More Fisking, 1/17/16

::Yawn::

…one person who is clearly a disgruntled past contributor.

That’s right. I’m clearly no damn good.  How about removing my EGI PDF from your anti-White Yellow Supremacist website?  How many goddamn times do I have to ask, Madame Butterfly?

While Sallis apparently bemoans the Soviet sufferings in the example of the Sino-Soviet border conflict of 1969, the normal answer/position for anyone who cares about Europeans and European EGI: with regard to which side to take in the Sino-Soviet conflict is of course the Chinese side.

Daniel S: race-traitor.

This is like a case of chess vs. checkers. If you are playing checkers (which apparently Sallis is doing) then you’ll scream, “Russians are white and therefore they should be blindly supported no matter what they do, because their skin is very white!”

No worries, I won’t always support the White.  After all, in a theoretical death-match (think Highlander, with the swords) between Yukio Mishima and Daniel S, my full support would go to Mishima.  By the way, anyone familiar with my work knows full well I do not conflate race to skin color.  Why don’t you read the EGI PDF before you delete it?

Or, you could play chess and realise that the Sino-Soviet split was one of the most exploitable things that ever happened for people who were struggling against the Soviet Union.

Or you can play “chess” and realize that the Yellow Peril is the ultimate long-term threat to the White race, and that a short-term “checkers” advantage derived from supporting chanting yellow insects does not justify that ultimate strategic threat down the road.

ALSO: Given the rhetoric that he is throwing around, I wouldn’t be surprised if Sallis will next declare that Adolf Hitler and the entire general staff of the German Army in NS Germany, as well as Benito Mussolini and the whole PNF, were somehow magically ‘race traitors’ to the European peoples because they chose to work with or enable the following militant groups of people against certain European groups: Japan, Korea (yes, large sections of Korean society fought in the IJA and collaborated with Axis), the Burmese National Army, the Indian National Army, Indonesian National Army, Young Malays Union, Thailand, the Philippines, Formosa (non-KMT Han in Taiwan and Taiwanese aboriginals), Mongolia, Crimean Tatars, Hmong tribes, Khmer Issarak (Cambodian and Khmer), Cambodia, Laos, Cochinchina (later part of Vietnam), Annam (later part of Vietnam), Tonkin (later part of Vietnam), Manchuria, Tibet, Assam, Bengal. I can’t wait to see the rationalising or perhaps the spinning that will happen next.

Don’t seem to remember either individual (Adolf or Benito) proposing Chinese colonization of White lands so that White faglets can be protected by buck-toothed, flat-chested Chinese girls with guns. And I note that Hitler quashed von Ribbentrop’s triumphalist announcement of the Fall of Singapore (which Hitler regretted) because of concerns over the Yellow Peril (see Irving’s Hitler’s War).  The alliance with Japan was due to the UK’s refusal to see reason, and the idea that Japan could be a counter-balance to the USSR.  Of course, the crafty nips stabbed Adolf in the back by signing a non-aggression treaty with the USSR, but – again, of course – expected German support after Pearl Harbor (which they got, proving again that Euro-Asian alliances are for the benefit of Asians only).
Further, both sides in both world wars made use of colored auxiliaries; both sides were at fault, and both are worthy of condemnation, your mendacious Asiatic.
By the way, one can make all sorts of excuses for arrogant Japanese behavior, re: 1914 and English overseas colonies.  I can’t wait for the “spin and rationalizations” for the protests of Asian nations, including Japan, for America’s Asian exclusion acts.  Oh, you see, White lands are obligated to take leprous, tubercular, Asian immigrants (but of course never the reverse).

Asking ‘who would you support’ and presenting the dichotomy of supporting the USSR on one hand or the PRC on the other. The answer to that question is already known, Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford supplied that answer. In the circumstances that had come to exist at the time, that was the best possible choice that could have been made. 


Perhaps, gook, we’ll know what the “right choice” was when the final information is at hand.  Me, I think Nixon should have agreed to let the USSR nuke China.  If the White world ends up buried under a Yellow mudslide (with Danny masturbating and flagellating himself simultaneously), then I would think Nixon and Ford were in error.

Your blog should change its name, unless the “majority” in Majority Rights represents the populations of East Asia.  As a vehicle for specifically European interests, the site is a treasonous, pathetic joke.
Advertisements