Gus > for your ploy to be successful, you conveniently overlook my pro-French sympathies.
So what: what does that prove? Zionists were pro-Nazi and Nazis were pro-Zionist. Jewish fascists (to use your term) are pro-evangelist and evangelists are pro-Israel -- yet neither like each other. If you, someone who is clearly anti-white, is pro-France you must have a vested interest in being so. That it appears inconsistent with other arguments you have or that I don't know the reason are irrelevant. I am concerned ONLY about your racial position which I have already clearly stated -- you are either a white hypocrite or an angry black.
> I feel it my duty to dot the i's and cross the t's of Nikole Wollerstein, its resident, anti-French Judeofascist
Come now, what does he have to do with the price of tea in China? Anyway, that's not even his real name.
> you psychologize my opinion by branding me an "anti-white racist".
As you are now trying to do with my response. Forget the name, give me the reason for your opinion -- either a white hypocrite or an angry black?
> you are like a Jesus freak from the Bible Belt who would find it impossible to debate with an atheist or a polytheist on matters of faith
More bullshit. If ever there was a Devil's Advocate, it's me. So much so, I frequently don't know what I actually believe because I can take either side in the argument. Certainly the racial one where, in fact, I have. As I state frequently, I opposed the white apartheid regime for its racial policies and likewise I now oppose the ANC for theirs.
> or a white person taking up the cause of Africans?
If it's in their perceived self-interest to do so, they will and I have done so myself. It's not an inconsistency although it may seem to be. And surprising as it may seem, there are, in fact, values which supersede racial ones -- self-preservation is one. But with you, you have not declared your position, you have merely stated it. Therefore, I am entitled to assume you are either a white hypocrite or an angry black.
> Muslim spouses extolling the virtues of mixed marriage
Or a piece of string extolling the virtues of a pair of scissors. Absurd argument. Anyway, to my knowledge, there are damn few serious Muslims who marry out of their faith. In fact, I would say there are more Catholic priests who break their vows by having relations with girls and little boys.
> Ditto for the US where political pundits have routinely pointed to the "ironic" voting pattern of the US's white underclass who keeps voting GOP AGAINST its own economic self-interest! The reason being that the social/religious conservatism of white Americans is stronger than their purely economical awareness.
That's exactly what I am saying and you prove my point -- people do or say what is in their own perceived self-interest. Therefore I say you are either a white hypocrite who is pretending to be something he isn't or an angry black who nurtures a grievance based on his own shortcomings?
> George Soros, Ted Turner (who bankrolled the UN with the money he got from the TimeWarner/CNN merger), and Bill Gates (thru his charities) are all big redistributors of wealth, yet none is a politician
Bill Gates, for example, has stated frequently that he doesn't believe in leaving an enormous estate to his kids. Whether that is merely a ruse to protect them from kidnappers or he actually believes it enfeebles them I can't say, but I can assure you that his charitable works are definitely in his own self-interest, as he sees it. Likewise George Soros, who is actually a professional at this, he makes a living from involving himself in the financial affairs of various countries. Of course, being a smart guy, he see to it that his self-interest coincides with the moral high ground (as he sees it). Ted Turner I don't know much about except that he opened his mouth to wide on one occasion about the Israel - Palestine situation.
> there certainly are Palestinians supporting the existence of a Jewish state peacefully and alongside a Palestinian one.
If it's in their perceived self-interest, they will, as I do, and I'm not a Palestinian. But they certainly will not extoll the virtues of Sharon or Netanyahu, and I don't either. And the reason I take this position is because I believe that the Israeli right-wing position is wrong, that the way to peace is not through war, and that one day they will have to bite the bullet and accept the Palestinians AS THEY ARE and not as they would like them to be -- or, more importantly, where they would like them to be. We had to do that in SA and it was the only way forward. At a level, apartheid was fine, but it was not a long-term solution nor, indeed, the proper solution.
> cross-pollination and bridge building are genuine, instrumental features of human life, be it in politics, in sociology, in economics,....
I accept that but argue one does those things only if it's in one's perceived self-interest to do them.
Now, Mr Jaeger, please tell me the reason for your apparent dislike of whites? |
