Therefore, appeals to the Confederacy, National Socialism or the American Revolution are of very limited utility. The ongoing displacement and dispossession of the white West --- including the massive brainwashing and cultural usurpation preventing any sort of resistance --- is brand-spankin' new on the political horizon since hunter-gatherers first sowed a seed and settled down.

We can draw inspirational strength and some tips from historical examples of white resistance, but we need to be thinking anew here. Recognizing that is a good first step, however bracing. Getting out of this mess will take some doing.

But doing, mostly, and here is a related thought: I often imagine that our task is prohibitively overwhelming, i.e., so gigantic a cluster**** that one is frozen into inaction. We need to avoid this. Because I wonder if, however helpful courage and genius might be, plain old PERSISTENCE for the long haul won't be our best ally. That is, committed whites who engage in prolonged dedication to our cause in ways great and small, working to change minds, politics and media messages: the teachers, lawyers, judges, politicians and doctors Pierce imagined rolling up their sleeves and quietly getting high and inside.

Depending on what is meant by "our plight" there are a number of historical precedents for what is happening: North Africa, ancient Egypt, Central Asia, all at one time in the past were White, and now are only a minority White in the upper classes.

bardamu is spot on here.

Some of us even noticed the fact that ancient Sumer was one of the earliest high civilizations to be inundated by nonwhites and it's precisely that area that is being shot up now, perhaps for distraction as our civilization gets inundated.

History begins at Sumer, they've been telling us for years. The reconquista seems to have started there too. Coincidences about that place abound lately.

Do you have any evidence that Sumer was inhabited by Whites?

Sumer I put in the same category as Egypt. If not Euro they were Martians.

I am prepared to prove either civilization makes more sense if they were Martian. But they were probably southern European as the grave diggers have been asserting now for a hundred years or so.

My bet is Egypt was probably a mix of whites and semites, Sumer is more of a riddle and as you are probably aware, their language is related no other that we are aware of....

Here is a great laugh if you need one, an Afrocentric site trying to claim Egypt for the Negroes:

http://www.geocities.com/wally_mo/index.html

Do you have any evidence that Sumer was inhabited by Whites?
The Sumerians racial characteristics are not I believe known for sure, but the Chaldeans( the main people of Babylon) were described as fair skinned and the ancient Assyrians and Hittites were described as often blonde haired and blue eyed.

My bet is Egypt was probably a mix of whites and semites

If you look at their art and statues thats what it look likes.

There's no clear line between "white" and "Semite" anyway. Egypt and Sumer were certainly Caucasoid. The same can't be said for central Asia.

The term 'white' is a conglomeration of many peoples. Its usage distorts history. What does it mean to say a population is 'white'? It could be anything from a Scandinavian, to a Greek, and even a Jew. To say that the Egytpians were mixed with 'white' means nothing, because there is no one certain people identifiable by the term 'white', yet an entire multitude. It is a word that refers to the lack of melanin in a particular population that within itself is very diverse. Where is the line to be drawn?

There's no clear line between "white" and "Semite" anyway. Egypt and Sumer were certainly Caucasoid. The same can't be said for central Asia.

Exactly. There is no clear line when the word 'white' is used. Like I noted above, it could refer to any population from Europe or the near East. It does not target anything specific, yet references the lack of melanin in people.

Posted by Otto_von_Bismarck:
and the ancient Assyrians and Hittites were described as often blonde haired and blue eyed.

Post your sources. Let's hope that you're not using the same history that "teaches" [pardon the abuse] us how the Romans were also blonde haired and blue eyed.

Thirdly, I suspect that 'Hugh Lincoln' is a troll. Can Fade please investigate the identity? I think it was used when Poppins was spamming the board.

Sumer I put in the same category as Egypt. If not Euro they were Martians.

I am prepared to prove either civilization makes more sense if they were Martian. But they were probably southern European as the grave diggers have been asserting now for a hundred years or so.

Do you have any conception of the ancient Semitic tribes? I'd be happy to introduce you to them. The Egyptians and Sumerians were certainly not European. That they were 'Southern European' is also false. You are however on the right track in identifying them under the subrace Mediterranean. Though they are a distinct type of Mediterranean from Greeks, Italians, and Iberians.

Thirdly, I suspect that 'Hugh Lincoln' is a troll. Can Fade please investigate the identity? I think it was used when Poppins was spamming the board.

Hugh Lincoln is not a troll.

The Egyptians and Sumerians were certainly not European. That they were 'Southern European' is also false. You are however on the right track in identifying them under the subrace Mediterranean. Though they are a distinct type of Mediterranean from Greeks, Italians, and Iberians.

This is the hair-splitters argument over who started Sumer and Egypt which cannot be reduced to a 50 or 100 word post.

Dynastic Egypt (eg) was invaded by a tall, narrow-headed racial type that was definitely European (Emory, Archaic Egypt, 1961). That there were indigenous inhabitants to the Nile Valley is a given (and Emory again expands on it.)

Sumer seems to fit the same profile. The area was, like the Nile Valley, invaded and settled in part by a seagoing race and if their ship lists and their mythology says anything at all, it indicates a European people.

The one concession we all must make on the issue is that when Emory (et al.) were writing 40 years ago race and the ancient world could be discussed more or less freely.

On the upside, there are literally tons of Afro-Sumer and Afro-Egypt sites I could link up with for those who insist Europe was raised from squalor and ignorance by Uncle Remus and his wife Aunt Jemima.

(OK, just kidding. Better: Spend 3 or 4 years learning archaic Egyptian and then tell those of us who already have they were non-white. No crime against dumb opinions if you earn them.)

The one concession we all must make on the issue is that when Emory (et al.) were writing 40 years ago race and the ancient world could be discussed more or less freely.

On the upside, there are literally tons of Afro-Sumer and Afro-Egypt sites I could link up with for those who insist Europe was raised from squalor and ignorance by Uncle Remus and his wife Aunt Jemima.


I have also seen claims that Sumeria was founded by Dravidian people and that the Indus Valley civilization was a colony of Sumer, and also Dravidian.

Julius, stop being a disruptor :D

Thirdly, I suspect that 'Hugh Lincoln' is a troll. Can Fade please investigate the identity? I think it was used when Poppins was spamming the board.
Hugh Lincoln is from the Original Dissent forum.

Hugh Lincoln is not a troll.
I agree. Either Raina or Poppins one did register an account though with his username during the SPAM attacks. Someone registered 'Texas Dissident' as well, although with a fake email address.

Just trolling for subscribers to National Vanguard magazine, if you aren't already one...

http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=3719

http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=3720

Gotta get through college somehow!

:|

This is the hair-splitters argument over who started Sumer and Egypt which cannot be reduced to a 50 or 100 word post.

Dynastic Egypt (eg) was invaded by a tall, narrow-headed racial type that was definitely European (Emory, Archaic Egypt, 1961). That there were indigenous inhabitants to the Nile Valley is a given (and Emory again expands on it.)

Sumer seems to fit the same profile. The area was, like the Nile Valley, invaded and settled in part by a seagoing race and if their ship lists and their mythology says anything at all, it indicates a European people.

The one concession we all must make on the issue is that when Emory (et al.) were writing 40 years ago race and the ancient world could be discussed more or less freely.

On the upside, there are literally tons of Afro-Sumer and Afro-Egypt sites I could link up with for those who insist Europe was raised from squalor and ignorance by Uncle Remus and his wife Aunt Jemima.

(OK, just kidding. Better: Spend 3 or 4 years learning archaic Egyptian and then tell those of us who already have they were non-white. No crime against dumb opinions if you earn them.)

I'll touch upon this using an AUTHENTICATED SCHOLARLY SOURCE about the Mediterranean and its history, someone who lived there and was intimate with its details. Actually, the guy is from the same school as Michel Foucault, though he was denounced by Foucault because he was an historian. I'm talking about Fernand Braudel. I'll post excerpts later, but for now I must go to the gym. :)

I'll touch upon this using an AUTHENTICATED SCHOLARLY SOURCE :)

Thanks for the warning and do wear boots! :D

When dealing with Egyptology, one must read the most up to date material. I have been to libraries that still use books based on the Flinders Petrie chronology, these books were probably published in the 50s, early 60s. These older works have many Egyptian events occuring about 900-1000 years earlier than they actually did occur. Earlier works on the Sumerians also misdate by many centuries.

Sumer is more of a riddle and as you are probably aware, their language is related no other that we are aware of....

Nonsense.

The Sumerians spoke perfectly servicable Atlantaean, not some grubby pigdin, like the Egyptians and Mexicans. Sadly, none of native Atlantaeans in these three major colonial posessions were able to raise general education in the wider populations there to allow for the preservation of technological civilization, following the flood.

But this is certain: whichever Great Power is first to recover the crystal from Atlantis' central temple complex will certainly rule the solar system forever . . .

It must not fall into the wrong hands.

http://www.crystalinks.com/temple.jpg

WM

I agree. There is a definite uniqeness to this problem. The problem isn't that unique, but the methodology is, the fight is and the techniques are new. It is for that reason, that we need a new movement, and not a resurrected one.

Ave Caesar sorry I didn't see this post earlier. Not able to find my source now and trying to find anything on ancient Assyrians as a race tends to yield some kooky bible **** I don't think you would believe.

But look at the pic of a big group of modern Assyrians who no doubt over the centuries have picked up some sand monkey blood... still a fair # of blondes. http://www.zyworld.com/Assyrian/Main.htm

The ancient Sumerians were created by aliens as slaves to service space ships and extract other materials for the aliens' well-being. The pyramids were created as landing markers for the UFOs. It's true, just read Zechariah Stitchen. :rolleyes:

I'm not even going to waste my time with the idea that the Sumerians or Egyptians were Nordic. It's so laughable that it doesn't even deserve attention. The same applies to anyone who may have blonde hair or light eyes automatically being 'Nordic'. It's a revisionist cult of history that borders on the absurdities of Stitchenism.

Never claimed the Ancient Egyptians were "nordic", im not a nordicist( you have kinda a paranoia about this, Ive in fact joked about nuking Sweden before they contaminate the rest of world on this very forum). Ive never said anything about the Sumerians whatsoever, nothing really is known.

The kook religious **** is just what comes up when you try to look up the ancient Assyrians on the internet... though I don't think they're all that far off on some points.

You're a mistake, otto_von_bismarck. I suggest you occupy yourself with other affairs.

I'm not even going to waste my time with the idea that the Sumerians or Egyptians were Nordic...

Nobody with brains ever did. The point of who started the civilizations versus which phenotype populated them later really is confusing and no modern scholar apart from Emory has even tried to deal with it.

By 1964, Time-Life Incorporated released a coffee-table sized picture book about ancient history that referred to Sumer and Egypt as "Afro-Asian melting pots" which reflected where "scholars" were heading with this. These cultures were being removed from the history of the West. (Not incidentally, this thinking opened the doors wide for Sitchen, who at the time was running an exhibit at the New York World's Fair.)

Then again, think of it as practice. In the forty years since we've lost lots of other history too.