. Firing squad, gassing, starvation.

What did I miss?

Not true. There were gassings.

Yes but remember Leningrad? How is that better?

The west didn't want the soviet union to get too far west.

Yes supply lines were damaged but they were starving before that. They weren't fed enough.

Ok proof that they were starving in camps? 'The man who broke into Auschwitz' Dennis aver, fantastic book well worth the read. Show me those pictures.

Yes the west allowed the soviets to take Berlin because they knew it would be a horrible battle.

Inmates at concentration camps were taken on death marches and the ill were left behind.

When do I justify communist expansion? I think the soviets were terrible

well Dennis Avey was not a Jew so well done.

Action T4 euthanasia campaign. Ensatzgruppen.

Make stuff up? No I am not the west allowed the Russians to take Berlin them selves and look at the fight for berlin. It was brutal. Stalin wanted the west to open another front for a long time around 25 million soviets died in WW2

Do you, as a ardent believer in racism, and nazism believe in Eugenics and race theory?

Einsatzgrupppen helped to organise pogroms, mass shootings, weeding out hiding Jews. And what about Aktion t4? You denying that as well?

Germany had stepped a line, it couldnt be like WW1 total defeat was needed.

Eugenics is not fact. It was based on the assumption that the reason poor people were shorter was because of their genetics when in fact it was their diet.

How is race equality not real?

What is that you just did? Ignored all my points and had an unfounded statement. Tut tut

No I have not. Answer my points

[deleted]

Rule 10. No personal attacks. Removed.

We have no rules against "shilling". Nor does any other sub that I'm aware of.

Okay, and the British SAS

The SAS were a roughly regiment sized military group of special forces which focused on high value targets and materiel.

The Einsatzgruppen were a paramilitary group which were tasked with extrajudicial killing and the murder of civilians and was composed of a half dozen battalion strength groups.

The West declared total war on Germany, and mass bombed civilian areas first.

Germany pioneered the bombing of civilians during the Spanish Civil war and were the first to employ it, again, against civilians during WW2

Germany was ready to negotiate peace at any time with the west.

Sure they were. They were ready for the West to leave them alone to their affairs while they invaded and killed without repercussion. Wanting peace and wanting to be left along while you kill people aren't the same.

No they were partisan fighters

Einsatzgruppen generally did not handle anti-partisan duty. This was handled by the regular police and by either the Wehrmacht or SS though many reprisal killings were carried out by the Einsatzgruppen.

Spanish civil war now? Whats wrong cant stick to the discussion?

Germany using terror-bombing in this context is directly relevant.

Franco handled that bud

With Germany providing the pilots and aircraft which would do the civilian bombing.

Germany wanted peace it was Jewish Media and finance that wouldn't allow it.

Germany wanted people to leave them alone.

That would be colonial Britain and France bud.

Well we're not talking about colonial Britain or France.

http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=68

Okay, and? What does this have to do Einsatzgruppen killing civilians?

Evidence given about Einsatzgruppen is laughable. The pictures the scribbled notes on scratch paper that are supposedly orders etc.

This particular document and the resulting discussion only concerns a single particular instance; not whether or not Einsatgruppen killed civilians and whether or not they were in charge of anti-partisan activity.

"Germany used terror bombing" Compared to what the allies care bombing and love nukes?

I never made any comparisons. However, you made this incorrect statement, which is what I replied to:

"The West declared total war on Germany, and mass bombed civilian areas first."

Communists use civilian partisans not helpless idiots that would waste ammo and give away position

Huh?

u got rekt m8

You respond with confoundment or "..and?"

Because you keep responding with nonsequitors.

FDR built up Russia from a backwards torn agrarian state into and industrial power with gulag slaves and kidnapped American engineers

No he didn't. Collectivization, which was aided in part by a brief foreign trade boom, was only the beginning of stalinist policies aimed at returning russian industrial output to number seen in previous years.

The reality is Einsatzgruppen were am anti partisan (today called terrorist) force

You haven't demonstrated this to be true. The majority of anti-partisan duty was handled by other organizations. One can read this in Gerlach, Blobel, Edeiken and Stalecker.

Germany negotiated honorable peace with every nation that came to the table.

Yes. She wanted a carte blanche- to be left alone to do whatever she wanted. Peace and freedom from repercussion are not the same.

All allied soldiers commmit mass looting and rape

You'll have to find a source, even a single source, to back up anything even approaching this moronic claim.

while the Germans did nothing like this.

Germans were implicated in a large number of war crimes and their behaviour in occupied territory was considerably worse than any of the western allies.

Churchill bombed civilian cities first

Germany invented civilian terror bombing and was also the first to employ it during the war.

he declared war first ostensibly to defend Poland but instead had it handed to Stalin at Tehran and Yalta Conference.

So by your logic, Germany has a right to invade other countries to "protect people", but others can't do the same?

All American aid.to Stalin during FDRs first years went to support Mao also

By 1933-1934, the US' economic activity was roughly half what it was the year before. FDR's recognition of the Soviet state was not nearly as successful economically as some had hoped. Not that none of this was in the form of "aid" but legitimate two-way economic activity and investment extending from the NEP system.

Half truth speaking media in America much like you ignored the Soviet presence and armor in China supporting Maos guerrilla and assassin campaign

I didn't ignore it. It's not relevant to the einsatzgruppen and civilian terror bombing.

Harry Dexter White and Morgenthau helped fix precious metal rates and destroyed Chiangs economy doing everything they could using operatives like Solomon Adler rousing the Chinese against Chiang Kai Chek.

More nonsequitors. What does that have to do with anything?

Japans Greeter East Asia Co Prosperity Sphere was liberating Asia toward a cultural and national awakening thst would have restored unity and real technology progress in Asia just like in Europe under The National Socialists

Lol. "Liberating". Nazis and fascists sure love that term. Don't worry, we're not executing anyone- we're liberating them!

"No he didn't" Yet he did and congressional investigations reveal just how much aid and intelligence was given to the USSR

Following NEP, Russia would see effective foreign trade. That's correct. FDR was not responsible for Russia's economic changes despite however FDR felt about stalin.

http://np.reddit.com/r/WhiteRights/comments/2soar3/the_decline_and_fall_of_the_united_states_details/

Great, some unsourced copypasta from who knows where. Even just skimming it I can see it's pretty poorly researched and full of a lot of goofy assumptions and power words.

There I listed just how much was given to the lunatic soviet state.

The dates for numbers given change all throughout. I never made reference to "the total amount given between the first five year plan and the end of the second world war". The only one to make any such declarations was you; and they were in reference to FDR's first year in office- which you were wrong about. That would be called changing the goalposts, and it's the same slimy tactic you continually employ whenever one of your points is debunked.

You keep calling answers to your questions non sequitors

I posed no questions.

Responding to a statement with a completely irrelevant anecdote would be considered a nonsequitor. That's evidenced by some fault statements about the einsatzgruppen and germany's bombing campaign repeatedly being met by statements about Mao Zedong. I'm actually surprised you haven't mentioned israel yet.

Yes. It doesn't have a single citation. That's the definition of unsourced. Similarly, many of the phrases contained therein are directly plagiarized from other sources which aren't cited.

You can't just call someone a liar without responding, just stating something doesn't make it true- and you certainly then can't go posting copypasta from plagiarized, unsourced material from a self published "expert" as some kind of evidence.

You got rekt and can't accept it.

No, it's unsourced because there are no sources

Yes, and as I said, you didn't list any sources and Masse plagiarized many sentences without citation but I wouldn't expect you to understand how legitimate academic research is conducted. Someone who sits there with their fingers in their ears going "YOU'RE A LIAR" isn't interested in being held to the same standards and rigours as the rest of the world.

Now youre going to make up bs about Lt Col Anthony Masse? Really?

I didn't make anything up

What craziness makes you think your word alone on these distracting accusations enough?

Huh?

Just face it. You had no idea how FDR was the lifeline for Stalin and in turn Mao

Actually I acknowledged foreign investment in soviet russia quite early on.

You tried to narrow it to lend lease but got rekt

You (and Masse) don't seem to understand how economics work by conflating "aid" with bilateral trade and diplomacy. This is seen in one of your earlier responses which was typical posting of spam nonsequitors as a result of being corrected on a number of points.

But more importantly, I didn't mention lend-lease even once.

k well its interesting how now you know all about masses book when I brought it up

No, it's just easy to find sources. And I've been reading the crap you people have been using as "fact" for years so I'm pretty familiar with most of the copypasta that pops up.

Eisenhower took his fuel away and gave it to British General Montgomery in order to make sure Soviets would occupy Eastern Germany.

Patton had a tendency to disregard logistics and push forward at an unsustainable pace. He generally demanded a massive chunk of supplies to push a dangerous and unsupported salient.

Moreover, Montgomery suing Eisenhower for a direct push to Berlin as they were in posture to do so. Pattons army was looking to tear through the Lorraine and the Saar pretty much on their own. Ike didn't really "take" anyone's fuel away. He was stuck between supplying the British and American groups; they were an allied army and neither a 40 division thrust through the Ruhr nor Third Army's assault through the Saar could exist, successfully in a vacuum.

The only reason the USSR was capable of fighting a war is because FDR set up unlimited aid to the USSR in his first year of office.

The USSR had been receiving allied aid since before the 1941 agreement, and while the amount received was considerable, the lion's share of LL materiel was not received in Russia until well after the dice had been cast in the East. Only one lend-lease protocol was drawn up prior to Stalingrad while another three occurred after. After 1941 russia had only received ~2% of the total amount of LL she would receive across the course of the war. Trains weren't even shipped out until 1944. Lend-lease sped the Soviet advance but did not turn the German attack away, nor did was it the source for soviet victory in the east.

Thanks for making up stuff about Patton and all this unsupported conjecture

which did I make up? That Patton was to drive through lorraine?

You refuse to recognize anything I say about FDRs aid to Communism and try and narrow it down to just lend lease

Lend lease is the only thing you brought up in reference to FDR and the soviets.

Eastern Europe and Asia among others

FDR didn't give any of these things to Stalin.

Yes, and? What does this have to do with anything? Secondly, that copypasta is a load of shit; links to some website without a single citation. Stalin's Five Year Plans increased America's hesitation at trade with Russia, which peaked in 1930. Collectivization pushed foreign investment away and Stalin himself cut foreign imports considerably. Her grain exports were abysmal and couldn't generate much to buy with. The period of economic stimulation which accompanied the first five year plan saw considerably increased trade between Russia and America. So what? America was trading with everybody.

The thing about boycotts is they are perfectly legal, reasonable, even rational things to do. Of course, that's ignoring the state sponsored anti-semitism which had been occurring already for some time.

a Jewish declaration of war against Germany all over press in 1933

Nothing about the circumstance you are referring to as "all over the press", wasn't. It wasn't all over the press by any stretch. As if a sensationalized title in a newsrag is any kind of substantiated, accurate description of anything. Moreover, there wasn't any monumental state of Judea with which to declare war.

Yet jews managed to start both world wars and even make the peace agreements.

As far as I know Hitler wasn't a Jew.

Nor was Hirohito, Truman, Stalin or Churchill. Nor were Princip, Kaiser Wilhelm, Asquith...

They also got their haven from international law (Israel)

Yes. Some things happen as a result of other things.

Looks like your words dont make up for how things are going here in reality where talking points dont work

I'm not even sure what this sentence is supposed to say.

I never mentioned Warburg and Rothschild.

That's right.

But those aren't really relevant.

To the

topic

at hand.

Instead you just

post non-sequitors

and dodge the question

instead of actually

addressing the points

oh only what you the jew says matters...

Of course. You haven't provided anything.

I mean Hitler starter world war 2?

Yeah pretty much.

He never declared war on Britain or France.

Of course. Because Hitler invaded Poland, among other things.

Germans arent obligated to live under polish and Czech occupation in their ancestral homes just because a gang of Rothschild Jews behind the Versailles Treaty says so.

And Germany isn't obliged to go invading other countries.

Unification of German lands was the way to peace and ending bloodshed.

Invading is the...way..to... huh?

Forcing an intolerable situation to get worse while having a Jewish monopolized media conceal polish and communist aggression while highlighting "German expansionism" (into German land ironically)

There weren't many jews left in any kind of powerul media positions in Germany after they were all sacked in the middle of the 1930s.

Lithuania, the Sudetenland, Poland and Austria were not "German Land unironically". Nor was Germany within their right to invade without repercussion.

Germany was a rising advanced nation with many products and inventions the world wanted access to

Too bad Hitler and his cronies had to bugger it all up.

Except I have and you say "That doesn't matter" or "and?"

You've provided single words or phrases that are either wrong, irrelevant or empty assumptions. You can't live your life on insinuation.

Poland should have stopped brutalizing Germans even children in the Danzig corridor and come to terms to let them be German again.

Danzig was a free city and had no obligation to "Become German" and Germany had no right to invade to do so.

Poland doesn't have the right to claim ancestral German cities

Nobody does.

But frankly, as far as ancestors go, it was just as historically Polish as German, if not moreso.

Do you think America would care if Britain objected to us taking Texas back from Mexico? Funny how Israel today occupies Golan Heights, Gaza/West Bank and all we here is "Israel has a right to defend itself....but not Germans"

Zero relevance. No one made any statements towards Israel.

Worst part is that actually is German land that owes it's development to German people.

Yeah. German people. Including German Jews.

"Jews" today are just eastern khazars that claim to be hebrews with no real ancestral right to Palestine.

Non sequitor.

"Jews" today are just eastern khazars that claim to be hebrews with no real ancestral right to Palestine.

No I didn't. The statement with regards to Germany was contextual as it related to the "rest of the world" and their apparently "false" narrative about Germany's aggression.

Not only did media conceal Polish atrocities against Germans

Which of course have been greatly exaggerated by revisionists.

But- even assuming the claim were true, doesn't really give Germany any kind of right to invade.

Danzig crisis and Hitler's intervention

The Danzig crisis was caused by Hitler wanting the Danzig corridor and Poland. That's what caused that.

they also lied and said Hitler said he had no more goals after the Treaty of Munich when Hitler in fact said after the situation with Poland was resolved Germany would have no more goals.

Huh? What?

Completely concealing the Russian presence helping Mao attack Japanese Manchuria and instead painting a picture of "Japanese aggression"

Hm. Probably could have been all those other aggressive things they did.. like.. Invading manchuria...

But no instead somehow it was Mao...

The lies told about the Axis nations are even more ridiculous. "Six million jews died!

Oh yeah... that whole "lie"..right..

Hitler was going to take over the entire Earth!

Not really sure of anybody who's actually read a book or two in their life thinks this.

All non blue eyed/blonde hair people will become slaves!"

""

Danzig corridor in "Poland" was German,

Danzig was a free city.

Lithuania was annexed by the USSR so I guess you just got lost in your head,

It was not part of the Soviet Union until after the war.

Klaepida was annexed by the Germans in 1938.

Sudentanland was German though

Of course, according the the Nazis.

and so was Austria (which voted 99% to unify with Germany, what do you have to say about that?)

After violence, a handful of failed nazi-sponsored coups, and then finally under continual threat of invasion, Austria agreed to join with Germany. By this point, troops had already mobilized.

Once the Germans were handed power and were marching around Austria, killing and jailing opposition and dissenters- then there was a vote. Amazingly they claimed it was 99% in favour.

The occupation of the Baltic states refers to the military occupation of the three Baltic states—Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania—by the Soviet Union under the auspices of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact on 14 June 1940[1][2] followed by their incorporation into the USSR as constituent republics, unrecognised internationally by most countries.[3] On 22 June 1941 Nazi Germany attacked the USSR and within weeks occupied the Baltic territories

Who said anything about this? Not me, that's for sure.

Klaipeda was annexed by Germany in 1939.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anschluss#/media/File:Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1985-083-10,_Anschluss_%C3%96sterreich,_Wien.jpg Here are all the oppressed invaded Austrians setting up a parade for Hitler and all of them of course know snipers are ready to shoot anyone not appearing happy!

Oh boy.

Buddy, Sudentan and Austria are Germany,

Of course, after Hitler declared them to be and then invaded.

So let me get this straight, do you think because world war 1 ended and borders were changed, that the people in the changing borders magically morphed into polish people/czech/slovak people?

The Sudetenland was never German. It was Austro-Hungarian after being separately Hungarian and Czech; etc. Under Austro-Hungary, things were looking like Czechoslovakia might become a thing, then the war. Yadda yadda yadda. Germany took it upon herself to invade to take territory- it was never their right to do so. Of course only a short while after "freeing" their German bretheren they marched into the rest of Czechoslovakia.

Danzig was free city, Germany also had no right to invade. Nor did Poland have any obligation to cede it to anyone.

Etc.

Danzig was a German city.

Danzig at the time was an autonomous, free city which was neither Polish nor German. Prior to this it was Prussian, before that it was Polish.

The sudetenland was recognized as German in treaty of Munich.

Yes, because people didn't want war with Hitler.

. If Hitler was a hostile invader why did oceans of people come to greet the National Socialists?

You'll find idiots everywhere. It's one of the few universal constants.

Amd, as you stated- there were German people and people sympathetic to the Nazis.

I also love that tidbit about the USSR and the Baltic States

Which tidbit exactly? The one where you didn't know what you were talking about?

"b but it was just a military occupation followed by annexation later! That counts pleaase believe me!"

What is this childish hyperbole in response to?

Germany defended Europe from a Communist threat which is why all European nations had volunteers fight for Germany.

What relevance does this have to anything?

It doesn't. You're looking for justification.

Spain France Norway Netherlands Belgium Russian Volunteers

Great. Good for them. I don't think I ever made any statements about the Nazis not being popular.

National Socialism is better than democracy or communism especially for white nations who are only hurt by third world immigration

National Socialism took an emerging nation and reduced it and its people to ashes. Nice work Nazis.

who are only hurt by third world immigration

You know you can be a democratic nation and practice very controlled immigration policies, right?

Your argument is the Jewish one that at any cost Germans must not reunite with Germany.

Huh? What? Your mastery of grammar and sentence structure is almost as adept as your ability to format reddit replies.

That they should be forced to live under foreign occupation based on the Rothschild Versailles Treaty as if Jewish will is law.

As far as I know Germany wasn't ever occupied until after the war.

Poland had no obligation to cease brutalizing Germans in occupied German territories!

And Germany had no right to invade, especially based on some trumped up pre-text.

A treaty magically changed the cities and people into Poles and Germany has no rights!"

Danzig was never German. Prior to 1918, it was Prussian territory which was won from Poland. During much of the late middle ages it was a self-governing autonomous city state. If you're wishing to invoke some kind of historical precedent, control of Danzig has far greater claim to being called Polish than German. However, I don't really care about invoking some dumb pre-Napoleonic precedent. Germany continually bullied Poland in attempt to cede the territory; when it wasn't, Hitler didn't just take Danzing but invaded Poland. That's a far cry from really worrying about the state of Danzigers. Attempts at "peacefully" resolving the conflict were used the same as they were elsewhere- a pretext for invasion, trumped up justification and threat under violence- "give us this peacefully or we will invade" is not diplomacy.

I'll say this one more time for your thick talmudic head. Just because WW1 ended, and borders changed, didn't magically change cities/people into Poles/Slovaks/Czechs. They were Germans forced to live under foreign occupation

Yes, Danzig had lots of Germans living in it.

"Yes because people didn't want war with Hitler" Citation needed

Do you know what appeasement is?

"You'll find idiots everywhere" Yeah so your basis for judging someone as an idiot is someone that disagrees with you? lol....

No, it would be running to cheer on Hitler as he paraded through your country.

What relevance does this have to anything?" The fact that German wasn't an aggressive expansionist power under Hitler.

So all the examples of them invading other countries isn't an example of aggression?

The Waffen SS was a large international force of people seeking to free their nations from Jewish finance and Jewish Communists.

The Waffen SS was a German paramilitary force which employed many foreign volunteers.

After ww2 ended Jews dominated Communist Warsaw Pact nations. (Ana Pauker, Matyas Rakosi, Erno Gero, Moshe Pijade, and so on) For a "holocaust" there sure was no shortage of Jews to be chairman of communist parties of X countries.

More nonsequitors

No, National Socialism eliminated unemployment

One can't just state unemployment to be ended to make it so. They were masters of cooking the books. The actual unemployed figures were roughly twice what the Nazis claimed with nearly another half million invisible unemployed. The would achieve these figures by including temporary workers as full time employed, working on prestige projects, discluding women from the employment register and discluding jews from the emplyment register. Of course, conscription works really well too- rearmament works, temporarily.

and brought about an economic/technological spring a new European renaissance.

The depression occurring at the time of Hitler's rise to power wasn't unique to Germany, nor was its recovery. The rest of its recovery can attributed to re-armament. No democratic country has ever devoted a portion of its economy to military industry as large as Germany did.

Similarly, many of the policies that kept Germany from bottoming out completely were not Hitler's. His best economist wasn't even a member of the nazi party and wasn't well liked by Hitler or his cronies.

As far as a "European Renaissance" I'll just have to laugh that one off.

It was those who declared war on Germany who reduced it to rubble and

Maybe he shouldn't have invaded all those countries or driven his economy to inevitable ruin.

even still Germans rebuilt to become a large economic force again because of their racial stock being better than Jewish finance.

Germany was on its way to bankruptcy in 1938. Completely uncompetitive resources (thanks gold standard), huge raw materials and food imports. The export subsidies of the mid 1930s stopped being effective. Now they couldn't even afford to import. The military-industrial-complex it had used to pick itself up with had stagnated. Of course, assuming control of Czechoslovakia didn't hurt. What about all those loans she took out in 1933 that were due for payment in 1939???

Democracy is trash, I'll take my American White Republic back.

Wait, you mean back when it was a British colony??

National Socialism gets you the best leader with the best policies

You mean the most ruthless.

on a certain economic dogma and will go with what works

Yes. Military economies work, for a short period of time.

Just because ww1 ended with a Jewish peace deal, didn't magically change German cities/people into poles/czechs

It also doesn't magically give Germany the right to invade.

Prussia founded Germany and the leadership was Prussian. This is just retarded grasping at straws.

You're the one trying to be pedantic.

Prussia wasn't the "founder" of Germany either.

Yes, to end the war with Poland and force them to surrender German land back.

That's some good logic. We'll demand you surrender a piece of territory under threat of invasion, and then when you don't, we'll invade.

Britain could have had the same peace as well but refused because Jewish financiers guaranteed USA entry just like they did in ww1 in return for Palestine (Balfour Declaration).

Lol. Unbelievable. This isn't even worth addressing. Patent History According to Stormfront 101.

I will say this though jude, Germany has a much greater claim to it's territories than these so called Jew Khazars do to Palestine.

You sure have an obsession with Israel.

Funny how the media wasn't saying "Germany has a right to defend herself!"

Germany had no right to invade anyone.

Israel wipes out villages and occupied parts of Syria/Lebanon for decades using American Jets/Tanks/Artillery against third world people with weapons from the Korean War era and somehow Jews make themselves out to be oppressed victims.

You sure love Israel.

Jews always cry holocaust as they genocide. That's why we hear about the fake six million story while neglecting the fact Jewish commissars murderers the Tsar and his family/daughters and murdered tens of millions through killing/gulag/slave labor/forced famine.

Non sequitor

Unless it's for Israeli/Jewish/US interests. Then it becomes "Operation Iraqi Freedom" Sorry, Jews/Israel isn't worth young Americans being maimed/losing limbs just to say that Jews/Arabs can vote in a democracy. Instead we get greasy yid lobbyists saying "No goy the terrorists hate us because we have baseball and women in the workplace! It has nothing to do with what America/Israel does! That's just the inexplicable phenomena of 'anti semitism'!"

Non sequitor

All these meaningless responses.

Okay

sure

all just

meaningless

responses

good

one

You present it the Jewish way "Germany invaded Poland!"

Yes. Germany invaded Poland. They didn't just cartwheel into Poland. They didn't waltz into Poland. They invaded.

Whereas the Germans forced to live in Poland would say "Germany came to save us from Bolsheviks!"

No Germans were forced to live in Poland. Moreover, any living in Poland were already doing so, regardless of any border-switching treaties. Poland was invaded. All of it. Not small pockets where there were Germans living that at one time sort of belonged to Germany.

What happened to the nations occupied by Germany? Nothing, most even were left with an improved infrastructure and industrial capacity.

Murder, violence, etc

What happened to the nations occupied by Germany's enemies?

The conduct of the Western Allies was certainly not perfect but was an order of magnitude greater than German behaviour, which was generally less bad than Soviet. However, the Western allies didn't occupy any country in the capacity that Germany did.

setting back technological progress indefinitely

lol...right...

end of free speech.

Ah yes, the Nazis' favourite thing. Freedom of speech.

"No Germans were forced to live in Poland" You forgot treaty of Versailles

No I didn't. They weren't forced to live in Poland.

The entirety of Poland was invaded to end the war and get Danzig corridor back.

Right, Hitler invaded Poland when Poland, who had no obligation to, didn't readily accept warmongering Germany into their territory.

But to people like you a fraudulent story of six million is required distraction from the fact Jewish Communists backed by their tribe in the West killed close to 100 million.

There you go bringing the jews up again.

You cry about parts of Poland but are indifferent to the horrors which prompted Hitler to intervene.

I think you have an issue conflating reasons for justification or approval.

When brought up youll just try and reduce the discussion to a lower level or steer it somewhere else.

Actually

I've responded

to everything you've said

and not resorted to nonsequitors

Or hyperbole

National Socialists arent afraid of free speech.

Lol yeah they just rounded up all those dissenters and free speech types and sent the to fun summer camp

Saying nonsense like "our greatest ally in no wars Israel isnt the only country committing state sanctioned human/organ trafficking so no one can hold Israel accountable!"

Hey there's you bringing up Israel again

I guess East Germans were allowed to leave also now?

How is that even close to an appropriate comparison?

Hitlers foreign policy was that of liberation

Liberation by invading other countries and taking their land.

against powers that rape and scorched earth their way through civilization

Huh?

who were ready to negotiate peace

No they weren't.

They were looking to be left alone in their action. They were looking to invade without repercussion. If they were in any way interested in peace they wouldn't have invaded all those countries. That's directly counter to "wanting peace".

They wanted a peaceful resolution to their demands. While they were making all the demands and offers of peace, their army was lining up. They wanted peace the same way a mugger points a knife at you, demands your wallet and says "I just want to do this peacefully"

They are the ones who turned the Danzig crisis into The Second World War.

No no, that would be Hitler invading Poland.

They are the ones who armed and funded the expansion of Jewish Communism into East Europe and Asia ensuring tens of millions would be wiped out in gulag starvation hell or being executed as a "counter revolutionary" (Speaking hate speech)

Non sequitor. This has no bearing on Germany's aggression.

I.brought up Israel because in response to that charge earlier you just said basically other nations do to and so just accept it.

No I didn't.

No one should have to tolerate the pedophile talmudic culture of parasitic people who want to murder everyone against their monopolistic drive

That's why you brought up Israel; you're obsessed with it.

How is is not?

Well first off, East Germany and Poland in the interwar period weren't really very similar.

That's why it's a poor comparison.

"Liberation by taking land"A tiny fraction compared to what France, the UK especially and the USA/USSR

Poland, Czechoslovakia, Austria, and then the rest of the countries later invaded is a considerable amount more than the territory the UK?? and USA??? divided up

At least the Germans worked with collaboration governments and were only comcerned with partisan activity.

Right, at least they brutally suppressed any dissent.

Its becoming not so uncommon knowledge now that the leaders of the earliest communist leadere were Jews that commit to plans to purge all opposition to control of all government but even all production.

Wow, an irrelevant mention of jews and your reply isn't even half over.

I already showed you how many Russian people collaborated for the ideals of the Russian Liberation Army which aimed to secure honorable peace with Germany and take Russia back from this international clique's tribal mentality.

Yes. Once you continued to modify your stance, you finally arrived at a figure for russian collaborators.

The ROA, and other soviet anti-Stalinist movements or even individual soviets serving within the Heer are not one and the same. Interestingly, the formation of the actual ROA was continually shot down by Hitler until things started getting really desperate. Once formed, the ROA was composed of about two barely full strength divisions with some associated support elements and a handful of understrength ersatz divisions.

which aimed to secure honorable peace with Germany and take Russia back from this international clique's tribal mentality.

For the most part they didn't have much interest in Germany. Their focus was on Russia. The ROA even skirmished with German troops.

Jews support diversity here and ultra nationalism for Israel and even founded Communism.

Hey look, more about Israel

They were similar in how they treated Germans, that's why it's a wonderful comparison

Well no, because East Germany was German and Poland was Polish.

The world has treated rising Germany like complete garbage all throughout the 20th century as if it wasn't them colonizing the entire world.

The world was pretty pro Germany until they started a world war.

and then another. And after that one the world spent millions organizing a massive relief effort for it.

And West Germany was always seen in positive light, while East Germany was usually treated with sympathy.

Slovakia remained independent

Czechoslovakia was finally invaded by Germany in the spring of 1939.

The Slovak Republic was a Nazi puppet state.

Austria was German and voted to unify legitimately

Austria was Austrian.

Austria voted to unify after Germany invaded, bullied, killed and imprisoned dissenters. You don't pay attention too good.

"Rest of the countries later" what?

The rest of the countries.... that Germany invaded. Oh wait... "Liberated"

Dissent is not equal to partisan activity. Armed saboteurs and insurgents, you know the ones that butcher villages and hang who they don't like.

Of course, label anyone who disagrees with you as violent and dangerous and you can do whatever you wish.

The partisans were red pieces of trash led by evil jewish commissars mainly.

I.e. that sort of thing

"Irrelevant because I say so" Sorry, nope

Yes actually, it doesn't have any relevance. It's just you spamming antisemitic non-sequitors like some neurotic tic.

"modify stance.....finally arrive at a figure for russian collaboraters" drivel.

Which is what you did.

First you made a statement about non-white allies, when proven wrong, you pretended like you said something else.

At the very twilight of war hoping to get away from the terror of Western backed Communism which killed tens of millions and made up a six million fraud.

Yes. They didn't really have much interest with Germany, which is what I said.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dda-0Q_XUhk

more about israel

https://vimeo.com/55650631

another mention. this is like some kinda neo nazi tourettes.

Yes, and Polish government treated Danzig corridor Germans worse than animals.

But they didn't. You're falling back on your geocities sources again.

Nor were Germans in greater Poland treated anything like what occurred in East Germany.

The whole system is fucked up Indian man 'pretended to be black' to get into medical school http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/booknews/11517877/Mindy-Kalings-brother-pretended-to-be-black-to-get-into-medical-school.html

I'm sick and tired of this peoples calling names white supremacy bla bla bla wake the fuck up.

So what's your solution? I bet it is sorta final.

will try to find your employer to have you fired,

Just like the Nazis!

have you business boycotted have you harassed

Just like the Nazis!

or even send masked thugs to physically harm/murder you.

Just like the Nazis!

Boring. Have anything substantial to produce or is it just more mindless drivel?

The anti defamation league Simon wiesenthal museum of "tolerance" All they do is demand Jewish will be done in law and courts Holocaust denial laws etc.

What doe any of these have to do with the points raised?

Jews have been kicked out of over a hundred nations for the same crimes.

And?

It's easier to target a distinct, but arbitrary ethnic group than actually bother to root out corruption, greed and nepotism because that would end up putting yourself away.

They would still be banished from England if Jewish financiers didn't bankroll Oliver Cromwell.

And?

Anti semitism is a slur against people who want to live in a free nation without being flooded with third worlders via immigration death pushed by Jewish organizations

Anti semitism is a term for hatred towards Jews.

in a free nation without being flooded with third worlders

America wasn't founded on immigration.

Immigration reform act of 1965 was an Anti Defamation League bill.

So? And?

If Americans were able to they would never have voted for it

Hearsay.

no politician ever runs on a campaign of "I will flood our nation with tens of millions of third worlders and give them preferential laws economically while cursing whites as privileged!"

You're right. Nobody does that anywhere

What do any of these "talking points" have to do with the issue already raised?

It doesn't.

It's just a nonsequitor and essentially spam.

Because you have no argument

Just a selected notepad file of copypasta

Because you're unable to actually address things

So you dump irrelevant or unrelated phrases, buzzwords or names.

If all you can say is and?,

Of course. Because you just drop one word answers without any substantiation or discussion.

and say that Jews were just arbitrarily chosen to be oppressed and victimized then obviously you have nothing but to disagree for the sake of disagreeing

I didn't say that.

Also kid hearsay? Do you really think in 1965 most Americans were concerned about bringing in so many third worlders that we become replaced?

See this is the problem with your godawful grammar and spelling. It's almost impossible to figure out what is just you fumbling a sentence together and what is your actual, lunatic opinion.

But more to the point; the issue was never about "bringing in so many third worlers we become replaced" (whatever that means).

Its self evident that you simply feel you have to disagree with a "neo nazi murderer who killed six trillion Jews"

I disagree with your childish tactics of nonsequitors, copypasta and dodging the question.

Which of course, that last sentence is evidence of.

"because you just drop one word answers" One word is all that is needed for "We were founded in 1790?" Stop being petty.

This retort is so nonsensical.

You first replied, with one word about an article from 1790. When asked what relevance that one single word has, you replied it was something about being founded a white nation

"I didn't say that" Yes you did. You said "It's easier to target a distinct, but arbitrary ethnic group than actually bother to root out corruption, greed and nepotism because that would end up putting yourself away."

Yes. That's what I said. Good job. That's not the same as:

and say that Jews were just arbitrarily chosen to be oppressed and victimized

Please pay better attention.

"I disagree with your.....copypasta...." What copypasta? Source pls.

Huh?

I hear ya, but the main stream right are some special kind of stupid. Murdock has thoroughly skull fucked them for years. It's all zionist sperm dripping out of their mouths everytime they open them.

All democracies march steadily to the left. Rupert Murdoch has nothing to do with it.

[deleted]

Nevermind then.

Obviously racial identity is not a competition. You either are it or are not and if you think it is you will just end up agreeing with the logic of Hitler when he agreed that the Germans needed to be destroyed. Right from the get go you establish in peoples minds the idea of the race you claim to speak for as transferable based on 'merit'.

And what race exactly only has Nazis to draw on as an example from their history? Zionists.

Big talk but in defining race by non-racial conditions of merit you are still pushing for it's conditions of transferability. As Hitler did before blowing his unworthy brains out. And by attacking Zionism you are most likely just trying to impose anti-racism on historically Christian societies (just as the Christian / feudalist attackers of the Pharisees try to do).

Naturalization Act of 1790

Left out indentured servants, slaves, and most women.

i.e. A foundation of imposing anti-racism on society (imposing it on servants, slaves, and most women) by the feudal attackers of the Pharisees who imposed on the British people there (unlike in Canada).

Riiight.

Well you were involving non-Britons. That was the reason for the civil war: the Anglo-French southern states were going to flood America with slavery and non-Anglosphere people.

The same could not be said for the Scots proper. Although famed poet Robert Burns once wrote an "Ode for General Washington’s Birthday," the Scots who had emigrated to Colonial America were seldom convinced by the patriots’ arguments. Many had fought against the Crown only thirty years previously, but when the Revolution broke out, the majority of Scots sided with Great Britain. Of this there is little dispute. In 1776 former Paisley cleric John Witherspoon, then president of the College of New Jersey and a staunch patriot, tried to change this point of view. He gave an address (later printed as a pamphlet) to the "Natives of Scotland residing in America" that noted: "It has given me no little uneasiness to hear the word Scotch used as a term of reproach in the American controversy." Virginian Thomas Jefferson included a condemnation of "Scotch and other foreign mercenaries" in an early draft of the Declaration of Independence, a phrase that Witherspoon discreetly helped remove. However, Jefferson continued to rail at the "Scotch Tories" for over two decades.

No. The civil war that was a direct result of people fearing the looming legal extension of anti-racism that the slaves of about 3% - 4% of the population represented.

The civil war also was more about the right to sell southern goods to other powers instead of being forced to sell cheap to northern industrial states and bring forced to buy expensive finished products.

Forced like the 3rd world was forced?

Still though "racism" could end instantly with geographic separation

And grow through hatred of the state. Not submission to it. That's what the Nazis showed.

Also crime stats list Arabs Jews and Mexicans/Central Americans etc as White in order to obviously cook crime statistics

American agencies have murdered about 40 million people since WWII, 2 million in the last 10 years.

Literally any government would be better than Judeo Bolshevism

So you are not really a racist. Just pissed.

Can't even have a discussion on race or the value of Israel to the USA without some human garbage acting as if free speech ends there.

Muricans are WASP Zionist Yankees and Christian Identityist Redneck 'sinners'. How many people have Israel murdered since WWII? Or even in the last 10 years?

Yes the poor third worlders. We foolishly built thousands of miles of roads and electricity along with hospitals and schools.

Well WASP Zionist Yankees would say it was them who did that.

"and grow through hatred of the state"

Germany had more non white allies than vice versa and supported Arab liberation.

And look what happened to their statism.

"American agencies have murdered.." Yes since the Jewish takeover and cold war as a result of the wrong side winning ww2

Your mastery really stinks you know that right?

"....how many people have Israel murdered"

They have murdered a lot as Jews and communist Jews. Tens of millions.

Yes that's what happens when your society is based on economics.

More millions displaced in Palestine for people that arent even real Hebrews.

Yes. Future Americans

Israel also has a $1 billion a year sex slavery trade of white women mostly from former Soviet states

Europe isn't far off.

Lavon Affair/USS Liberty attack. 9/11

Israel also allows organ and human trafficking and doesn't even explicitly ban slavery of non Jews.

Jews project onto the National Socialists what they are.

So called mastery again.

This is /r/conspiracy.

I was comparing the amount of ex-communist block people in Europe with the middle east.

Germany had more non white allies than vice versa and supported Arab liberation.

England had more than 2 million non-white volunteers India alone.

That's in stark contrast to the few-thousand "non whites" which would make up various volunteer forces fighting "for Germany"; Indische, Free Arab, Ostlegion, Ostturkischen etc.

Free India Army was supported by Japan.

The Free Indian Army boasted, at its peak, around 40,000 members. Many of which weren't volunteers.

Similarly, while they fought for Japan, they were never allied with Germany in any capacity, much less fought for them. So the INA doesn't count towards your "non white allies of Germany". (The Indian Legion would, however)

Gandhi considered Hitler a friend.

More stormfront propaganda.

Gandhi lent his support to Britain and its people, at least as much as a staunch nonviolence advocate can. Of course, the "friend" term was used when Gandhi addressed Adolf in a letter trying to persuade him from going to war. Another letter followed a year later using the same tone.

An entire army of Russian volunteers joined the Axis.

Yes, I mentioned that. While there were many soviet volunteers, there was nowhere near army-strength amount of Russian volunteers. There were a variety of central asian ethnicities who fought, not many of them "non-white".

Great copypasta. And you'll see how I mentioned all of that, if you'd bothered to actually read. Most of these soviets were white.

If you had bothered to make your statement solely about foreign volunteers, things would be different, but you specified "non white"; of which there weren't that many, much less in comparison to what the British could boast.

A lot more than Germany's enemies.

So you just ignored everything I posted and went back to your original, wrong, assertion.

Britain used basically conscripted slave soldiers, India did not ever want to be a British subjugated colony, neither did Africa and Palestine and the part of Asia Britain was subjugating using brutal methods.

India alone contributed over 2 million volunteers. That one nation contributed more non-white troops than the entirety of Germans foreign legions, non-white or otherwise.

"Most of these soviets were white" White people count buddy, more so than most.

So what does that have to do with your bad math about non-whites fighting for germany?

There were Black, Arab, and Asian volunteers in service to National Socialisms' worthy cause.

Yes. Not very many of them.

The British lost the war completely and soundly,

How did they lose the war? As far as I know they met every single one of their strategic goals and a good deal of their tactical ones.

They remain a world leader and have always been a G6/7/8 nation.

My nation is the only reason the USSR wasn't a backwards state in civil war when Hitler kicked in the door.

No, that would be the blood of millions of soviet troops

We sent unlimited aid to build up the USSR from the first year FDR was elected he set up unprecedented aid programs to build up the soviet state.

By the time the majority of Allied lend-lease kicked in for the ussr, the war in the east was already decided.

Also ww2 didn't start in FDRs first year of office.

I didn't say anything about that?

He recognized the USSR and set up aid programs even sent hundreds of engineers and their families to build up their backwards state

Yes, the US sent aid to the ussr.

Stalin ended up kidnapping them since he couldn't replace the skilled labor.

And? Your point?

Article 1 Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution

Ammended.

Naturalization Act of 1790.

Modified.

The changes to immigration law are two things, 1 unpopular and forced,

More of that hearsay.

they are completely detrimental.

Hearsay. I don't think I've seen a single statement of fact from you.

There is absolutely nothing positive about mass third world immigration that makes up for the death/crime/rape/drug trafficking/organ trafficking/human trafficking/child grooming.

What does that have to do with anything?

I'd rather have White America where you could speak your mind,

Like in Nazi Germany!

not stress out because you forgot to lock your house/car door,

I grew up in a minority white neighbourhood and never had these issues. Meh.

and enjoy a neighborhood community that has a lot in common culturally

A black man threw a bbq for the whole street every year and ran most of the school's volunteer extracurricular activities. Sounds like you are just suffering from having a shit childhood.

rather than people working third world wages and live prisoners in their own homes.

Hey I wonder if that has to do with third world wages and absurdly expensive cost of living?

It's the truth.

Citation needed. Hart Cellar was quite popular; specifically because it pertained to job-placement ability and familial ties over arbitrary quota.

They tried to change our immigration laws before, but it didn't work because the politicians weren't all blackmailed/controlled/coerced into agreeing.

Everything is a coverup with you people, isn't it?

You what? An article from 1790? Or our nations' first Immigration law from 1790?

Not America's first immigration law. Laws regarding immigration didn't start showing up until the 19th century. The 1790 article regarded citizenship.

The irony is hilarious though, you say Germans have no right to German land, but that Khazar converts to Judaism have a right to Palestine.

Show me where I said that?

If you accept the label of anti semite then that's like another 6,000,000 because you rely on people going on the defense instead of saying "yes I am, now how am I wrong?"

Huh?