It is currently Sun Oct 21, 2018 6:28 am


Flag Flap

  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1807
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Flag Flap

PostSat Feb 17, 2018 3:54 pm

Will Williams wrote:A Statue of a Confederate General and KKK
Leader Has Just Been Removed in Memphis

By ASSOCIATED PRESS
December 21, 2017

(MEMPHIS, Tenn.) — A crew removed a Confederate statue from a Memphis park Wednesday night after the city sold it to a private entity.

The City Council had earlier voted unanimously to sell two parks where Confederate statues were located and crews began working right away to remove a statue of Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest...
---

If we were able, I wouldn't mind purchasing that statue of General Forrest and placing it at National Alliance headquarters as an example of one of our race's most honorable fighting men. I'll try to find the time to transcribe some remarkable facts I read the other day about NBF.


Some more here about this "private entity" that purchased Forrest Park, then removed the monument of General Forrest, in front of which he and his wife are buried:
---
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — A private group headed by a county commissioner and fueled by anonymous donations bought two parks from the city of Memphis at little cost this week, allowing for the swift removal of two Confederate statues that had sparked conflict for years.

Shelby County Commissioner and attorney Van Turner told a news conference Thursday that his group, Memphis Greenspace Inc., is ready for any lawsuits that arise from its deal with the city, which took months of planning to sidestep a Tennessee law that makes it tough to take down Confederate monuments on public grounds.


Image
Shelby County Commissioner Van Turner (center)

The law has been criticized by those who say the statues are a reminder of a time when slavery was enforced and bigotry sanctioned in the South. It has been supported by those who say removing the monuments would be like trying to erase history.

Turner said he approached the city attorney with the workaround idea, the group was incorporated in October, and its 501(c)(3) application is still pending.

But Turner said Memphis Greenspace wasn’t formed just to remove the statues of Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest and Confederate President Jefferson Davis.

He said he envisions more Memphis-area parks being transferred to the group so it can raise money to revitalize them. In the meantime, he said, the organization will use the donations it has received to run the two parks it bought.

Removing the statues, now kept at an undisclosed location, will help the city focus on bigger issues, Turner said.

“When we wake up tomorrow morning, we still will have issues with education, we still will have issues of poverty in this city, we still will have issues with public safety. This doesn’t resolve any of that,” Turner said. “What this does is move this out of the way. This is a non-issue now.”

Image
Memphis City Council Chairman Berlin Boyd

The City Council voted unanimously Wednesday to sell the two parks where the statues were located for $1,000 each and crews began working right away at Health Sciences Park to remove the Forrest statue. People cheered as the statue was lifted off its marble base and placed on a flatbed truck.

At the Fourth Bluff Park, a statue of Confederate President Jefferson Davis was later taken down.

Memphis Mayor Jim Strickland said the law lets the city sell land to a private entity, and allows the buyer to remove any items it chooses from the land. In September, the City Council passed legislation allowing the city to sell parkland to nonprofit groups for less than fair market value.

Image
Memphis Mayor
Jim "Pussy Boy" Strickland

https://apnews.com/994d0c83cd0f4336a657 ... blic-parks
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1807
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Flag Flap

PostSat Feb 17, 2018 4:30 pm

Can you guess how many horses were shot out from under Bedford Forrest fighting for the C.S.A. during the Lost Cause?


This is a note (pages 600-601) in John Allen Wyeth's 1899 definitive biography, That Devil Forrest.
---

In the engagement at Sacramento, Kentucky, in 1861, Forrest was unhorsed in a running hand-to-hand fight. His horse went down after colliding with that of a Union officer with whom he was engaged in personal combat, but it is not known whether the general's horse was killed or wounded. At the first battle of Fort Donaldson he had two horses killed under him, and one of these received seven bullet wounds before it fell. The second horse was wounded, but not seriously enough to compel Forrest to dismount. Later in the action a cannonball passed through the belly of the animal, just behind Forrest's leg, killing the horse instantly, On Tuesday, April 8, 1862, at Monterey, on the retreat from Shilo, his horse was mortally shot in the charge which he led, and in which he was severely wounded in his hip. The animal lived long enough to bear his rider out of this great danger, and then fell to earth from loss of blood. At Munfordville, Kentucky, during the Perryville campaign, Forrest was again unhorsed, he having his shoulder dislocated by the accident. In the second engagement at Dover, in 1863, Forrest had two horses killed from under him. At Thompson's Station, Roderick, one of his famous war horses, was killed; and in the pursuit of Streight, in April and May of that same year, he had three horses shot.

Image
General Forrest, unhorsed again

At Chickamauga, Highlander was killed, and at Rossville, the day after the battle of Chickamauga, his horse was shot through the neck while he was leading the charge with a detachment from Armstrong's brigade. The blood spurted out, and Forrest, realizing that the horse would bleed to death before he could complete the attack unless the hemorrhage was stopped, leaned forward and thrust his finger into the wound, thus controlling the hemorrhage. The animal bore his rider safely through the fight when, his rider dismounting, the hemorrhage recurred and the horse soon expired. At Okolona, Mississippi, the horse he was riding was several times wounded and fell dead. A second horse was killed here, and Forrest continued the fight and pursuit on King Philip, a large dapple-gray animal, as sluggish as a dray horse until he heard firing, and then he was all excitement. King Philip was wounded at Okalona, and several times after that, but survived and was with Forrest at the surrender in 1865. At Fort Pillow two horses were killed under Forrest and a third wounded. At Plantersville his horse was wounded, but not mortally. At Selma, Alabama, another horse was shot.
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1807
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Niggers With Smart Phones

PostSat Mar 24, 2018 1:08 pm

Speaking of Memphis, I found this comment under an article over at the New Order site from a couple of months ago:
---

It’s all pretty sickening. In Memphis, TN local black teens and parents organize Flash Mob attacks at the Wolfchase Mall. They show up in the hundreds dropped off by parents. The local police are there but they distract them and when they run upstairs to break up fights the black tens start attacking white people including young kids. The most recent resulted in a shooting moments later outside the mall.

Flash mob defined in Urban Dictionary:https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Flash%20Mob

Flash Mob
There are two types of flash mobs:

Caucasian flash mob - Mainly Caucasians and a few Asians who come together to unexpectedly entertain or confuse an existing crowd of people. Features some light-hearted performance or a surprise random form of entertainment.
Example: Christie and Lynn were sopranos in the large chorus flash mob that unexpectedly broke into "Silent Night" for the crowd at the mall courtyard during Christmas Eve last year.

African flash mob - Mainly Africans and a few hispanics who come together to unexpectedly rob or vandalize a business establishment. Features the surprise theft or destruction of the business owner's property and/or inventory.
Example: Shaqueefa and Lashawnda each stole over $400 in candy, beef jerky and menthol cigarettes and smashed windows and displays as part of the large flash mob that overwhelmed the Qwiktrip last week causing untold damage to the store and injury to the owner.

Further commentary at Urban Dictionary, using the "n-word":

flash mob

Niggers have taken the term 'flash mob' to a new low, although it is not unusual for niggers to ruin anything they become involved with. What are currently being called flash mob(s) is actually a larger group niggers entering a place of business and looting the place as a group and leaving without any form of payment. Another example of a nigger flash mobs is niggers jumping a defenseless white person and beating them. This should be considered a 'hate crime', but the current nigger-run administration won't touch black-on-white crime. This usually occurs in large cities in states where the right to self defense is prohibited or against the law, so the proprietors are defenseless to stop the thievery. In areas of the country where the right to defend yourself and your place of business is recognized, niggers realize they would be turned into coon skin caps and refrain from such actions.

Image
A flash mob for niggers is just another excuse to commit crime. Niggers will use any excuse to loot and commit violence since for them, it's easier than learning a skill and getting and a job. Lets face it, if they hadn't been removed from the continent of Africa, they'd still be there chucking spears.
#flash mob#niggers#hate crime#nigger#crime#loot
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1807
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

White "Flash mob" acts White

PostSat Mar 24, 2018 4:46 pm

Imagine that!

With video: https://nationalvanguard.org/2016/10/wh ... n-station/

"Even in commercialized surroundings, White people create spontaneous beauty."
Offline
User avatar

PhuBai68

  • Posts: 251
  • Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2017 3:23 pm
  • Location: Pickens County, SC

Re: Flag Flap

PostSun Mar 25, 2018 7:36 pm

Negroes will be Negroes.

Funny when you think as a kid they were "coloreds", "niggers" or "Negroes".
Then sometime in the 60's with the marches and city riots they became "soul brothers & sisters" or "blacks".
I honestly don't remember when they became "African Americans".


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tV3Mpmbd0lk
It's not diversity, it's displacement.
Offline
User avatar

PhuBai68

  • Posts: 251
  • Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2017 3:23 pm
  • Location: Pickens County, SC

Re: Flag Flap

PostSun Mar 25, 2018 7:49 pm

Actually the Hardee's in Lewisburg and White Sulfur Springs are rather pleasant fast food joints - White people work them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXdTOHyT3g8
It's not diversity, it's displacement.
Offline

Jim Mathias

  • Posts: 582
  • Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 8:48 pm

Re: Flag Flap

PostMon Mar 26, 2018 2:08 am

PhuBai68 wrote:Actually the Hardee's in Lewisburg and White Sulfur Springs are rather pleasant fast food joints - White people work them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXdTOHyT3g8
I see your point, the behavior of both employee and customer were unnecessarily disruptive. While I'm certain similar videos of Whites acting badly in public could be produced too, experience shows that per capita it appears blacks are more prone to the poor impulse control that produces these situations. When poor impulse control reaches the level of violent crime, FBI statistics consistently bear out over time that blacks as a group are the most violent per capita and therefore have the lowest levels of impulse control. Some might claim it's a "cultural thing" but as culture is a product of biological organisms and their groups (and not the other way around). it stands to reason that this is their nature.

This is yet one more piece of evidence in support of the race-as-a-biological-reality argument.
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1807
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Flag Flap

PostThu Apr 19, 2018 9:45 am

Will Williams wrote:
Will Williams wrote:A Statue of a Confederate General and KKK
Leader Has Just Been Removed in Memphis

By ASSOCIATED PRESS
December 21, 2017

(MEMPHIS, Tenn.) — A crew removed a Confederate statue from a Memphis park Wednesday night after the city sold it to a private entity...


Tennessee lawmakers punish Memphis for
removing statue of Confederate and KKK leader

By Alex Horton April 18

The Republican-dominated House voted to remove $250,000 earmarked for the Memphis bicentennial next year after the city engineered a way to remove that statue in December, along with a statue of Confederate president Jefferson Davis. The amendment was adopted in a $37.5 million spending bill still working its way through state chambers for approval.

“This is one of the most vile, racist acts I’ve seen happen in the legislature,” state Rep. Antonio Parkinson (D), who represents Memphis, told The Washington Post on Wednesday. Parkinson is part of the majority-black population of Memphis.
Image
Tennessee state legislator Antonio Parkinson

U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) blasted the amendment.

Image
Tennessee Congressman Steve Cohen


“From Scopes Monkey Trial, to 10 Commandments resolution of ’96, & now to punishment of Memphis for removing statues that honor leaders of the Confederacy, the TN House of Representatives sadly continues to embarrass Tennessee across the nation,” Cohen wrote Wednesday on Twitter...
---
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... f0ffba5e84
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1807
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Flag Flap

PostWed May 02, 2018 2:59 pm

White Man 1 wrote:I wrote my state and federal representatives about General Forrest's tomb being desecrated shortly after it happened. I received back one email from Lamar Alexander's office, shown below.

Dear Dan,

Thanks for getting in touch with me and letting me know what’s on your mind regarding Confederate monuments and the history of our country.

The Civil War was an important event in America’s history, and there's a place to remember all of it. I think states should carefully consider where and how to appropriately display chapters in our history, and there are appropriate places to remember the Civil War, including in museums, birth sites and battlefields.

This is a serious issue and the willingness of good people to stay informed and get involved is very important. I’m grateful you took the time to share your views about Confederate monuments, and I’ll be sure to keep your comments in mind.

Sincerely,
Lamar
LA/bm



Thanks a lot, Lamar, you weasly excuse for a White Man.


Here's another letter that's relevant. This one to the disgusting, tax-exempt, anti-White Southern Baptist Church from an otherwise Bible-believing former congregant:

---

N.B. Forrest Home's Caretaker Blasts
the Southern Baptist Convention

24 April, 2018
Source: http://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org/jam ... ds/author/


Southern Baptist Convention
The Executive Committee
901 Commerce Street
Nashville, Tennessee 37203

Dear S.B.C.,

When I went to your website to find your mailing address, I noticed that a topic of discussion from a recent convention was the concern over the decrease in membership. May a lowly rank and file member offer a suggestion?

No one wants to be a member of any organization run by a bunch of suck up, ass kissing, politically correct cowards. Your vulgar attack against our honored Confederate Battle Flag was disgusting. It was nothing more than a pathetic display of pandering to the criminal element of our society.

I promise you most assuredly that you have lost one worker from Crievewood Baptist Church in Nashville. I will never donate another dime to you effeminate whiners, nor will I ever again waste my time cleaning up after programs, working the neighborhood picnic, or servicing the grounds.

Ask the loudmouth, vulgar thugs from Black Lives Don’t Matter to Other Blacks to cough up the tithe money for your salary so that you can spend time insulting Southerners who had ancestors fight under St. Andrew’s Cross against a brutal, sadistic enemy who used churches in the South to stable their horses and the pews for feed troughs.

Ask George Soros to work at the church since you wimps are more concerned about Marxist liberal perverts than you are about Southern Baptists.

My ancestors fought – and some died – under the Confederate Battle Flag. Those men never did anything to make me ashamed of them. Nor would I do anything that would make those Confederate patriots ashamed of me, like consorting with South-hating cowards...

Former Southern Baptist,

Gene Andrews
Nashville, Tennessee


Image
Gene Andrews, former Commander of the Sons of Confederate Veterans (Tennessee
Division), served as a combat officer with the 3rd Marine Division in Vietnam... Gene
is now retired and works as the caretaker of the Nathan
Bedford Forrest home
near Chapel Hill, Tennessee...
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1807
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Carlos Porter on Slavery, Indians and Mulattoes

PostMon May 07, 2018 10:19 am

Will Williams wrote:The law has been criticized by those who say the statues are a reminder of a time when slavery was enforced and bigotry sanctioned in the South. It has been supported by those who say removing the monuments would be like trying to erase history.

Carlos Porter enlightens us on a few facts about slavery, including some of N.B. Forrest's history with the institution: http://www.cwporter.com/slaveryblog.htm

Sweepings from the Out Box

This is email. It is not the place to look for organized, formal, careful writing. Some of it may be deemed offensive. Enter at your own risk. Subject to change at any time. This article will be rewritten in a far more formal, academic style, with references, sources and quotations. -C.P.

---
SLAVERY, INDIANS AND MULATTOES blog

[excerpts from exchange with a White nationalist who believed that most slaves were owned by Jews]

No, I don't believe that all or even most slave holders were Jews. About 10% per cent of all whites owned slaves, although 5% might well be correct. Slaves were a necessity because they were immune to tropical diseases, also there was the rationalization of baptising them, Christianizing them, saving them from being eaten or tortured to death, typical Christian do-good stuff.

In 1860 there were 28 million white people in the whole country, plus 4 million slaves. New Orleans might have been a special case, if what you say is true. First, I do not believe that slave holding was ipso facto immoral at all.

According to your theory Washington, Jefferson, Lee, etc. were just exceptions and all other plantations were owned by Jews! I see no evidence of this, although no doubt Jews, free blacks and American Indians owned slaves, too. How many, I don't know. The only study based on actual statistics and archive records, like testamentary bequests, contracts of purchase and sale and census records, is TIME ON THE CROSS, by Fogel. The author claims that there are millions of pages of archive documents which have never been studied, because they are too voluminous (and because nobody wants to be accused of trying to “whitewash slavery”).

Most accounts of slavery are based on eyewitness accounts by travellers, who may not have understood what they were seeing and were often wrong. I see nothing wrong with holding slaves if they are treated humanely, which they were.

That the Jews invested financially in plantations, yes, at interest, the same way they invest in Broadway plays. It is simply untrue that slavery was cruel and it is also untrue that the mulattoes resulted from mass interracial sex and/or rape by whites.

It is not difficult to disprove the alleged cruelty of North American slavery, at least in the South. A few isolated cases, more likely in the North, I would think. One famous case I do know of, but an exception. A lot of legends, a few exaggerations of real cases, but it's obvious that slavery as practiced in the South was not cruel and cannot have been cruel.

The American Indians owned slaves, too, sometimes other Indians, sometimes whites, but very often blacks as well. The Creeks became largely Negroid as a result, and the case of the Seminoles is very well known. They're black.

Most sources say only 10% of all Southerners owned slaves. But most of those owned very few, maybe 2 or 3, maybe most often just 1. They worked beside them in the fields and were simply treated as hired help. So the number of large slave holders must have been very small, 5% or less. John Randolph of Roanoke was said to have owned 300 slaves, but that was in the 18th century and I don't know how that figure was computed.

Robert E Lee was said to have been one of the biggest slave holders in the South and he only owned 55 slaves. He freed them during the war, sent them back to Africa, and received letters from them through the blockade. He obviously taught them to read and write.

Nathaniel Bedford Forrest had approximately 40 or 45 slaves, and is said to have offered them their freedom win or lose if they would fight with him, and most of them did. Very few refused. One, named Napoleon, is said to have escaped Yankee captivity several times and returned to Forrest.

There was never one single case of a slave rebellion at any time during the entire war, even though the men were all off in the army and the women, children and blacks ran the plantations. Think about it. You live in a big expensive wooden house – some plantation homes were built of brick, but this was unusual -- with lots of windows, and you're surrounded by flammable crops most of the year. Any injustice to a slave will become known to every other person of negroidal ancestry for miles around, including the house-persons of negroidal ancestry owned by everybody you know -- friends, enemies, relatives and neighbors -- which means that your family will find out sooner or later. And you’re going to go around raping slaves under these circumstances?

Plus your slaves have access to fire, to heavy farm tools, and they're not locked in or chained up at night. Even if they were, what’s to prevent them from burning your crops during the daytime? Do you have a fire brigade? Probably the best you could manage would be a bucket brigade from the nearest swamp.

During the two Cuban wars of Independence, the guerrillas -- most of whom were freed or escaped slaves -- roamed the island burning crops and attacking the plantation houses. So the houses were built like forts, fire-proof, bullet-proof adobe or stone walls 3 feet thick, slits for windows, gun ports in all the walls, etc. Southern plantations were never built that way.

What happens if you're talking to 5 blacks hoeing a garden and one of them hits you on the head with a tool from behind? Slave owners were very vulnerable. But nothing happened at any time during the whole war. The closest thing to it was a Sioux Indian uprising in Minnesota in 1862 which killed 800 people in 6 weeks, almost all of them women and children. This never happened in the South at any time during the war.

In any case Jews have never shown an interest in farming.

The fact that the slave markets or exchanges were closed on Jewish holidays does not prove that the slave OWNERS were Jews, only that most of the TRADERS were Jews, many of whom were also importers, at least in a financial sense. No Jew will ever concentrate on purely business matters if he has the slightest chance of concentrating on the purely financial end of the business. Henry Ford offered 1000 dollars to anyone who could produce even one Jewish farmer, and the money was never claimed.

I think French Louisiana must have been a special case in most ways, which I'll explain. The English and Scots came to the New World with their families, the only nationalities to do so. The Spanish, French and Portuguese were all single men and always mated with native women. The Latin races have always been less adverse to race mixing than the Anglo-Saxons. Louisiana was a huge territory, easily equal to 5 or 6 modern US states. For this reason, large numbers of mulattoes must have originated in that area of the United States, rather than elsewhere. In Canada, the French produced tens of thousands of “métis”, mixed race Indians, just as the Spanish produced millions of “mestizos” in Central America.

TIME ON THE CROSS states flatly that Southern white men were not attracted to full-blooded blacks, and that all known free black prostitutes in the South were mulattoes. He also asserts that nothing could be kept secret in the crowded atmosphere of a Negro slave quarters, and the stories of race-mixing and white rape of blacks are pure myth.

Many people assume that because most American persons of negroidal ancestry are anywhere up to 75% white, that there must have been a lot of interracial sex going on, including rape by whites. In fact, there is no evidence of this and it goes against all logic. At the risk of having to explain the birds and the bees all over again, mulattoes can be produced in 3 ways: sex between a white person and a full-blooded person of negroidal ancestry (the whites involved being almost invariably sailors, sealers, itinerant workers, transients, bargemen, i.e., really scummy people), or sex between mulattoes and persons of negroidal ancestry -- which is always very rare, because mulattoes constitute a unique racial and cultural group in all countries, and are always cordially hated by full-blooded persons of negroidal ancestry -- or sex between mulattoes themselves.

You could put a million mulattoes down on a desert island on planet Mars and in a million years they'd still all be mulattoes. The added ingredient of sex with whites is not required, must less interracial rape.

According to some sources, there was quite of bit of interracial sex in the slave trade, but only between the top officers and a few slaves kept apart during the voyage, women they picked out before they were mixed with the others in the hold. There are always women willing to “put out” to obtain better conditions, so if that is rape, then so is everything that happens in Hollywood between producers, agents (or people like JFK) and potential starlets.

You may be very sure that ordinary seamen avoided their slave cargoes during the voyage because of the danger of disease. Hugh Thomas’s HISTORY OF THE TRANSLATLANTIC SLAVE TRADE cites many cases in which the death rate was higher among the white crew than among the Negro cargo! Remember, blacks are largely immune to tropical disease, while whites are not.

Another problem is that Northern soldiers raped many thousands of Negro slaves during the Civil War, and persons of negroidal ancestry raped many thousands of white women during Reconstruction.

Then you had a century during which white trash women were free to go looking for their more or less imaginary “big male membra” the same way they do today. Segregation was not strictly enforced among white trash, that's what made them trash. Or rather, it was enforced by excluding white trash from all dealings with decent people (with some occasional physical chastisement). In any case, no white Southerner ever cohabited openly with a Negro woman, like Thaddeus Stevens of the North.

Some persons of predominantly negroidal ancestry on http://www.youtube.com describes this, it might have been David James Manning, white women looking to get picked up by persons of negroidal ancestry. His mama told him that any white woman that would look for a male person of negroidal ancestry would have to be trash.

On white soldiers raping female persons of negroidal ancestry, see Walter Cisco's WAR CRIMES AGAINST SOUTHERN CIVILIANS. David L. Hoggan, DAS BLINDE JAHRHUNDERT [The Blind Century], Part I, Chapter III, pp. 170-176, claims that persons of negroidal ancestry raped "hundreds of thousands" of white women after the war. But never DURING the war. Cisco cites one slave woman who said she "never saw a Yankee yet that wasn't common as dirt". Typical negroidal ancestry-lovers.

Just found an interesting book, JEWISH PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN by Edward Kritzler. That's a new one to me. I thought Jews were too cowardly for that. I would have expected them to finance piracy through limited companies, and so on.

Fogel even claims that only about a third of all slave plantations had white overseerers! What does that tell you?

I'm sure Jews owned a lot of slaves, but only indirectly, only financially, they would never want to bother with making them work and worry about getting the crops in. There may have been a few exceptions, somebody like Judah P Benjamin. If you research his life you'll probably find the answer. You can bet they dominated the trade, owned the exchanges, advanced money at interest to buy them, etc. But who wants the trouble of actually owning persons of negroidal ancestry? I wouldn't give you a nickel for 10 of them.

I think the figure would be about 5% of white Southerners, apart from those that owned only one. And what about the native Amerindians from eastern Siberia? The Cherokees even fought for the Confederacy! Or at least a faction of them. The last Confederate general to surrender is sometimes said to have been a Cherokee Indian named Stand Watie.

Plus, you know why the American Indians, the Tasmanians, and so on, died out as a race, to the extent that they did? The Indians, because they killed each other off, then intermarried with their captives to keep their numbers up. Some of these captives were whites, whom they kidnapped and kept as slaves, while the Tasmanians, like all non-white races, treated their women as slaves and sold them to white sealers for a bag of flour or sugar. They raided each other for women, so the tribe that lost the war couldn't reproduce, then they sold the women to white sealers, who treated them better than their own people, and now the Tasmanians claim we made them extinct!

See also Darwin,VOYAGE OF THE BEAGLE, on the way the Tierra del Fuegians treated THEIR women!

There are a lot of Tasmanians still alive, but they are 31/32nds white. So by what right does the 1/32 presume to lecture us?

Whites took over America, and Canada when the whole continent was almost empty. There were never more than 10 million Indians on the whole continent, the whole hemisphere, most of them in Central America. Now they lie and say, “There used to be 150 million of us, now there are x hundred thousand, that proves you murdered the rest of us”. There is no proof of this. It's like saying "There used to be a million elephants around here. There are no elephants now. That proves we killed a million elephants".

The French Canadian film LES INVASIONS BARBARES ("The Barbarian Invasions", actually a comedy about the collapse of the Canadian public health care system), claims that “Without the atomic bomb and with gas chambers, the Spanish and Portuguese exterminated 150 million Indians. Then the English exterminated 50 million more. The biggest massacre in the history of the world took place right here, all around us”.

But those 200 million people never existed in the first place! This is very easy to prove. A whole continent (North American), much of it arid, mountainous or forested, with no cities to speak of, except in Central America and parts of South America; no aquaducts, no irrigation, no large-scale farming, no transport systems (they never even invented the wheel), and we're supposed to believe that both these continents were the most thickly populated areas on earth, more so than Europe or China?

The 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica (remember, no new information on Indian population figures has come to light since the 16th century) estimates the total number of Indians in the whole Western Hemisphere at 10 million, most of them in Central America. NUMBERS FROM NOWHERE by David Henige describes the manner in which these fantastic population figures have been fabricated, based on purely mathematical extrapolations based on assumptions read into just a few Spanish words.

For example, they see the word “casados”, which means either married men counted apart from their wives, or married couples. They decide that the men were counted separately, so they double the number. Then they “postulate”, which means they imagine, a 98% population decline and multiply that number by 50. Or 99% and multiply by 100. Same with “casa”, “pueblo”, and other words. They say, OK, how many people per house, how many houses per village, how many villages per kilometre, how many kilometres, assuming that everything is uniform over tens of thousands of square miles, and come up with some fantastic figure which is purely speculative. It’s a huge fraud.

Even the huge epidemics have been grossly exaggerated. One historian made up the lie of a huge smallpox epidemic wiping out practically both continents, North and South America together. There are no Indian records of this, no pockmarked Indians, nothing. So they made up the lie that the disease spread faster than the white man could travel, while the incubation period lasted so long that the disease didn’t break out until the white man was no longer there and couldn’t see it. This was said to have included the entire American South West. But Fernando de Soto travelled 1500 miles, back and forth along the same route, staying in the same Indian villages on his way out, and his way back, both, and he saw nothing of the sort.

Until well into the 1930s, in fact, until the 1960s, the standard estimate of North American Indian populations found in all encyclopaedias and reference works was 1 million Indians occupying 2 million miles of land. The Indians exterminated each other in war and then died out as a result of race-mixing with whites and Negroes, usually either captives or slaves. Sequoia, the inventor of the “Cherokee alphabet”, was half-German; his white name was George Guess. Historians quote the chroniclers and then delete all contemporary references to internecine warfare as a cause of Indian population decline. I recommend Henige very highly. He has also written several other books on the same subject. The “historians” also assume that if something is true mathematically, then it is true historically. Another trick is, whenever they come up with wildly disparate numbers, they simply "average" them. This gives a very exact-looking result. But it's rubbish.
In fact, at least 90% of the land was completely empty. In North America, 1 million Indians occupied 2 million square miles of land, starving, murdering and eating each other, torturing each other to death, living in misery. Francis Parkman describes a hunting party of 19 Iroquois who had nothing to eat for 3 days except for one porcupine and one rabbit. It is generally estimated that the greatest population density that can be supported by a hunting-gathering life style is 3 or 4 persons per square mile, or less.

The American Indians were the 19th century equivalent of Mexican drive-by shooters: they had to be defeated, disarmed, confined to reservations and made to stay there. There was no other way. This is why we cut down the forests, because anywhere there were trees, there were Indians. Just as the Australian Aborigine is perfectly adapted to life in the desert – they will sit in the shade of a tree and never move a muscle all day -- the Iroquois were perfectly adapted to life in the forests: they could lie down behind a log and conceal themselves under leaves and never move a muscle, for days. You come along and they bash your brains in.

2 million square miles of land occupied by 1 million people, most of them migrant bands of only a few hundred people who roamed thousands of square miles and only passed through most areas once or twice a year, if that? Sometimes for centuries nothing happened, but then for no reason they show up and butcher 300 white people by surprise, mostly women and children. And we're supposed to recognize a legitimate title to the whole continent on that basis? Apart from the fact that they were paid very large amounts of money for their land in many cases.

At worst, we treated them they way they treated each other. In the end, the Iroquois obtained firearms from Dutch traders and exterminated all the other related tribes, speaking related Iroquois languages, 5 whole tribes. There were none of them left except for a few who ran away all the way down into the USA someplace, the Wyandots, who are now found only in North Dakota, if memory serves. Plus, they're all more white than Indian anyway, since they adopted white captives into the tribe after massacring, torturing and eating all the others (they were all cannibals), so in the end they became more or less white and died out as a race. Same with the Tasmanians. They treated their women as slaves and sold them to white sealers for a few bags of tea or sugar, then they couldn't reproduce as a race, now they say we "exterminated" them. All the so-called "Tasmanians" today are about 31/32ths white, but they claim their status as "1/32th Tasmanians" gives them a right to criticize everybody else and demand money?

Plus the other original 1/32th, the original "one half" of the original "white fraction of 1/32", were the very same people they accuse of committing all the atrocities! Their own ancestors! By what right do they even call themselves “Tasmanians”? By what right do they demand money from us?

By the Indians' own rules, we conquered them, so we own it.

The Mexican and Peruvian empires had no knowledge of each other's existence, but they both had a religious tradition of white gods. The Spanish exploited that, and the locals never recovered their manliness. Prescott calls the Peruvians "effeminate". They never got their act together even after they discovered that the Spaniards weren't gods at all! Peru was one of the most highly advanced, best organized societies that ever existed, millions of Indians, and it fell almost completely without a fight. The Jews did the same thing to us. We think they're "Israelites". The Spanish were never more than a few hundred men. The Jews did the same things to us that the Spanish did to the Mexicans and Peruvians. Exploited all their weaknesses.

Sources:
CONQUEST OF MEXICO and CONQUEST OF PERU by William H. Prescott
HISTORY OF THE JESUITS IN NORTH AMERICA IN THE 17th CENTURY by Francis Parkman
HISTORY OF THE TRANSATLANTIC SLAVE TRADE by Hugh Thomas
THE FALSIFICATION OF ABORIGINAL HISTORY vols 1 and 3 by Keith Windschuttle, Macleay Press, Australia
NUMBERS FROM NOWHERE by David Henige
1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Indians”, plus look up individual tribes. Very interesting table at the end of the article on "Indians" describes most of the New York tribes as "more white than Indian" or "Indians in name only".
COMING OF THE CIVIL WAR by Avery Craven
TIME ON THE CROSS: The Economics of American Negro Slavery by Robert Fogel and Stanley Engerman
THE MARTIAL SPIRIT by Walter Millis (Spanish-American War, Cuba)
PreviousNext

Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron