User talk:Exterminance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello Bill. First, I do wish to thank you for the tone with which you voiced your concern. So far you've yet to accuse me of being Richard Warman or a member of Anti-Racist Action so already you're heads and shoulders above others who have been upset with my article and edits.

As I said when I reverted one of your earlier edits, in most cases pro-White seems to be a euphemism that racist or hate groups use when describing their organization. If it was simply a matter of pride in one's heritage, then that description would fit and I can think of a number of European heritage groups that could be considered pride groups. The big difference that I see and how I define groups when I write about them is whether the pride claimed by an organization is based in part on denegrating the accomplishments of another ethnic group. Take Stormfront for example. I would define that website as a hate site based on the fact that the members routinely attack other ethnic groups in an attempt to claim some sort of superiority over those groups. I realize that Don Black has attempted to put on a more respectable front for the public but his efforts have been sabatoged by members who refer to African-Americans as "niggers". Other websites, such as VNN and Blood and Honour, don't even bother with such an attempt at respectability. As you've posted on all three websites as Exterminance, I'm sure you can see my point in how these groups exhibit their pride or their pro-White stance.

I'm of European extraction. I'm certainly not anti-White and I do try to be as objective as I can. I do believe that hate group, hate site, and all the variations are accurate. AnnieHall 03:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Well Annie, I certainly won't deny that hate exists, or that it occurs in the rank and file of WNs. However, the occurence of hate in the pages of Stormfront hardly justify labelling Stormfront a 'hate site'.

Consider that White Nationalism is a cause which only needed to come into existence because the welfare and existence of the White race was in peril. The source of the peril lies in various non-White and/or anti-White groups, in a confluence of various contributing factors which can involve non-Whites who are not necessarily anti-White, and anti-Whites who are not necessarily non-White, as well as numerous non-White anti-Whites.

The definition of an anti-White is anyone who deliberately takes a course of action which is calculated to hurt the White race or any effort to preserve the White race.

Hatred, when it occurs, occurs for a reason. Many of those who hate Blacks do so because they have had negative experiences with Blacks. I myself might have reasonable grounds to hate Native Americans, as I've been assaulted by them often enough, most recently a couple of weeks ago. However, I make the intellectual choice not to hate them, because I see their behavior as being part of their nature, and thus, something they cannot help; they are violent and aggressive, and hate White people. There are exceptions, certainly; yet, there is also the rule to which those exceptions occur.

What hate you observe in sites like Stormfront is simply a natural response to the pressures of opposition, aggravation, and various other negative affronts non-Whites and/or anti-Whites commit against my people. Some WNs live near ghettos and have experienced violence at the hands of ghetto Blacks. an you blame them for developing negative opinions of Blacks as a result? And perhaps some fear, some resentment, some derision or contempt?

Other WN live near Native reserves, as I did, and have had unpleasant experiences there. Still others have been subject to violence by Asian gangs or various other ethnic delinquents.

None of this implies that all people of every non-White race is necessarily a bad apple. However, the fact that racial tension is naturally inherent in human beings means that forced integration or a 'program of multiculturalism' is going to expose people of one race to the dark side of other races.

If all races were separate, had their own sovereign territory and self-rule, and each took care of their own criminal element, then the word 'racism' would come to bear connotations of 'respect' instead of the connotations of 'hatred' that become apparent in the word's ciurrent everyday usage.

So long as White people are subject to having multiculturalism imposed upon them, without their consent, they are guaranteed to react to this cultural rape with strongly negative feelings and expressions.

If you want to end hate,

You must first end the rape of the White race.

It's either that or hurry up and slaughter us so that we are no longer present in this world to hate those who wilfully rape and slaughter our race.

Yes Mr. Noble, I have been reading your post on the Glenn Bahr Wikipedia article with a great deal of amusement. You might wish to let “Teardown” (who I believe edits on Wikipedia as 8318) that there’s nothing that I’ve written about on Wikipedia that he himself can’t find online. There’s no inside information that I have access to (I wish I had access to such a source) and that the articles I write and edit are based on some very simple Google searches. They give me far too much credit.

It seems to me that you want to have it both ways Mr. Noble. On the one hand you say that Stormfront is not a hate site, but on the other hand you say that if some White Nationalists do express hatred on Stormfront then they have a reason, and a good one at that, which you then proceed to vaguely justify.

You know that I can easily provide thousands of links to posts made by Stormfront members who use vile language to describe non-Whites and Jews. Yes, I know that there is a policy that such language is not permitted on Stormfront, but that policy is administered sporadically at best. At the same time anything critical of White Nationalists whom David Duke or Don Black favour is often immediately removed from the forum by Stormfront moderators. To me this implies tacit approval of such language and the attitudes that accompany the language since it is not often expunged immediately, if at all. If Stormfront is the respectable face of White Nationalism, then the VNN forum and Blood and Honour forum don’t even make an attempt. If you don’t consider Stormfront to be a hate site, then how about these other two websites?

You said that White Nationalists who hate have reasons for feeling the way they do. I agree that they have reasons, but the question then is whether their reasons are justifiable. I’ve never been victimized by an ethnic minority in my life that I can remember. I have been physically assaulted by three white men though. I realize that this sounds like a contrived example, but it is true. Would I be justified in hating all whites? According to your logic, such hatred would be understandable. To me it would be ridiculous to condemn an entire group based on the actions of a small sample. So, I don’t hate whites because I was attacked by three white men, though I will say I’m not at all fond of those particular three white men.

Incidentally I do find it interesting that you claim that hatred by White Nationalist can be justified based on their negative experiences with minorities, and then say that Native Americans hate white people but provide no explanation. Since you seem to be saying that hatred occurs for a reason, I wonder if you’d explain the reason why Native Americans hate white people as you claim they do? If white hatred of Native Americans is justified, then is Native American hatred of whites justified? You said that you were recently attacked by some Native Americans? This would imply some animosity. Was their animosity justified?

I have to say I’m worried about your definition of what an anti-White is. Using the Blood and Honour forum again as an example, there is a Canadian moderator who I won’t name who routinely calls for killing minorities and Jews if it means the advancement of the Aryan Master Race. Should he carry though with his boasts, and if you knew that he committed such a terrible crime, would you report his crime to the police? If you would turn him in then aren’t you, in a way, engaging in an anti-White act according to how you define it?

I find your comments about multiculturalism to be interesting but I have to question them. Toronto is a very multicultural city and I know the posters on Stormfront rail about that fact and the murder rate in the city. But the murder rate in Toronto is a little over 2 per 100,000 people. In London the murder rate is around 2.4 per 100,000 and it’s at least as multicultural as Toronto if not more so. However Moscow, which is far more monocultural, has a murder rate of 22 per 100,000 people (at least according to 2002 numbers). Perhaps other factors are at play than multiculturalism? Levels of poverty and inequality? Maybe race has far less to do with crime than economic factors?

I often think that those White Nationalists who express hatred towards non-Whites, and you yourself admit some could be described as hating non-Whites, feel the way they do because it’s easier to blame others for their own inadequacies. It’s easier to make an excuse for one’s failures than it is to think introspectively and come to the conclusion that, “Perhaps it is me after all.” Be honest Mr. Noble. When you read some posts on Stormfront by people complaining about how society is so unfair to whites, don’t you sometimes think, based upon how the poster presents himself, that perhaps the reason why that person is a failure is because that person IS a failure? You might not think this for all, or even most, but I think you’re intelligent enough to realize that you can’t blame multiculturalism for every sob story on Stormfront.

I think I started to ramble at the end. I’ll post it anyways. I’m interested in your reply to what is likely the garbled ramblings of a sleep-deprived mommy. AnnieHall 09:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

"Yes Mr. Noble, I have been reading your post on the Glenn Bahr Wikipedia article with a great deal of amusement. You might wish to let “Teardown” (who I believe edits on Wikipedia as 8318) that there’s nothing that I’ve written about on Wikipedia that he himself can’t find online. There’s no inside information that I have access to (I wish I had access to such a source) and that the articles I write and edit are based on some very simple Google searches. They give me far too much credit."

'... with a great deal of amusement'. This indication of condescension suggests that I may not have been far off with my comment that you wished to avoid speaking directly to us 'because that would give them credibility' and that you plan to abruptly cut off this discussion in the not-too-distant future. Perhaps your entire response was delivered for the express purpose of proving me wrong in suggesting that you'd avoid open discussion altogether?

I do agree that most of what you post does appear to be derived from the public domain, however.

"It seems to me that you want to have it both ways Mr. Noble. On the one hand you say that Stormfront is not a hate site, but on the other hand you say that if some White Nationalists do express hatred on Stormfront then they have a reason, and a good one at that, which you then proceed to vaguely justify."

Perhaps I didn't express my point clearly enough: the expression of hatred on a site does not define what that site is. Pro-White sites exist to help pro-White activists network with one another. The adversity we are beset with will inevitably lead to expressions of hatred. We are after all only human, and it is human to experience emotional reactions to things which confront us in life.

"You know that I can easily provide thousands of links to posts made by Stormfront members who use vile language to describe non-Whites and Jews. Yes, I know that there is a policy that such language is not permitted on Stormfront, but that policy is administered sporadically at best. At the same time anything critical of White Nationalists whom David Duke or Don Black favour is often immediately removed from the forum by Stormfront moderators. To me this implies tacit approval of such language and the attitudes that accompany the language since it is not often expunged immediately, if at all. If Stormfront is the respectable face of White Nationalism, then the VNN forum and Blood and Honour forum don’t even make an attempt. If you don’t consider Stormfront to be a hate site, then how about these other two websites?"

VNN - which I personally have posted on, indeed using blunt jargon - seemed originally to place stress upon freedom of speech over outward appearance. As much as I appreciate the freedom and the honesty inherent in such a prioritization, I can see all to well that it does result in a crude outward appearance. Though my chief reason for abandoning that site is their endorsement of the traitor Glenn Miller.

Blood and Honour revolves around the British Skinhead sphere, where the talk tends to be tougher than on this side of the Atlantic. Largely because their situation is tough enough to warrant such talk.

Stormfront may have ended up being something of a censored environment, but if the end result is something civilized and productive, I see no reason to complain.

"You said that White Nationalists who hate have reasons for feeling the way they do. I agree that they have reasons, but the question then is whether their reasons are justifiable. I’ve never been victimized by an ethnic minority in my life that I can remember. I have been physically assaulted by three white men though. I realize that this sounds like a contrived example, but it is true. Would I be justified in hating all whites? According to your logic, such hatred would be understandable. To me it would be ridiculous to condemn an entire group based on the actions of a small sample. So, I don’t hate whites because I was attacked by three white men, though I will say I’m not at all fond of those particular three white men."

Intra-racial violence would best be dealt with by tribal law, i.e. in a White society, White assailants would be executed or otherwise punished for their crimes. Chances are, with the current regime's approach, the White men who assaulted you got minimal sentences (if any) and are now free as a reward for their assault upon, and resultant partial alienation of, a White woman. Had you been non-White, likely they would have been worse off. You would be fully justifiable in feeling resentment towwrds those who assaulted you, but were they merely White? Or were they White drug addicts? Or White drug dealers? Or White whiggers? Chances are, these lot had something other than race alone to define them. Most well-balanced White men don't go around assaulting the women of our race. Depending upon your clarity of mind, you could end up hating degenerate White males, or you could end up hating men in general, to the point of becoming a lesbian. The clearer your intellect, the better focused your dislikes.

"Incidentally I do find it interesting that you claim that hatred by White Nationalist can be justified based on their negative experiences with minorities, and then say that Native Americans hate white people but provide no explanation. Since you seem to be saying that hatred occurs for a reason, I wonder if you’d explain the reason why Native Americans hate white people as you claim they do? If white hatred of Native Americans is justified, then is Native American hatred of whites justified? You said that you were recently attacked by some Native Americans? This would imply some animosity. Was their animosity justified?"

Native Americans hate White people because we occupy the same space as they do. Hence the slogan: END THE HATE... SEPARATE! It isn't necessarily because we invaded and conquered their land; it's mostly because they live in such close quarters with us. Different races need separation from each other if they are to be peaceable with one another, as delineated in the Twenty-Sixth Precept: Nature has put a certain antipathy between races and species to preserve the individuality and existence of each. Violation of the territorial imperative necessary to preserve that antipathy leads to either conflict or mongrelization.

"I have to say I’m worried about your definition of what an anti-White is. Using the Blood and Honour forum again as an example, there is a Canadian moderator who I won’t name who routinely calls for killing minorities and Jews if it means the advancement of the Aryan Master Race. Should he carry though with his boasts, and if you knew that he committed such a terrible crime, would you report his crime to the police? If you would turn him in then aren’t you, in a way, engaging in an anti-White act according to how you define it?"

I'm not sure if you grasp all the fine points of survival in the face of natural law, but the bottom line is: the end justifies ANY means. If anyone finds themselves feeling threatened by pro-White activists, they need to look at what they're doing to become the focus of our anger. I'm sure that in the current social environment, there are multitudes of individuals totally oblivious to the harmful consequences of what they percieve as normal and acceptable everyday behavioural patterns. But what if they paused to consider the eventual consequences of their actions? What if they realized that their actions negatively impacted the survival and/or freedom of another people? Might they not feel remorse at the reckless endangerment they were participating in, and seek to change their ways?

"I find your comments about multiculturalism to be interesting but I have to question them. Toronto is a very multicultural city and I know the posters on Stormfront rail about that fact and the murder rate in the city. But the murder rate in Toronto is a little over 2 per 100,000 people. In London the murder rate is around 2.4 per 100,000 and it’s at least as multicultural as Toronto if not more so. However Moscow, which is far more monocultural, has a murder rate of 22 per 100,000 people (at least according to 2002 numbers). Perhaps other factors are at play than multiculturalism? Levels of poverty and inequality? Maybe race has far less to do with crime than economic factors?"

No single factor can be pinpointed as the cause of any complex phenomenon. Multiculturalism is a significant factor, and the source of many negative eventualities, without any sufficient beneficial side effects to justify its being imposed upon a nation.

"I often think that those White Nationalists who express hatred towards non-Whites, and you yourself admit some could be described as hating non-Whites, feel the way they do because it’s easier to blame others for their own inadequacies. It’s easier to make an excuse for one’s failures than it is to think introspectively and come to the conclusion that, “Perhaps it is me after all.” Be honest Mr. Noble. When you read some posts on Stormfront by people complaining about how society is so unfair to whites, don’t you sometimes think, based upon how the poster presents himself, that perhaps the reason why that person is a failure is because that person IS a failure? You might not think this for all, or even most, but I think you’re intelligent enough to realize that you can’t blame multiculturalism for every sob story on Stormfront."

Most of those sob stories don't have anything to do with the poster being a 'failure'. It's probably debatable what a failure is. My own definition of the term might be someone who dies without reproducing, or someone who fails to avoid addiction to a non-beneficial, harmful substance. Many of the people on Stormfront have personally been victimized in one way or another by non-Whites or by the process of multiculturalization. Many of us are currently in situations where our liberty is at stake for no other reason than expressing our views, opinions and beliefs - I myself am looking at two years in prison, after a court date in late March 2007. That, and a lot of the other unreasonable persecution we have to put up with from the governments, media, manipulated public, and various other collossi that tower over us, certainly justifies resistance and protest from us.

The bottom line is this: We seek SURVIVAL and LIBERTY. We resist our EXTINCTION and our OPPRESSION. And frankly, if somebody gets offended because we used a derogatory term to describe them, or because we express concern at their crowding us out of our communities, or they don't like the colors and symbols of the flags we fly, their taking offense doesn't give them a moral high ground over us. We are human beings, and that means we will be rude, we will be angy, we will be resentful, we will be desperate, we will sometimes lose control and lash out... we will not be shining angels smiling away blissfully accepting the tramp of the tyrant's boots crushing us into oblivion.

We are human beings being subject to a deficit of freedom and the means to self-preservation, and we will do whatever we have to do to srvive. We will also often do stupid and detrimental things, because to do such is one of humanity's inevitable shortcomings.

I think I started to ramble at the end. I’ll post it anyways. I’m interested in your reply to what is likely the garbled ramblings of a sleep-deprived mommy. AnnieHall 09:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Not too much rambling, but the comment about reading my post 'with a great deal of amusement' was perhaps ill-advised. It comes across as an attempt to assert intellectual and/or moral superiority over the person being spoken to, and is not a productive approach to open discussion.

- Bill

I will respond to the rest of what you wrote soon but I will make a comment on this part right away. It really isn't an issue of me trying to assert intellectual or moral superiority. At least that's not what I intended. What I find funny is the absolute insistance by many on your side that I'm someone who I simply not. I opt to laugh at it and shake my head rather than become annoyed or frustrated by it, though I can't say I'd be really annoyed or frustrated by it either. It just seems so weird, and honestly a little paranoid, to me. I'm just someone who has been interested in the far right in Canada since I first watched a movie on the KKK when I was a child and wanted to understand why people would feel that way. AnnieHall 06:37, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

So the ends justify ANY means? Should I make the leap that you're saying that murdering non-Whites is acceptable in certain circumstances? I find it a little frightening that you would blame the victim of racially motivated attacks for their victimization (would this reasoning apply to Whites attacked by non-Whites in racially motivated attacks?). I'd be interested to know how you would justify the stabbing murder of a a nine-year-old Tajik girl named Hurshida Sultanova (Violence and hatred in the new skinhead playground). What did she do personally to make herself the focus of anger? Was her murder justified? AnnieHall 05:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Exterminance

what an appropriate name for a self-called 'peace loving' nazi who is the victim of not being able to afford to move out of "da ghetto." poor you... you want me to send you food coupons?