White Biocentrism

So it has been almost a week or so since this Dylann Roof massacre happened. So far the only person who's opinion I find most agreeable is Ramzpaul's. If you haven't watched his video then I encourage you to do so, I will embed it here:

Ramzpaul is probably the most moderate of the people in the Nationalist scene right now, but I believe he gave this kid his due. The way in which other so called emissaries in our "cause" made a B-line to denounce this Dylann Roof and to send their condolences to the families of the victims makes me sick to my stomach. While I don't condone senseless violence, I also don't like hypocrisy, and that is what most of the White Nationalists today seem to made out of. If Dr. Pierce were alive today I think he would take a position similar to Ramzpaul's. That position is understanding the frustration that must have been brewing in this kid's soul, but condemning his act and wishing that the kid had more discipline. In fact Dr. Pierce made the very same assessment of another white shooter by the name Benjamin Smith in his Adv broadcast called "Knowledge and discipline", which I have copied and pasted below. I believe Pierce would have had the same sentiment towards this Dylann Roof character as he had for Benjamin Smith. FYI to those interested parties see Ramzpaul's newest video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BKms7Gke8c) on the Roof case in which he points out that the shooter's Manifesto points the finger at NBC for manipulated facts and that it is NBC and that people should be targeting NBC and not the CofCC if they want to blame someone for what happened in South Carolina. For all the brainless lemmings out there who are rallying to ban the confederate flag, do they really think it was the confederate flag that made this kid do what he did? I don't think so? This is a by product of multiculturalism and Jewish Media control.


Perhaps I shouldn't make assumptions on what Pierce would have thought about this issue, but that is my inclination. I don't know the details of Dylann Roof's life but can anyone say they don't understand his frustration?

P.S. I am not a Ramzpaul booster, I just happen to agree with him on this issue more so than with other's opinions.

----------------------------------------------


Knowledge and Discipline

ADV broadcast here: http://web.archive.org/web/200712080334 ... 071099.mp3


By Dr. William L. Pierce

7/10/199



As I was preparing this week's broadcast, the news story causing the most excitement in the
controlled media was a series of drive-by shootings last weekend in Illinois and Indiana by a 21-
year-old student at the University of Indiana, Benjamin Smith, who killed himself as police were
trying to arrest him. In addition to himself Smith killed only two other people — not much to get
excited about by today's standards, when drive-by shootings are a nightly occurrence in a number
of our larger cities. What really had the media people stirred up about Smith, however, was the
fact that he was a member of a pro-White church, and his targets were all non- Whites: Blacks,
Jews, and Asians. A Black and an Asian died.

I don't know anything about Smith except what was on the television news and the Internet, but I
cannot help but feel some sympathy for him. Smith, according to those who knew him, was
intelligent, quiet, and serious. He was a student of criminal justice at the University of Indiana.
Most notable, however, he was racially conscious. He was unhappy about the destruction of our
White society in America and the perversion of our European culture by the program of
multiculturalization promoted by the government and the media. He distributed leaflets on the
University of Indiana campus in Bloomington expressing his views, and the university
administration harassed him for it. He distributed leaflets off the campus in Bloomington and in
the Chicago suburb of Wilmette, Illinois, where he grew up. Leftists, feminists, and Jews
organized a public demonstration against him in Bloomington in an effort to stop his leaflet
distribution, and the police in Wilmette arrested him. Blacks repeatedly smashed the windows of
his apartment in Bloomington to show their disagreement with Smith's "racist" views. It must
have been very stressful for Smith, trying to exercise his freedom of speech in a society which
pays lip service to our Bill of Rights but which actually tries its best to make life difficult for
anyone who doesn't toe the party line.

Finally something snapped, and Smith began shooting at Jews, Blacks, and Asians. He
apparently had given up completely at trying to make a difference with his leaflets, and his
shooting was an expression of his frustration. He obviously didn't intend to survive. He didn't try
to conceal his identity. He simply drove up to groups of non- Whites in his car in broad daylight
and began shooting, then drove off until he saw another group of non-Whites and began shooting
again.

Now the media people are wringing their hands and asking the question: "How did this man's
talk about hate lead to a racist killing spree?" And the media are trotting out all their Jewish
experts to ask similar questions. I saw Rabbi Marvin Hier, one of the head Jews at the Simon
Wiesenthal Center, and Mark Potok, a Jewish expert at the Southern Poverty Law Center, both
on television asking, "How can we stop hateful talk like that in Benjamin Smith's leaflets from
leading to hateful acts like this series of shootings?" And from the leers on their Jewish faces
when they ask this question you can see what they're thinking; you can guess what they want the
television viewers to think. They want to plant the suggestion that the way to stop racial violence
and hostility is to stop what they call "hate speech." If no one is permitted to say hateful things,
they suggest, then people will be less inclined to do hateful things. That's the sort of feminine
reasoning which seems to be agreeable to America's couch potatoes.



You know, I haven't seen any of Benjamin Smith's leaflets, but I wouldn't be surprised if there
was nothing hateful at all in them. What the Jews call "hate speech" these days, what they want
to have outlawed, is any Politically Incorrect speech. They don't care about crude or vulgar
expressions of hatred, because they don't see that as very persuasive or effective. The speech
they want outlawed is any speech which might be dangerous to them, any speech which exposes
their schemes or interferes with their plans.

As I said, I cannot help but feel some sympathy for Benjamin Smith. When I lived in
Washington, DC, I was almost constantly enraged by what I saw all around me. In Washington it
wasn't just the presence of the Blacks and the Jews and what they were doing; it was at least as
much the behavior of the Whites which enraged me. It was the effeminate and pusillanimous
behavior of the members of the White majority, who really didn't like Blacks and Jews much
more than I did but who were terrified of being thought "racist" or Politically Incorrect if anyone
found out what they were thinking.

It was the trendy, liberal airheads, mindlessly parroting every cliche they learned from television
and eagerly embracing every fad which came along, no matter how degenerate or destructive. It
was the homosexuals and the pushy, obnoxiously assertive feminists, who knew they were on a
roll and were determined to make the most of it.

And it was the utterly corrupt and deceitful behavior of the politicians and the bureaucrats and
the media people in Washington which enraged me. If anybody in this country really needs to be
put to death, it's not the convicted serial killers sitting on death row in the various state prisons:
it's the people sitting in public offices in Washington — all of them. And it's the lying,
treacherous minions of the controlled media, panting and wagging their tails frantically in the
hope of receiving a pat on the head from their Jewish masters every time they slant the news in
the required direction or put the proper "spin" on a story.

Washington is really the armpit of the universe, where nothing is too corrupt or treacherous or
destructive, and I did find it frustrating being there and watching all of the degenerates and
criminals doing their filthy work and not being able to stop them. There were times when I had
some pretty violent thoughts. But I am not suicidal, and perhaps I have a little more self-
discipline than Benjamin Smith had. Perhaps I am a little better able to postpone my
gratification. And so I wrote books instead of going on shooting sprees. But I still sympathize
with Benjamin Smith. It's just a shame that he didn't have a little more self-control.

The media circus resulting from Smith's activity last weekend is what we have come to expect
from the Jews who control the media. It was another excuse for them to harp on the dangers of
permitting Whites to think "racist" thoughts and express "racist" sentiments. And this time they
even had the titillating twist of a White "racist" church to work into the story.

It's really too bad that they had virtually nothing to say about a Black church which has been
involved in the racially motivated murder of Whites. The charges recently brought against one of
the members of this Black church for the murder of a White man would have given them an
opportunity to tell us about some far more interesting things than the two killings by Benjamin
Smith. The Black church to which I'm referring is the Black Hebrew Israelites, led by Yahweh



ben Yahweh. The murderer I mentioned is Robert Rozier, a Black former National Football
League player. On March 23 of this year — that's just three and a half months ago — Rozier was
charged with the ritual murder of a White man outside one of his church's meeting places in
Newark, New Jersey. Rozier and another Black member of the church, John Armstrong, stabbed
52-year-old Attilio Cicala to death as a ritual sacrifice of a White man to their Black leader,
Yahweh ben Yahweh, who was born with the name Hulon Mitchell.

The murder charge against the Black football player Rozier was reported by the Associated Press
in March, but I'll bet you never heard about it. The news was even printed in the New York
Times, but no one I've spoken to remembers seeing it. People tend not to notice little two-
paragraph news items which appear just once on page 126, tucked in among the ads for
hemorrhoid relief and telephone sex. You still can dig it up from the New York Times site on the
Internet, however, if you're interested.

The point is that the way in which the news is reported makes all the difference. Most people in
this feminized age simply don't relate to bare facts. They relate only to other people. They aren't
able to assimilate evidence that doesn't appear in a personal context. It just doesn't mean
anything to them unless Tom Brokaw or Bill Clinton or someone else they can relate to explains
it to them and tells them how they should respond to it. They really do need to be told whether or
not a news item is interesting and what attitude they should have toward it. I'm sorry, but that is
the level to which the television-viewing American public has sunk.

And that's why the news about the ritual murder of Attilio Cicala outside the so-called Black
Hebrew Israelite temple in Newark has made virtually no impression on the consciousness of the
public. And that's too bad, because it's really an interesting story: much more interesting than the
story of Benjamin Smith's shooting of a Black and a Korean last weekend. The Jewish media
bosses hoped that you wouldn't pay any attention to the news about the murder of Attilio Cicala,
but I'm going to tell you about it now, because I think it's something you ought to know.

The story goes back 25 years to a horrendous series of racial murders in California, many of
them in the San Francisco area. Over a period of six months in 1973 and 1974 members of an
offshoot of the Black Muslims called "Death Angels" murdered several hundred White men,
women, and children. The exact number will never be known, because many of the victims were
so-called "street people": runaway teenaged girls on drugs, hippies, and the like — people who
weren't missed. There were many of these pitiful lost souls on the streets of San Francisco in the
1960s and 1970s. Their corpses often were hacked up and dumped in the ocean or buried. But
the San Francisco police who tracked the Death Angels counted 15 very tangible victims from all
walks of life, not just street people: 15 murdered White people, and eight others who were
seriously injured during attempts to murder them. While they were looking for the killers the
police referred to the series of murders as the "Zebra" killings: all Black on White.

Eventually the Death Angels were broken up when San Francisco police arrested eight of them.
Four of them were put on trial, and after the longest trial in California history — a year and six
days — were convicted on all counts. The transcript for the trial filled nearly 14 thousand pages
and was bound in 141 volumes.



You say you never heard of any of this? Could that be because the Jewish media bosses — the
ones who have been making such a circus of Benjamin Smith's killing of one Black and one
Korean — didn't want you to hear about it? Could it be that the news of the Zebra murders didn't
fit the pattern of White aggressors and non-White victims that the media bosses wanted to
imprint on the consciousness of the White public?

During the trial of the four Death Angels between March 3, 1975, and March 9, 1976, a great
deal of interesting information came out that the White public should have been told about. One
of the Death Angels who had been involved in many of the murders, Anthony Harris, obtained
immunity from prosecution by testifying against the other Death Angels. Harris was on the
witness stand for 12 days, and the chilling details of his testimony make very interesting reading.
He told the court that the Nation of Islam — the so-called "Black Muslims" — taught that the
murder of a White person — a "blue-eyed devil" — was pleasing to Allah. There was an elite
organization in the Nation of Islam whose members had especially pleased Allah. That was the
Death Angels. To become a Death Angel one had to murder nine White men or five White
women or four White children. In 1974 the San Francisco chapter of the Death Angels had
fifteen accredited members.

Harris related the horrifying details of some of the murders. There were the young White couple,
Richard and Quita Hague, who were grabbed off a San Francisco street at gunpoint, taken to a
rail yard, and butchered with a machete. Richard, a mining engineer, was 30 years old. His wife
Quita, a reporter, was 28. They were out for an after-dinner stroll when three Black Muslims
forced them into a van. Two of the Muslims were in the process of raping Quita when the third
grabbed her by the hair, dragged her over to the railroad tracks, and slashed her throat.

Some of the White victims were taken to a loft used by the Death Angels, where they were tied
to chairs and tortured to death. Harris testified that he was given the butchered remnants of one
of these kidnapped torture victims, all trussed up in a plastic sheet like a turkey, and told to drive
the package to a bluff overlooking San Francisco Bay and throw it into the water. Other victims,
more fortunate, were simply gunned down on the street. And the killing wasn't confined to San
Francisco or even to California. Other groups of Death Angels murdered Whites in other states:
in New York, in Georgia, in Florida. The word spread among Black Muslims everywhere. The
only people who didn't hear about what was happening were ordinary White citizens, like
Richard and Quita Hague. They didn't hear about it because the Jewish media bosses didn't want
the White population to become alarmed. They didn't want Whites to take measures to protect
themselves. They didn't want Whites to stop feeling guilty about how badly they had treated
minorities.

One Black Muslim in Atlanta who learned that the murder of blue-eyed devils was pleasing to
Allah was Hulon Mitchell, known at the time as Hulon X. Hulon was given control of a Muslim
mosque in Atlanta, but his career in the Nation of Islam was cut short when he was caught
dipping into the collection plate and having sex with underage Muslim girls. Hulon moved to
Florida. In 1978 he founded his own Black church in Miami. He called it the Nation of Yahweh,
called its members Black Hebrew Israelites, and took for himself the name of Yahweh ben
Yahweh. Hulon's new church flourished, and he soon formed an elite group in it, which he called
the Circle of Ten. He also branched out to several other cities, including Newark.



He taught his followers that the killing of blue-eyed devils was pleasing to Yahweh, rather than
to Allah. Soon one of the members of his church, NFL player Robert Rozier, brought him the ear
of a White man he had just murdered: his first victim. A number of other victims followed during
the next few years. One of these victims was Attilio Cicala, the 52-year-old Italian man
murdered in Newark.

As with the Death Angels in California, many of the ritual murder victims chosen by Yahweh's
followers were the easiest White victims: people who wouldn't be missed — young runaways,
street people, Whites who lived in Black neighborhoods or who associated with Blacks. It wasn't
until November 1990 that the police finally wound up Yahweh's murder spree, charging him and
sixteen of his followers with a number of felonies, including 14 murders. Actually, the murder of
Attilio Cicala was not one of the 14 murders the Black Hebrew Israelites were charged with.
That murder remained unsolved until last year, when Black Israelite John Armstrong, also
known as Yokonon Israel, was charged. And finally Rozier also was charged in the murder of
Cicala this March. He will be tried later this year.

Well, Blacks will be Blacks, and they, at least, understand that we're engaged in a race war. But
that's our fault, really. We shouldn't have brought them here. As soon as we rectify that mistake a
big part of the war will be over. Meanwhile, there's not much point in our being angry at Blacks
or shooting one or two of them here and there, a la Benjamin Smith. That's just foolishness.
What we need to win this war is self-discipline: iron self-discipline, and Benjamin Smith didn't
have it.

We also need knowledge of the sort I try to disseminate with these broadcasts. If we are to make
intelligent decisions about the world around us and about our future, we need to know that
hundreds of White Americans have been ritually murdered by members of Black religious
groups during the past 25 years. Even more do we need to know that news of these murders has
been suppressed by the Jewish news media, and we need to understand why this news has been
suppressed. We need to know what the Jews and their political, ideological, and religious allies
are aiming for when they deliberately suppress the news of the mass murders of Whites by the
Death Angels of the Nation of Islam and the Black Hebrew Israelite followers of Yahweh ben
Yahweh, while filling our television screens day after day with the details of Benjamin Smith's
killing of one Black and one Asian. We need to know these things if we are not simply to be led
like lambs to the slaughter.

Knowledge and discipline, those are the keys to our survival as a people: knowledge of what is
really happening in the world and why, and the self-discipline to deal collectively and effectively
with the very real threats to the future of our people, rather than expressing our frustration in
foolish and undisciplined acts of premature violence. And if our knowledge leads us to anger, to
rage of the sort that I felt while living in Washington and of the sort that Benjamin Smith
presumably felt while attending the very Politically Correct University of Indiana, let us direct
that rage not at the random Black or Asian on the street, but rather at the evil creatures who
planned the government policies which are putting more and more Blacks and Asians on our
streets, policies which are leading America into becoming a non- White country in the next few
decades. Let us direct our rage at the evil creatures who conspire to keep our people ignorant of



the real dangers around them by suppressing the news of the Zebra murders and the Black
Hebrew Israelite murders.

And if we sometimes feel ourselves frustrated by the willful ignorance of the lemmings and by
the malice of those among our people who have cast their lot with our people's enemies, let us
remember that it is we who are becoming stronger, not they; let us remember that more and more
of our people are understanding what is happening and are drawing the correct conclusions. Let
us remember that with growing knowledge and growing self-discipline among our people, we —
not they — will prevail.

DanielOlj79 wrote:So it has been almost a week or so since this Dylan Roof massacre happened. So far the only person who's opinion I find most agreeable is Ramzpaul's. If you haven't watched his video then I encourage you to do so...

If Dr. Pierce were alive today I think he would take a position similar to Ramzpaul's. That position is understanding the frustration that must have been brewing in this kid's soul, but condemning his act and wishing that the kid had more discipline. In fact Dr. Pierce made the very same assessment of another white shooter by the name Benjamin Smith in his Adv broadcast called "Knowledge and discipline", which I have copied and pasted below...

I'm no fan of this Ramzpaul character, but will watch his video when I've got five minutes.

Here is an article put up today by former Alliance member Hadding Scott on this same subject, also tying in the more mature observations of Dr. Pierce: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/20 ... more-28516

Young Dylann thinks Jews are White. Dr. Pierce didn't have that problem.

I like that Hadding emphasizes, as Dr. Pierce did, of quality of pro-White activists over quantity when it comes to organizing our people.
---

On Dylann Roof’s “Manifesto”
June 22, 2015
Hadding Scott

Before Dylann Roof set out to commit the shooting at the Emanuel A.M.E. Church, he set up a very simple web-site called LastRhodesian.com and posted there a manifesto that referred to his intended actions. I think that it is worthwhile to examine Roof’s manifesto for some clues about how he ended up doing what he did.

Roof says that he grew up in the South, having “a small amount of racial awareness, simply because of the numbers of Negroes in this part of the country.” Southerners in general probably do have a better sense, compared to White people from other places, about how Blacks behave. This was not a clear White racial consciousness however; rather it was the kind of dissimulating defensiveness promoted by the likes of Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck, with its rhetoric of deflective counter-accusation characterized by Roof as “Blacks are the real racists.”

Roof was shocked out of this weak orientation based on fear of being called “racist” by the drumbeat of anti-White propaganda that began with the absurdly biased reporting on the case of George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin in 2012 and 2013:

The event that truly awakened me was the Trayvon Martin case. I kept hearing and seeing his name, and eventually I decided to look him up. I read the Wikipedia article and right away I was unable to understand what the big deal was. It was obvious that Zimmerman was in the right. But more importantly this prompted me to type in the words “black on White crime” into Google, and I have never been the same since that day. The first website I came to was the Council of Conservative Citizens. There were pages upon pages of these brutal black on White murders. I was in disbelief. At this moment I realized that something was very wrong. How could the news be blowing up the Trayvon Martin case while hundreds of these black on White murders got ignored?

Although Roof’s main theme was biased media-coverage of Black-on-White crime, this was not mentioned in an article on Roof’s manifesto by one of the leading culprits, the New York Times.
There is no question that the biased publicity over the alleged murder of Trayvon Martin caused an increase of violence by Blacks against Whites. Two months after the original incident in the case, Darryl Owens called attention to some of the ramifications of the media-coverage in the Orlando Sentinel:

Let’s call it Trayvon Piñata.

How’s it played?

Simple. Gather at least two or up to 30 players (usually black, but not always). Target some unsuspecting, blameless white person. Confront. Spout some racial pap. Stomp the stuffing out of him in Trayvon’s name.

Rip-roaring fun!

It’s all the rage — these outrageous acts of vengeance born out of misplaced rage.

Gainesville was the scene earlier this month of two rounds of Trayvon Piñata.

In the first attack, five to eight black people allegedly pounded a 27-year-old white guy as he walked home, according to the Gainesville Sun. The goons shouted “Trayvon!” before laying into him.

In the second assault, a crowd reportedly pounced on a white guy who’d chased down a black purse-snatcher and pinned him. Unaware of the circumstances, some began shouting “Trayvon,” egging on several group members who stomped the good Samaritan’s hands to free his quarry. [Darryl Owens, Orlando Sentinel, 27 April 2012 ]

The game was not limited to Florida. In Chicago 18-year-old Alton L. Hayes III and a minor accomplice robbed a 19-year-old White man, then gratuitously beat him, telling police later that they did it because of Trayvon Martin and because the man was White (Huffington Post, 26 April 2012).

In Mobile, Alabama, Matthew Owens was beaten nearly to death by a mob of 20 or more Blacks in front of his home. After the attack, one of the Black attackers declared, “Now that’s justice for Trayvon!” (New York Daily News, 25 April 2012).

The mood of vengefulness generated by mass-media during the period following the death of Trayvon Martin was pervasive and palpable, and some influence thereof could be reasonably presumed as a contributing factor in any Black-on-White violence during that period, whether explicitly stated or not.

In March 2012 in Kansas City, Missouri, one month after the publicity about Trayvon Martin began, a 13-year-old boy returning home from school was doused in gasoline and set on fire by two older Black boys who said: “This is what you deserve. You get what you deserve, White boy.” (Daily Mail, 4 March 2012).

John McWhorter, writing in Time about the shooting-death of an Australian college student by a Black male in Oklahoma, says that racially motivated Black-on-White violence like the Kansas City incident is “hardly uncommon”:

So, it’s just fake to pretend that the association of young black men with violence comes out of thin air. Young black men murder 14 times more than young white men. If the kinds of things I just mentioned were regularly done by whites, it’d be trumpeted as justification for being scared to death of them. [John McWhorter, “Don’t Ignore Race in Christopher Lane’s Murder,” Time, 22 August 2013]

Time of course is about as mainstream and respectable as any monthly news-periodical could be, yet it plainly states that there is an anti-White and pro-Black racial bias in the reporting of violent crime. The real question is not how Dylann Roof came to the same conclusion in the wake of the Martin-Zimmerman case; rather the question is how anyone could have failed to understand it by now.

In 2014 and 2015 the mass-media seem to have been obsessed with publicizing any possible case of misconduct toward Blacks by police, beginning with the accusations against policeman Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri. It was predictable that there would be retaliatory violence generated by that propaganda as well. The first such incident was the murder of two New York City policemen, Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu (neither of them White, but then neither was George Zimmerman), as they sat in their police-vehicle. The fact that the young Black male suspect, Ismaaiyl Brinsley, was motivated by media-hoopla against the police was apparent in his posts on Instagram before the crime:

Brinsley allegedly posted a photo of a gun with the caption, “I’m putting wings on pigs today. They take 1 of ours, let’s take 2 of theirs,” officials said. He used the hashtags ‘Shootthepolice’ ‘RIPErivGardner (sic)‘ and ‘RIPMikeBrown.’ [CBS New York, 20 December 2014]

That was only the first of a number of such scattered incidents of anti-police violence induced by mass-media. The alleged murder of Trayvon Martin, in the accusation’s original form, was also supposed to have been a conspiracy of the police.

For many who become racially conscious, it began with noticing absurd anti-White bias in the news. Dr. William Pierce, in an essay about the evolution of his thinking (“The Radicalizing of an American,” 1978) mentions that an important moment for him was when he saw bias in news-coverage about the Civil Rights Movement; he saw that television news always showed the least credible and least attractive representatives of the pro-White side, for example screeching overweight housewives in hair-curlers, rather than someone like the one-time C.E.O. of Delta Airlines, Carleton Putnam, who wrote two books defending segregation.

What Dr. Pierce did next, and what Dylann Roof did after observing anti-White media-bias, was to look for sources of truth. Dr. Pierce read books and eventually learned about Jewish control of mass-media as the explanation for anti-White media-bias. Roof on the other hand found a trove of documentation about Black-on-White violent crime on the Internet, and this made a great impression on him.

In his radio broadcasts in the 1990s, Dr. Pierce would sometimes begin a discussion by referring to an instance of Black-on-White crime, as a way to catch the interest of White listeners, but the ultimate focus was never on Blacks. It was on the real powers — especially Jewish control of mass-media — that made Blacks into the problem that they had become.

A defining factor in Dylann Roof’s course of action is that he retained this commonplace but mistaken idea about where the real problem was. Because unruly Blacks were obvious, and because mainstream conservative media and even much of White-advocacy media never mentions Jewish activism as contributing to the Black problem, Dylann Roof mistakenly regarded the Black problem as primary, writing 1484 of the 2444 words in his manifesto under the heading “Blacks.” Roof describes Blacks as “the group I have the most real life experience with, and the group that is the biggest problem for Americans.”

What Roof writes about Blacks suggests that he has read accounts of research often cited as supporting a race-realist perspective. His comments are a sort of poor man’s summary of Philippe Rushton’s research on racial differences: relative to Whites, on average Blacks have a lower IQ, less self-control, and higher testosterone levels; and they commit a grossly disproportionate amount of violent crime. Roof also correctly states that Blacks act with much more racial solidarity than Whites.

Roof offers two theories as to why Black misbehavior is tolerated. One is that Blacks are held to a lower standard because, whether we admit it or not, we regard them as inferior and expect less of them: therefore they get indulgence. The other theory is White guilt, particularly on account of Black sufferings under slavery and segregation. Roof thinks that Black suffering under slavery and segregation have been exaggerated:

We are told to accept what is happening to us because of ancestors wrong doing, but it is all based on historical lies, exaggerations and myths. I have tried endlessly to think of reasons we deserve this, and I have only came back more irritated because there are no reasons.

The indulgence given to Blacks because of this spurious guilt, he says, causes suffering to the principal victims to date of the anti-White revolution poor and working class Whites who do not have the means to get away from Blacks:

But what about the White people that are left behind? What about the White children who, because of school zoning laws, are forced to go to a school that is 90 percent black? Do we really think that that White kid will be able to go one day without being picked on for being White, or called a “white boy”? And who is fighting for him? Who is fighting for these White people forced by economic circumstances to live among Negroes? No one, but someone has to.

Dylann Roof looks around himself and finds again and again that in racial matters, what is done in the name of justice is usually gross injustice. Once upon a time a minority of Whites owned Negro slaves. Now poor Whites whose ancestors probably never owned slaves must bear guilt and other sufferings for it. There is no justice in that.

Roof also sees no justice in what has been happening in Europe, where the same racially destructive processes are being imposed without the justifications that are offered in the United States, which suggests that those justifications are really only excuses:

I researched deeper and found out what was happening in Europe. I saw that the same things were happening in England and France, and in all the other Western European countries. Again I found myself in disbelief. As an American we are taught to accept living in the melting pot, and black and other minorities have just as much right to be here as we do, since we are all immigrants. But Europe is the homeland of White people, and in many ways the situation is even worse there. From here I found out about the Jewish problem and other issues facing our race.

Roof mentions “the Jewish problem” and “Jewish agitation of the Black race” but treats it as less important than what he seems to regard as an inherent tendency in Blacks to take offense when no offense is intended. Roof seems to have no inkling that Blacks were not always as unruly and dangerous as they have become, especially since the counter-cultural revolution of the 1960s which, for example, saw the beginning of the dramatic decline in all of the markers of family-functioning among Blacks. He is unaware of the origin of the current troubles between Blacks and Whites in the “Black-Jewish alliance” that E. Michael Jones discusses here:

[youtube]https://youtu.be/O3hU1n6aQko[/youtube]

Obviously, the Council of Conservative Citizens, by publicizing factual information about Black-on-White crime, is not responsible for Dylann Roof’s action. If CCC could be held responsible for that, then it would certainly be reasonable to hold television-networks liable for the killings of police that resulted from their biased reporting of the Darren Wilson case, etc. Nonetheless, I do not believe that the conflict between Black and White is really where the focus of pro-White media ought to be. Blacks most definitely do not form an elite, and they have little real power in shaping public discourse on race or in enacting legislation. Pro-White media should be making White people aware of the less obvious but much more important problem.

Roof says that he “found out about the Jewish problem and other issues facing our race,” but he does not treat the Jewish problem as primary. He knows that Jews agitate Blacks but he does not seem to consider it a key cause of the trouble between Whites and Blacks. Under the heading of “Jews” in his manifesto Roof wrote only 138 words. He says that “unlike many White Nationalists” he regards Jews as White, and concludes with: “I don’t pretend to understand why Jews do what they do. They are [an] enigma.”

It is evident that Dylann Roof never spent much time reading The Occidental Observer. If he had, he’d have had some idea about why Jews do what they do.

Another reason for Roof’s course of action seems to be that he underestimated the importance of ideas (as Americans often do). I have occasionally encountered people who take the attitude that educating people is a useless activity, apparently because its effects are not immediately visible. In some cases they tried to tell somebody something once, and because that person was not immediately convinced, the effort was abandoned. They didn’t have the patience to keep trying. Affecting people’s attitudes and thinking is a slow process that requires perseverance. Then after thinking has been changed, the new thinking still requires opportunities to be implemented. Anybody who thinks that educating people is pointless or futile probably is expecting tangible results much too quickly. From this impatient perspective, educating people is just talking, and talking equates to doing nothing. That seems to be Roof’s attitude:

To take a saying from a film, “I see all this stuff going on, and I don’t see anyone doing anything about it. And it pisses me off.” To take a saying from my favorite film, “Even if my life is worth less than a speck of dirt, I want to use it for the good of society.” … We have no skinheads, no real KKK, no one doing anything but talking on the internet. Well someone has to have the bravery to take it to the real world, and I guess that has to be me.

Note the wording. Roof dismisses talking; he wants to “see” somebody “doing” something, and he makes it clear that this means violence. Shooting people of course produces an immediate visible result, but the net result to any such premature illegal action is almost always counterproductive.

One point that I believe Dylann Roof has right is his point about the ability of quality to prevail over quantity. He rejects the view that a non-White majority means that Whites will be unable to master the situation:

To this I say look at history. The South had a higher ratio of blacks when we were holding them as slaves. Look at South Africa, and how such a small minority held the black in apartheid for years and years. … It is far from being too late for America or Europe. I believe that even if we made up only 30 percent of the population we could take it back completely.

The most famous example from history of the supremacy of quality over quantity consists of the various conflicts between the ancient Greeks and the diverse, multicultural army of the Persian Empire. Grossly outnumbered by the motley Persian assemblage, the Greeks beat them again and again.

That observation, that all is not lost even when we are a minority, would seem to be a note of optimism, and an indication that patient and well-grounded approaches to the problem are to be preferred over hasty and desperate actions. I agree with that. Yet in his next sentence Roof says: “But by no means should we wait any longer to take drastic action.”

That is a non sequitur. It seems to reflect Roof’s own impulsiveness rather than the foregoing argument. At best, one might suppose that he feels an obligation toward the White children in Charleston who must attend schools with Blacks, and hoped that a general race war would ensue from his initiative. It is hard to imagine how he thought his actions could have a significant effect on the Black population of Charleston. It is also not credible that there would be enough White copycat shooters to have any significant effect, except perhaps in terms of gratifying the craving of anti-White media for White-on-Black killings to report. The illegal action that Dylann Roof undertook is utterly ineffectual for whatever pro-White goal he may have had in mind — certainly, even counterproductive.

Roof, I believe, was onto something when he said that Whites could prevail even against much more numerous non-White enemies. It is unfortunate that he did not follow through with the implications of that thought.

If White people are to prevail, the main prerequisite is to change their thinking. Just as Jewish activists in the media and academic world initiated a decades-long educational project to change White attitudes on race that were dominant in the 1920s, we must do the same. Whites must learn to think and feel differently about race, and about issues affecting racial solidarity. They must learn to be less impressed with quantity and more concerned with quality. This is a long-term educational project that must contend with the fact that at present all of the media high ground is occupied by the enemies of Whites, their interests, and their culture.

Dylann Roof’s impatience, his emphasis on immediate physical action rather than the battle for the mind, and his belief that Blacks rather than Jews are the main problem, all contributed to his action, and in fact they all seem to be interrelated. If Roof had recognized the paramount importance of ideas, he could not have imagined that it was Blacks telling us what to think; the possibility for a tiny minority of Jews to wield enormous power, however, would have been obvious. The answer to false information and bad ideas does not have to be violence: it can be true information and good ideas. But if the whole problem is seen as irrational violence and nothing more, then the choice becomes simply whether to fight or to retreat, which is how Roof framed his choice.

This implies something about what the focus of pro-White media ought to be. The focus should be not on the bright and noisy spectacle, but on the man behind the curtain who makes it all happen. This is something that must be emphasized.

Ideally, Blacks and Whites should be able to recognize some common interests and cooperate on those interests. There are very clear common interests in curtailing Black crime — since, according to the FBI, 90% of murders of Blacks are committed by other Blacks — and in stopping immigration.

All of the agitation of Black hostility toward Whites by the mass media, mostly on false premises, which has generated not only anti-White and anti-police violence by Blacks but also Dylann Roof’s response, certainly doesn’t make such cooperation any easier.

Will Williams wrote: Young Dylann thinks Jews are White. Dr. Pierce didn't have that problem.

Hmm. I didn't notice that but perhaps that explains why Ramzpaul chose to talk about this, since that particular feeling that Jews are Whites seems to be a tenet of the AmRen philosophy. Ramzpaul is associated with AmRen and Jarred Taylor I believe. I didn't come across Hadding's article until you posted it. I think it all ties in well with that ADV broadcast from 1999 called "Knowledge and Discipline". I give Ramzpaul some credit for his last two videos which I posted above. I think he summed things up just about right.

Meanwhile, out here in Pontiac, South Carolina, which is only a
few miles from the state capitol building over in Columbia, I
have a unique perspective. Perhaps my imagination is at play
here, but if I were so inclined with the proclivities of the
"Holy Ghost," I could almost testify that I could feel the Earth
beneath my feet vibrate with the thunder of Christianized Goys
stampeding into the Capitol building in a mad dash to remove
the last vestiges of Caucasian monuments from the State House
grounds.

That, along the silent thunder of Shiksas removing their
undergarments to accommodate the indigenous Africans to
collect their just booty in reparations for four hundred
years of enslavement by Whites.

I trust intelligent readers of this forum will interpret
this tongue-in-cheek dialogue for what it is, much in the
manner that they do of Bruce Jenner's cat:

Wade Hampton III wrote:Meanwhile, out here in Pontiac, South Carolina, which is only a
few miles from the state capitol building over in Columbia, I
have a unique perspective. Perhaps my imagination is at play
here, but if I were so inclined with the proclivities of the
"Holy Ghost," I could almost testify that I could feel the Earth
beneath my feet vibrate with the thunder of Christianized Goys
stampeding into the Capitol building in a mad dash to remove
the last vestiges of Caucasian monuments from the State House
grounds.

)

I think I saw some footage of those Goys that were protesting against racism and against the Confederate Flag. I was wondering what the hell is wrong with those people. They look like a bunch of idiots. I don't know who got that mob of white lemmings to come out to protest something. They must of handed them out coupons for free beer and corn chips or something to get them to get off the couch and turn off the tv for a protest. Either that or the Jewish Camera crews of the mainstream media attract the lemmings like moths to a flame.

DanielOlj79 wrote: I think I saw some footage of those Goys that were protesting against racism and against the Confederate Flag.

The Jews know a bonanza when they create one. They waste no time
cashing in. Follow the link on this post. They claim this "protest"
took place in Charleston, yet you can clearly see the state Capitol
building in the background. I should know. I live in Pontiac, which
is less than 10 miles from downtown Columbia. Take it from one who
knows first-hand. No Yid cash is going to buy off THIS White boy!

http://whitebiocentrism.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2144

Damn Jews and their roaming mob squads.

Wade Hampton III wrote:...I could feel the Earth
beneath my feet vibrate with the thunder of Christianized Goys
stampeding...That, along the silent thunder of Shiksas removing their
undergarments to accommodate the indigenous Africans...

Thanks for that, Wade. But if we're going to use Yiddish here at WB, let's get it right. Goy is singular for what Jews call a Gentile: stupid cow; goyim is plural: stupid cattle.


Some prominent American goypoliticians

A Shabbos goy, Shabbat goy or Shabbes goy (Yiddish: שבת גוי, shabbos goy Modern Hebrew: גוי של שבת goy shel shabat) is a non-Jew who performs certain types of work (melakha) which Jewish religious law (halakha) enjoins the Jew from doing on the Sabbath. In modern times, it is a non-Jew who toadies to the every wish and whim of the Jews, especially in politics.

Shiksa is a disparaging word describing a Gentile female who is attracted to a male Jew, not to a Negro. The Yiddish translation is "impure" or "dirty meat."


Larry Zeiger aka "Larry King" with one of his shiksas

DanielOlj79 wrote:...I didn't notice that but perhaps that explains why Ramzpaul chose to talk about this, since that particular feeling that Jews are Whites seems to be a tenet of the AmRen philosophy. Ramzpaul is associated with AmRen and Jarred Taylor I believe. I didn't come across Hadding's article until you posted it. I think it all ties in well with that ADV broadcast from 1999 called "Knowledge and Discipline". I give Ramzpaul some credit for his last two videos which I posted above. I think he summed things up just about right.

I drew the line with this Ramzpaul fellow when he promoted Harold Covington as being legitimate, just as I drew the line with the CoCC when it chose to put in its mission statement: "The Council of Conservative Citizens is a Christian organization based on Christian principles."

We all have to draw the line somewhere.

Will Williams wrote:Thanks for that, Wade. But if we're going to use Yiddish here at WB, let's get it right.

Just curious here. Perhaps you are familiar with the concept of "Gentile-Jew?" A "Gentile-Jew" is a biological
Caucasian who has become so smitten with Jews and Jewry that, for all practical intents and intentions, he/she
may as well be a biological Jew. Is there a Yiddish word for "Gentile-Jew?"

Wade Hampton III wrote:

Will Williams wrote:Thanks for that, Wade. But if we're going to use Yiddish here at WB, let's get it right.

Just curious here. Perhaps you are familiar with the concept of "Gentile-Jew?" A "Gentile-Jew" is a biological
Caucasian who has become so smitten with Jews and Jewry that, for all practical intents and intentions, he/she
may as well be a biological Jew. Is there a Yiddish word for "Gentile-Jew?"

Probably. The term Crypto-Jew describes Jews who pretend to be Christians. Wiki: The term crypto-Jew is also used to describe descendants who maintain some Jewish traditions of their ancestors while publicly adhering to other faiths. The term is especially applied historically to European Jews who—outwardly or forcedly—professed Catholicism, also known as Anusim or Marrano.

Also "dampened Jew," and "Jew for Jesus," among other terms.

Judeophile is a fancy word for Jew lover, and more accurate than philosemite, who could love Arabs or Jews or both.


Well-known Jew lovin' goy, Glenn Beck