Myth #1: Whites have
been the imperialists of history.
Fact: Imperialism, that is, the invasion and conquest of land occupied by other peoples, is not unique to Whites, as alleged by non-White racists. Genghis Khan set out to conquer the world, and all peoples who would not submit to his rule were deemed "rebels". Chaka, the founder of The Zulu Nation, was embarked on a policy of national expansion by killing and despoiling other Black Africans. In the Americas, the Aztec and Inca Empires ruled over unwilling subject peoples who were glad to ally themselves with "The White Gods", as they called the Spanish invaders. Europeans and Asians suffered from the great invasions of Islamic peoples under the Arabs and the Turks.
Myth #2: Pre-Columbian
inhabitants of The Americas lived in conflict-free harmony with their fellow
Fact: Many names for "Indian" tribes mean "the people", such as Hopi. Non-Hopis were not deemed "people". Similarly, Navajos don't think Hopis are "people", either. Tribal, national and imperial conflicts caused bloodshed amongst the peoples of this hemisphere, long before the arrival of Columbus. Multi-tribal nations such as the Iroquois, fought their opponents, the Hurons, on a ferocious, 'take no prisoner' basis. The rivalry and hatred between these Indian nations was so great that they allied themselves with the invading Whites who were also at war against their fellow Whites: English versus French. As we know, the Hurons and their French allies were defeated by the Iroquois and their English allies.
Myth #3: Racism is
the reason for imperialism.
Fact: Imperialist wars have always existed between peoples of the same race. All races have been at war from prehistoric times to the present, and their foremost enemies were their fellow Whites, Blacks or Yellows. The causes of imperialism are hunger, greed and opportunity. In some cases, these underlying motives have been cloaked in racial and/or religious pretexts, but the results belie these pretexts, nearly every time. The Mongols were proud of who they were, but they were not too proud to race-mix with conquered peoples, nor to adopt their religions. The fierce Norsemen were no different, for they also interbred with people they conquered, spoke their languages and adopted their religions. Religious wars resulted in the same bottom line: the adulteration of races and religion, as we have seen with all the varieties of Christianity and Islam. If the European conquest of the Western Hemisphere had been truly "racist", there would not be any "Indians", nor Blacks, and certainly no mongrel mixtures of either.
Myth #4: Whites committed
genocide against the peoples of the Western Hemisphere.
Fact: Racemixing is genocide for all races who engage in it. Mongrel victims of genocide should not reproduce, and thereby repeat the original sin (adultery) and the original crime (genocide). Whites were not racists, for racists of any race want their race to survive. If the Whites had been real racists, they would have obeyed their Old Testament god who commanded them to slay every member of a conquered people, including their pets and livestock. The rule is simple and obvious: Kill your enemy and he is destroyed. Breed with your enemy and both of you are destroyed. Nature is the Ultimate Nazi.
I did receive one reply, from one of the Canadian groups you contacted. The contents were of general interest, with no particular reference to Anti-Zionist collaboration, but at least, it was a response. I will send them some material, as well as suggestions in regard to your letters of September 6th.
You illustrate the general need for an order of priorities, exactly as you have considered in your letter. In your case, specifically, the adoption of the philosophy comes first. Otherwise, the necessary community required to achieve concrete results will not take shape. In other cases, we see the cart being put before the horse: Whites should congregate, regardless of ideology and personal quality without first defeating the ZOG. This is about as 'smart' as arranging for a picnic in no man's land during a World War I battle: unless the enemy departs, it will, be a bloody disaster; hardly a picnic. How can we build the edifice of the new state when the Zionist state occupies our ground? You know the answer, but it appears the blightwing does not. For many, the idea of attacking the enemy, rather than building a subscription list, is downright exotic!
Yes, the fall of Anglo-Zionist Rome is approaching, and quite likely, an era of feudal warlords will be next, unless North America and Europe are invaded by Chinese under another Genghis Khan. How many Whites will survive the chaos is extremely doubtful, but there is no doubt that chaos will come. Latin America provides some object lessons, with a choice between Colombia and Argentina. North America will probably start like Argentina, but afterwards, who knows? Colombia has had a 'stable' civil war situation for 300 years, with occasional pauses for all sides to reload their weapons. Afghanistan is warlord land, and has been before the recording of history. Their way of life has survived all invasions and outlived all empires for thousands of years. It is likely they will survive U.S. intervention, and may be telling tales of the Zionist cowards and their explosives long after the ZOG is just a dimly-recalled bad dream.
By all means, please carry on your great work, and I shall keep you posted on any AZA developments at my end. All the best, and DOWZ!