Monday, July 31, 2006


This is a statement from one of the members of the New Right Australia New Zealand Committee and is representative of our views. It is intended to be a critique of nationalism as it exists today, particularly in America and Australia, and, despite the critical tone throughout, is intended to be constructive. Our aim in posting it here is to do something good for nationalism by making it more viable and help achieve the breakthroughs we are all striving for.

New Right Australia New Zealand Committee

I have been following the recent scandal in the American National Socialist Movement (NSM) with some interest. For those nationalists who are not in the know, it was revealed that some of the NSM's prominent members are involved in Satanism and other disgusting things. These unsavoury facts have been disclosed at, among other places, a former leading member of the NSM, Bill White, website, Bill White himself has been forced to resign (he denies that he was forced to resign and that he did it on his own accord) from the NSM and set up a splinter movement that he is currently organizing to get off the ground.

Bill White's career sums up a lot of what is the good, the bad and the ugly in today's nationalist politics. He is a very successful business man which is a rarity for Nationalists in the USA. Bill White began his political career as a left-winger, before becoming, like so many left wingers today, interested in the ideas of Third Positionism. He read Francis Parker Yockey's Imperium, and was unimpressed by it. But Julius Evola's books, particularly "Revolt against the Modern World", converted him. He used to be a writer for the internet version of Pravda, a Russian publication and he also wrote some articles for the Mathaba News Service, an alternative internet news provider with strong ties to Africa and Muslim organizations. He became, over this period, more and more anti-Semitic, and wrote a good many essays containing penetrating insights into the Jews and Zionism. He is not a trained intellectual, but still wrote some intellectually stimulating pieces of writing. His site,, at the time was one of the more professional, and enjoyable, nationalist sites on the web.

His downfall began, in my view, when he took up the ideas of Savitri Devi, a great female thinker, but one whose ideas - particularly the doctrine that Hitler is a reincarnation of Krishna or whatnot - must be taken with a grain of salt. Bill swallowed Devi-ism hook, line and sinker. He ended up joining a Nutzi movement, the National Socialist Movement (NSM) in America and soon he was wearing a homemade Stormtrooper outfit complete with a swastika armband and marching at the head of Rockwellian demonstrations against Negroes and Hispanics. His writings developed a ranting style against Jews, Negros, Communists, et. and rather pornographic attacks on anybody he didn't like.

In short, he lost the plot.

Eventually, with the revelations of the Satanism of a prominent NSM member, he snapped. He initially tried to argue that Satanism was, being an 'Aryan' and 'Pagan' doctrine, reconcilable with Devi's Esoteric Hitlerism to a certain degree. Perhaps one can reconcile the two (although I doubt it). But one thing is for sure: Satanism is not reconcilable with Hitler's National Socialism - the only real National Socialism - and would have been rejected by the German National Socialists, as filth, pure and simple, and Jewish-inspired filth at that.(In fact, if one wants to be a Satanist, and adopt a Nietzschean master-morality, one should convert to Judaism. The similarities between Judaist and Satanist ethics are many). Satanist freaks, along with the "Hollywood" skinheads, and the uniform-wearing Nutzis themselves, would have been locked up in a camp in Hitler's Germany, and not let out until they had proved themselves to be decent members of society.

The fact of the matter is, Devi's Esoteric Hitlerism is not German National Socialism, and never will be. Only because she idolized Hitler and used the symbols doesn't make her a political National Socialist, especially not a German one. Her "National Socialism" is a distortion. Or, more accurately, she has selected some of the minor, peripheral points of the doctrine and then brought them to the forefront; by doing so, she has invented a new doctrine which has only a superficial resemblance to the original. This is how Bill White, and other sincere, self-professed 'National Socialists', ended up becoming swept up in Nutzism and associated movements which have radically diverged from National Socialism, and Mussolini's Fascism. (And no American, especially in 2006, could be a National Socialist anyway; for National Socialism was a German, and to a lesser extent, Dutch, Swedish and Danish, movement relevant to a particular place (Western Europe) at a particular time (the 1930s and 1940s). The same goes for the fascist movements of Degrelle, Vidkun Quisling and the others).

Why is it, though, that a large number of nationalist movements - including the Nutzis, but not restricted to them - today attract such freakish people: Satanists, Odinists, Christian Identity-ists, Church of the Creator-ists? Why is it that some nationalists cannot accept ordinary Protestants or Catholics, or agnostics and atheists? Why are they attracted to made-up religions?

There are, in my opinion, a number of reasons. Firstly, it is a question of the class base. The fascists in Europe in the 1920s and 1930s recruited from a middle-class base, and often the lower-middle classes. Their cadre of support tended to be salary men (and women), often used to working for large organisations and not owning or running businesses themselves. They were inclined, because of this (and the fact that many of them were employed, or would have liked to have been employed, by the government), to gravitate towards socialism. Inexperience with capitalism and business made them suspicious of capitalist methods. What is more, they had suffered, as Hitler and Mussolini did, during the bust periods of capitalism. Both of these men had lived a secure existence in the army - an experience, despite all the blood and suffering of the First World War, which they had both very much enjoyed. But, after demobilisation, both fell into bitter poverty.

Today the fascist class base, with its statist and socialist inclinations, would vote Democrat in the USA, for Labour in Britain (Tony Blair, in the past, has exploited middle-class fears and insecurities, particularly on crime and juvenile delinquency, brilliantly) and for Labour in Australia.

We can say that the men and women of the lower-middle class in America, Britain or any Western country today tend to deport themselves with a modicum of decency and professionalism; they could not work as typists, civil servants, architects, etc, otherwise. They need to conform socially in order to keep their jobs: it is a case of professional necessity. Their income would be endangered if they were to dress freakishly with a SS Uniform or publicly espouse Satanism or Christian Identity. One cannot say the same, however, for the average Nutzi, or “Hollywood” skinhead, or indeed many of the nationalists I myself have met. They are lumpenproletarians; the NSM's followers, who appear to have stepped off the set from a Jerry Springer show, come from that class.

Bill White may boast that all the NSM members he knows 'have jobs', but jobs at what? Chicken pluckers? Fruit pickers? Shelf stackers? The American labour market always has jobs, but it is a question of how low, in terms of class and income, one wants to go. (Many lumpenproletarian in Australia or Europe do not have this option, and are more often than not forced to live on welfare). Because one has no career to speak of, merely a service-level job in a chicken factory or supermarket, one can afford to march up and down in a homemade Stormtrooper uniform, or espouse Christian Identity. What does one have to lose? Nothing!

Another trait of the lumpenproletarian, and, admittedly, the working-classes, is a lack of educational, or at least, intellectual, attainment. When one of them encounters a unified system which explains how the world is what it is - whether it be Satanism or Christian Identity or Communism - they are immediately overwhelmed. They are not accustomed to thinking outside of themselves and their narrow preoccupations. What is more, they do not have the training or the discernment to see through the fallacies of Communism, for example, or see Satanism for the fourth-rate pseudo-philosophy that it is.

Ironically, Bill White is always denouncing left-wing activists as being more or less of the same mentality. To him, the average anarchist or communist, especially the anti-racist type, lives off welfare or off his parent's money. They are unable to accomplish much in life, and not uncoincidentally, have little personal wealth; so they engage in nihilistic, pointless activity, and adhere to Judaised left-wing doctrines which claim to be the champions of the poor end of the community. (This tallies with my own experience of the anti-racist Left, with the exception that in Australia, university education is normally free and students are subsidised by the government for a short period of time). Some of the left-wingers may come from good middle-class families; but the lifestyle encourages a certain lumpenprole-ism. And they are just as intellectually vulnerable as your average chicken-plucker, and so tend to swallow Marx, Chomskyism and the other Jewish creeds whole.

So we have two sides which are remarkably similar: on one, the Far Right (for want of a better term); on the other, the Far Left. Both of them have a disproportionate appeal to drop-outs, the Far Left taking in middle-class drop-outs, the Far Right the working-class drop-outs. The dropping-out in question is to the lumpenproletarian level. That is, they are falling, a few rungs in the ladder, to the lowest possible class.

It is this isolation from reality, from mainstream life (eg, participation in everyday politics, and participation in the labour force) which breeds a certain underground mentality in the Far Right in particular. Which explains why its members are attracted to what Julius Evola would classify as 'subterranean' or 'ghetto' cults, cults such as Satanism, Heathenism and the like - that is, religions which appeal to those on the fringes of civilised life, to what the Hindus call the untouchable caste.

So how is nationalism to be saved from the Bill Whites, the World Churches of the Creators and the rest? The answer is obvious enough: nationalists must recruit from the middle-classes, not from the lumpen. Nationalism, if it found its electoral base in the middle-classes (especially the lower middle-classes) would more closely resemble the historical Italian Fascism and German National Socialism than Bill White's Nutzism.

The original Fascism and National Socialism were socialist, and Left, movements. The goal of them was to maintain the economic position of the middle-classes who had been ruined by a succession of economic catastrophes since the First World War. In that respect, they were not much different from the mainstream Australian conservative agrarian party, the Nationals, who exist to redistribute taxpayer's money to the rural class (or, for that matter, the farming lobbyists in the EU, France in particular). In both France and Australia, farmers are increasingly unable to make a decent living or at least live in the style they became accustomed to. How much of that is due to inefficiency or to bad luck is difficult to determine.

In any case, the farmers certainly feel entitled (out of a sense of 'social justice') to government remuneration. The same is to be said of the German middle-classes in the 1920s and 1930s, who perhaps were rather indifferent to the Jewish question but understood instinctively that Adolf Hitler was one of them and that his party was acting in their class interest. (It must not be forgotten, either, that failed farmers formed a large part of Hitler's constituency. Again, the farmers wanted socialism, and got it: the National Socialist government, among other things, wiped out their debts).

But here is the paradox. I have castigated the Nutzis, and the Far Left, for attracting misfits, dropouts, losers and fringe dwellers. But National Socialism and Italian Fascism attracted the same sort of people. We all know that Hitler, Mussolini, Goering, Goebbels and the rest experienced great hardship in their younger days; this fact is often used to explain their bitterness, their sense of deprivation, their radicalism and their cynicism. But socialism gave them someone to blame for their troubles: the Jews, the capitalists, the irresponsible parliamentary democrats, the Freemasons. If they had been inculcated with a sense of responsibility for their own failures, and taught not to blame them on other people, the world would never have seen fascism.

In other words, one could say that both fascism and certain elements of today's nationalism the fascists appeal to the less evolved sides of the human character. There is no reason why such a socialism as Hitler's and Mussolini's cannot win over the middle-classes of today's Germany and Italy, or for that matter America and Australia. Socialism is still going strong in 2006. But whether or not socialism is good for nationalism, or, for that matter, the West itself, is another matter entirely.

We, the members of the New Right Australia New Zealand, do not want nationalism to be bourgeois, ossified and reactionary, like Le Pen's or De Villiers'; at the same time, we should not be aiming at people who are naturally going to be attracted to a socialism - that is, the failures in life who are going to attribute their own deprivation to mysterious Jewish and capitalist conspiracies. This is not to take a soft, pro-Jewish line: it is merely to examine our own motives for thinking as we do and considering what is in progressive nationalism's best interest.


dasa said...

"Nationalism, if it found its electoral base in the middle-classes (especially the lower middle-classes) would more closely resemble the historical Italian Fascism and German National Socialism than Bill White's Nutzism."

absolutely spot on, I have always said this, it's the middle class (in Australia) who determine the next federal government, therefore are the largest voting block in the country. I know some on the 'far-right' 'hate' the middle class and tend to ignore it, i think that is foolishness. What is required is for nationalist parties to be out in the [middle class] community, building a profile within the community, through various campaigns, however patience is required, the payoff may be measured in years but ultimately, the middle class, when threatend, will vote for whoever will look after their interests the best and the onus is on nationalist party to put themselves into that position.

James said...

A good thought out piece, Bound to cause some controversy and debate in certain circles though. (Cue the nasty emails and text messages)

Anonymous said...

TOTAL disagreements with the following statements:

Why is it, though, that a large number of nationalist movements - including the Nutzis, but not restricted to them - today attract such freakish people: Satanists, Odinists, Christian Identity-ists, Church of the Creator-ists? Why is it that some nationalists cannot accept ordinary Protestants or Catholics, or agnostics and atheists? Why are they attracted to made-up religions?

MY ANSWER: Odinism and Christian Identity are not "made up religions". while i myself am an odinist and have no opinion on christian identity, christianity in today's world is not the christianity of yesteryear, and has evoloved into politically correct advertisement for multiculturalism. as far as odinism being a made up religion, i dont know where to begin on your inaccuracies here. This is THE religion of the germanic peoples. from scandanavian, to germanic, all the way to the baltic and greek isles with variants. its teachings are of high moral and a healthy alternative to what many feel are "jewish" mainstream religions. also you will take note that Odinist have no desire to force odinism on others, well true odinists anyway. and although i personally am very against mainstream christian religions i will defend here the rights of productive, postitive nationalists to choose their religion as christian identity if this is a motivating factor to contribute to creativity and positive action.

your statements here could not be more ignorant and offensive and were totally unnescessary. i wish to control no-one's faith and while i critize other faith i dont blame its followers, i attempt to appeal to their judement.

It is this isolation from reality, from mainstream life (eg, participation in everyday politics, and participation in the labour force) which breeds a certain underground mentality in the Far Right in particular. Which explains why its members are attracted to what Julius Evola would classify as 'subterranean' or 'ghetto' cults, cults such as Satanism, Heathenism and the like - that is, religions which appeal to those on the fringes of civilised life, to what the Hindus call the untouchable caste.

ANSWER: firstly, this underground mentaility you speak of stems from the feeling in these people that all is not right, and they usually try to find what is right for them by researching. some claim odinism/heathenism because of a subcultural affair but none of these people warrant any worthy reutation and are regarded as frauds more often than not. this underground mantality is usually the disillusionment of the current social standard and discoveries made during an attempt to find a better path/life style they would adhere to. yes the movemnts of varying "scenes" attract its nutcases and i will be the first to testify but first of all, a low paid worker is not worthless, and high paid workers life is worth nothing extra. Secondly; self realisation is a life long process and if someone is positive and pro-active why slander their motivation. actions speak louder than words.

this "anti social" element is just that as you say, but not all of it self destructive and if this is a tool of motivation, attact it's downfalling identities, not it's existence. Without culture, there is no identity. without ancient culture there is no racial identity, without identity of the people there is no nation, without a nation what is Socialism, National Socialism, 3rd Position, Nationalism, ect etc?

this article wasnt too bad outside of this blatant ignorant resentment.

thinking outside the square said...

All I can say is that there is nothing wrong with a bit of constructive criticism.

Anonymous said...

Keep your slander of Creativity to yourself.The only freak is you hiding behind a keyboard like a bitch.
Creativity Movement

Anonymous said...

Nazi's, Creators, Odinists, and CI, are all freaks? The writer is attempting to cause divisions, and I do not believe for one second that this was written by anyone in the White Power Movement. Unless it is that weirdo from New Zealand that switches Religions every 6 months, I think his name is Bolton. He is or was a 3rd Positionist along with everything else. Heil Hitler, and Heil The NSM!

Baron Von Hund said...

Simply brilliant. Well written, and I sincerely hope these "nutzis" wake up and smell the rot around them.

And we see exactly what the New Right is talking about in the form the above commments by Rev. Patrick O'Sullivan.

Oh, and this isn't Bolton you "freak" - he has nothing to do with the (real) New Right. Show how informed you type of guys really are ;)

And the article causes Division?

As if the Nazis, Creators, and CIs haven't spent many a day doing just this - on purpose!

This article explain why the Nationalist movement is struggling terribly. How can we lead by example with people having such backwards and down right stupid attitudes.

If anyone that found the above article personally offensive (more than likely silly Supremacists) - you should really have a good look at yourself.

Don't let that your "Pride" cut your nose off to spite your face.

MarkFarrell said...

I think that many of these people whom you criticize are probably decent people.

Why are the poor Whites the most radical? Simply put, they're affected the most by the evil laws that discriminate against Whites in every facet of civilization. They're the ones who must compete for jobs with the non-Whites who come to our lands and instantly receive the anti-White discrimination, masquerading under the various euphemisms--"civil rights" (as if such "rights" that discriminate against Whites could somehow be "civil"), "equal opportunity" (which is just another euphemism for the preferential treatment that they receive), "affirmative action" (though there is nothing "affirmative" about the "action" of discriminating against Whites), et cetera, ad nauseam.

Is it any wonder that these Whites then hover around extremist ideologies when conservatism has demonstrated that it stands for nothing other than the current status quo and when the "neo-conservatism" of today is little other than some extremely bizarre admixture of yesterday's communism and Israel-first antics?

You may be right about National Socialism being an outdated ideology from a far-away land that does not apply to modern-society, and I personally would never wear an armband honoring a foreign government from the yester-years (just as the Germans didn't wave Confederate flags in the air during their glory years). Perhaps, this is an aspect on which we agree. However, must we resort to insulting others--calling other Whites "chicken-feather pluckers" and "Nutzis"--in an effort to somehow make ourselves feel superior?

I don't think there are any such things as "Nutzis" (as you call them, a term with which I vehemently disagree): 30 percent are probably government agents (see the book "Nazis, Communists, Klansmen, and Others on the Fringe: Political Extremism in America" for more on this) pretending to be nuts and acting as agent provocateurs; and 70 percent are decent, hard-working folks who have grown disgusted with the wicked laws that affect this land and want to make a difference, seeing these movements as the few that will oppose the nation's madness. These people were not born; they were made by the vicious and bitter conditions in our nations that opposes our very existence.

Who are Nuts--the White folks in the government who support measures that destroy our nations by catering to non-Whites' every need, or the people who oppose this in every manner conceivable? I think that if anyone should be called "Nutzis," it should most certainly be applied to the cold, callous White politicians who care more about their political treasure chests than about their White constituents whom they repeatedly take for granted.

Bashing others will do little to bring forth the much needed White unity, but it might make you feel warm and fuzzy for doing it, as if you're somehow an arrogant king pissing on his subjects.

Yet, instead of offering these people inspiration, instead of giving new ideas, instead of offering leadership--instead of offering hope, I only see unconstructive criticism and name-calling.

Mark Farrell

Anonymous said...

There is no doubt that the "White Nationalist" movement, as it currently exists, is in need of an overhaul-- and then some! But your criticism is aimed at the wrong people. The proles are largely incapable of bettering their situations- so much the better! They will make better revolutionaries: When you have nothing left, you have nothing to lose. Many are sincere and bright people who are simply struggling to get by, they do not have the time to be pseudo-intellectual nationalists who waste their hours debating Evola or Yockey or other obscure writers-who will most likely remain obscure.

Indeed, guys like Tom Metzger or Hal Turner or even the late Ben Klassen and the "Nutzis" have much more to offer them.

Your essay may have had "good intentions" but, in the end, amounts to nothing more than a defense of bourgeois interests. And where do you draw the line between "poor" and "working class" and "lower middle class"? Given the economic situation in America today, many middle class folk will soon be finding themselves in the poor and working class categories. So any true socialist revolutionary movement would include all of the above in its ranks.

As far as appealing solely to the "respectable" middle class, David Duke has tried that. He has failed, at least as far as winning over the middle class is concerned. Most of these oh so respectable suburban American types want NOTHING to do with radical political ideas, whether it is the suit and tie nationalism of Duke and Willis Cartos, or the rougher proletarian racialist socialism of Metzger and his ilk.

In the long run, beggers cannot be choosers. Revolutionary ideas and movements will always begin with the downtrodden, the misfits, and the ruffians.

That is history. Like it or not.

Anonymous said...

In Australia it is clear what works. One Nation got the highest percentage vote of a nationalist party in ANY western country of recent history. This happened, despite terrible management, lack of discipline and not enough focus on the city electorates. The simple politics of One Nation were/are perfect for a large section of Australia: an appeal to tradition, way of life and love of kind.

After getting 20% of the vote, the party should've aimed for a soft-separatist angle(a'la Flanders) rather than let the Libs "ease the minds" of One Nation voters with fake policies. We had enough people and enough rural-agrarian support to pursue real cultural separatism. We were a nation divided MORE than what US Southerners and Northerners ever were.

There is a massive divide that exists. Lets push it.

Anonymous said...

I am not surprised to see a Kiwi, with the pablum Pacific-People-worshipping culture they have here, slamming Odinists. Look back to your own folk-soul to see where it's at for white people. Adding a touch of spirituality to your politics might bring a few more into the fold anywhere else but identity-challenged anti-spiritual New Zealand. Go tend your gardens, dumbasses, leave the white politics to the Ozzies.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Just an extreme nit-picky point. You mention "they could not work as typists, ...".

No-one works as a typist these says. The author is out of touch with the real working world.

So how on earth are we expected to give credibility to the author's generalisations about "the middle class"?

(It's interesting to speculate whether this error is because s/he is too old or too young to know what happens at work.)

New Right said...


You are wrong in that point that there are no typists anymore. Only because they use a PC doesn't mean that they aren't typists.

And I can tell you that the author (s) are not out of touch with the real working world, but standing with both feet in it.

Maybe you should look at the whole message in the article and not nit-picking around. The author (s) didn't want to offend anybody, just make people think why Nationalism is not getting ahead but backwards.

Anonymous said...

Actually, a third possibility occurs to me - the author has pinched slabs of text from an old article.

New Right said...

It would be appreciated if you could give some evidence of your claim.

Sydney Man said...

I have no idea what class I fall into. All I know is that I am a proud White family man with two children that owns his own home in the Western suburbs of Sydney.

I don't have a flash job. It pays the bills, keeps my family fed and allows my wife and I just enough money to afford to send my children to a private school which is all white instead of our local free public school (which has more breeds than a dog show).

My employment isn't in any way a reflection of my intellectual capacity, more so due to stupid choices in my school years. I had excellent grades, but just didn't enjoy attending school. I have great regrets about the choices I made back then. I can't change that now. I am almost 30 years of age.

All I can do now is try to encourage my children to strive to achieve what I didn't succeed in myself.

During my thirty year lifetime I have lived in what I would call "the more pleasant houses in the not so pleasant areas". These areas were somewhat dangerous before the boats even came ashore and are (as someone has already pointed out), the same places our governments choose to relocate "misplaced" persons of the third world.

I was not born a Nationalist, nor do I believe anyone is. I became a Nationalist through dealing with these third world creatures and also aborigines on a daily basis just like many other working class Nationalists.

The point I am trying to make here is, people are very selfish in nature, they will only react to something when it affects their lifestyle and invades their own personal space. These middle class wouldn't care how many immigrants our nation takes in. As long as they don't have undesirables beating on their children, urinating on their lawns or stealing their cars.

Until our governments begin to move these same people to "middle Class" areas and our middle class gets to sample the same violence, robbery and sexual assault that is so common in these people, I'm afraid to say that all you will ever have is worthless "chicken pluckers" like myself.

Anonymous said...

I agree that a lot of the problems we have in our society stems from the dumping of certain immigrants in certain areas. But that is also happening in areas where the so called middle class lives. Look at Chatswood, Beecroft, Epping, ect. They are overrun by Chinese, Korean and Indians.

So does the white middle class care? To a certain extent, but they only whisper their discontent to each other because they are afraid of being called a racist. And they care more about their real estate value more then about race.

Anonymous said...


True Fascist greetings and salutations!

I enjoyed reading the article "Freaks in the Movement" and I thought it made many valid points. Within American Fascist ranks we face a libertine, immoral, multicultural and NWO promoting group that dares to call itself "fascist" In our view they are indeed "freaks" and perverts of the first order.

While I agree that true Fascism must stress its complete opposition to Capitalism I disagree with over-emphasis on "socialism." While socialism may be more accecptable to our European kin most average Americans would see "red" when the word is mentioned.

I agree that Fascism is neither of the right, center or alone is above. However, I see not the need to over-stress our Agreement with socialism as we tend to take the best of all isms amd merge the same into something new. I have often used the analogy of light. Light is composed of many colors, as a prism shows, that combine to create what we see as light. So too Fascism takes freely the good from other isms and combines the same into something new.

I must disagree with your lumping of Christian Identity into the freak basket. Believers of CI are certainly motivated, moral, oppose the NWO, are nationalists and oppose multiculturalism. This is certainly a message that Fascism must echo.

For Resurgent Fascism, Culture & Civilization!

Brian Phillips
National Director
The Revolutionary Union of Fascists

Anonymous said...

See this:

Anonymous said...

I agree with some of the points on this, but it seems to take the leftist approach that it's all just a class thing. You should give more credit to the chicken pluckers, we are the backbone of the world.

New Right said...

I found that one in the comment section of another article. I guess Miss Anne Thropist wanted the comment in this section.

And no, we do not censor comments. We deleted one comment because it smeared some people and that is a no-no.

Miss Anne Thropist said...
what happened to all the others views on the article sir? Surely you aren't anti-free speech in this NewRight viewpoint? I agreed with the Freaks part of it, but disagreed much with the anti-workingclass sentiments throughout it, and as well the authors obvious religious bias. It has its points which I wont detract from, but an entire page or more could be written up arguing against this articles merrits. It contributes nothing, even though it makes some acurate points...I hope you all aren't as anti religion as the author is, pittuy if so as I rather like you alls other thoughts and articles.

Anonymous said...

You are a lackey of a Leb.Fuck and die Dave Innes you fucking germ,keep your bullshit to yourself,mutt.

Anonymous said...

How very intelligent Rev. Patrick. I am sure that David Innes is shacking in his boots, scared shitless that you will kill him.

But I leave it to the other reader to judge your comments.

Anonymous said...

"You are a lackey of a Leb.Fuck and die (Baron Von Hund) you fucking germ,keep your bullshit to yourself,mutt." - Rev.Patrick

Thanks for proving the point not only that I was making, but validating all the excellent points in the above said article.

You are a shining example of lunacy.

Baron Von Hund

Anonymous said...

You are a shining example of a gutless inter net jew lackey Innes.Fuck off and die.By the way the waek rat that who posted just before yours and eat shit.Who is threatening to kill who ?

Traditionalist said...

Interesting article to say the least.

kl88 said...

this is like saying we cant wear jeans because its made in china, or not eat bread because there are indians working in the bread company and never buy it from the dairy because some stupid muslim owns it..fuck all the religon and satan too..