Page 22 of 54 FirstFirst ... 12171819202122232425262732 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 220 of 538

Thread: Is There Any White Group You Strongly Dislike?

  1. #211
    Moderator
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Sigurd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 30th, 2020 @ 09:35 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Bavarii, Saxones, Suebi, Alamanni
    Subrace
    Borreby + Atlantonordoid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    Location
    Einöde in den Alpen
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Zodiac Sign
    Libra
    Family
    Engaged
    Politics
    Tradition & Homeland
    Religion
    Odinist
    Posts
    9,129
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    77
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    402
    Thanked in
    287 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    The migration waves that once went through today's Iran and left the language roots for that name from Aryan / sanskrit ā́rya->Iran shouldnt be confused with the today there living people either.
    Old/Middle Persian ā́ryanamstā́na > Iran. Quite possible the causal root to this is ar-, i.e. something in relation to farming. All this tells us is that they were Indo-European farmers, actually. The semantic change to "noble" came later when the local peoples were subjugated.

    The same goes for Asia Minor (Turkey,...). Even if 2000 years ago there have been Indo-Europeans, they are long gone.
    Well, the Kurds, who speak an Indo-European tongue, more precisely a West-Iranian tongue, are still in Anatolia.

    [Strangely to note, they have a tendency to be more industrious than actual Turks when they come here. If you know an industrious Turk whose surname ends on -as, -ah, -an or -ağ chances are that they are actually secretly Kurds ]

    Of course not in immediate Asia Minor, besides the point that the term "Asia Minor" is a bit odd, since in ancient terms all that was understood by "Asia" was what we now know as "Asia Minor".

    Well, enough nit-picking about groups on the far end of the IE spectrum for now.
    -In kalte Schatten versunken... /Germaniens Volk erstarrt / Gefroren von Lügen / In denen die Welt verharrt-
    -Die alte Seele trauernd und verlassen / Verblassend in einer erklärbaren Welt / Schwebend in einem Dunst der Wehmut / Ein Schrei der nur unmerklich gellt-
    -Auch ich verspüre Demut / Vor dem alten Geiste der Ahnen / Wird es mir vergönnt sein / Gen Walhalla aufzufahren?-

    (Heimdalls Wacht, In kalte Schatten versunken, stanzas 4-6)

  2. #212
    Senior Member
    velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    Sunday, March 8th, 2020 @ 03:10 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    47
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    5,000
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,295
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,476
    Thanked in
    672 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Sigurd
    Well, the Kurds, who speak an Indo-European tongue, more precisely a West-Iranian tongue, are still in Anatolia.

    [Strangely to note, they have a tendency to be more industrious than actual Turks when they come here. If you know an industrious Turk whose surname ends on -as, -ah, -an or -ağ chances are that they are actually secretly Kurds ]
    Yes, I noticed that. But Kurds are a persecuted people in Turkey, a little side detail of current history that is not widely known. Lot of the immigrants from 30, 40 years ago here in that area (the mining industry and its fringes) are actually Kurds, and they indeed came here for both reasons, for work and because they were persecuted. We came to know this only through the early 90s scandal of the old NVA tanks given for free to the Turkish military. There have been, often ignored though by the public, protests against that by Kurdish communities here, who seem indeed a much more decent people than the actual Turk.
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  3. #213
    Account Inactive

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Online
    Saturday, October 30th, 2010 @ 02:33 AM
    Ethnicity
    Caribbean/westerner
    Ancestry
    German,Italian, swedish, English,
    Country
    Other Other
    Location
    west indies
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    music
    Politics
    A political
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    150
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    seems like the biggest waste of time ever. who do you hate more?!!! I HATE SLAVS!!! NO I HATE ITALIANS NO I HATE...XYZ.. hey what ever floats your boat

    Quote Originally Posted by G Baughman View Post
    No one said you have to hate other white non-Germanic cultures, it just that certain groups show traits that are not liked by Germanics.

    As far as this thread being counter productive I would have to disagree, as it is always good to know how fellow members of this board think in relation to each other.

  4. #214
    Senior Member
    Gary in TX's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Online
    Wednesday, April 12th, 2017 @ 04:19 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Danish, English and Scottish.
    Ancestry
    Anglo-Saxon, Scot and Dane.
    Subrace
    Borreby
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Politics
    Pan-Aryan Nationalist
    Religion
    Odinist
    Posts
    194
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Sigurd View Post
    Actually, neither. First of all, you'd have to make a distinction between Bosniak Bosnians, Serb Bosnians and Croat Bosnians. The language is arguably the same, but other than this it starts at ethnic division = religious division.

    The religious groups: numbers for Muslims (45%) corresponds roughly to the number of Bosniaks (48%), the numbers of Serb Orthodox (36%) roughly with the number of Serbs (37.1%), the numbers of Roman Catholic (15%) roughly with that of Croats (14.3%).

    Amongst them even the Bosniaks would appear to be largely ethnic Slavs, who simply converted. At least that is the general agreement.
    Hmmm, that's interesting. Where did you get this from? (Books, accounts from friends, history course in college, National Geographic type of shows etc)

    I'm just curious as it contadicts most of what I've read on the subject (most of what I've read on the subject has been written from the Croatian point of view, so perhaps they might be a bit biased in thinking that the Bosnian Muslims are of mixed race instead of just Slavs from the region that converted to Islam).

    Albanians were likewise originally Indo-European (within that, a group of their own with no closer linguistic relative; Greek has a similar problem), and even though today's Albanians are arguably more mixed, in the more mountainous regions one is bound to find more racially and ethnically unmixed types who represent the previous population of Albania than you would in Ottoman-founded Tirana, for instance.
    Yeah, they definately look like they're of mixed race.

    Bosniaks and Albanians were occupied, converted and slaughtered, but mixed marriages wouldn't have been much higher than in other rather rural areas subject to foreign domination whilst the religious boundary is removed.

    I'm not a big friend of either Bosniaks or Albanians, but fair credit where it is due.
    I'm not exactly sure what you mean there, could you explain it a different way?

  5. #215
    Member
    Vlad Cletus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Wednesday, June 16th, 2010 @ 06:50 PM
    Ethnicity
    .
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Age
    34
    Posts
    209
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Gary in TX View Post
    Hmmm, that's interesting. Where did you get this from? (Books, accounts from friends, history course in college, National Geographic type of shows etc)

    I'm just curious as it contadicts most of what I've read on the subject (most of what I've read on the subject has been written from the Croatian point of view, so perhaps they might be a bit biased in thinking that the Bosnian Muslims are of mixed race instead of just Slavs from the region that converted to Islam).


    Yeah, they definately look like they're of mixed race.


    I'm not exactly sure what you mean there, could you explain it a different way?
    Those don't sound like Croatian sources to me. If anything, the majority of Croatian sources I've gone through overwhelmingly favor the claim that the Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) are actually Croatians that converted to Islam. Neznavisna Država Hrtvaksa or the Independent State of Croatia officially embraced the Bosniaks as "Croatians of the Muslim faith". The Doglavnik or Deputy Leader of the NDH regime was a Bosniak. This was a figurehead position that was meant to represent the Bosnian Muslims within the NDH although when it came down to the real political power they had little to back themselves up. This claim more or less so helps legitimize Croatian territorial claims to Bosnia and Herzegovina of which was a part of the NDH from 1941-1945.

    Albanians and Bosniaks like the majority of Turks in present-day Turkey are overwhelmingly related to the settled populations of their respective regions. Just because most of them don't look like Northwest Europeans does not mean that they are *mixed-race*.

    Quote Originally Posted by velvet
    To account to these people of today there the "foundation of civilisation" would be wrong, and can easily be proven with how those regions look today. The only civilisation they have is what is "forced" upon them through modern economic pressure.
    How they look today is overwhelmingly a result of the British Empire and to a lesser extent the French. They drew up the artificial borders which did not concern or regard the differences whether it was tribes or religious variation like Shia and Wahhabism. The borders were drawn up through various arrangements like the Sykes-Picot agreement, although they often conspired against each others interests despite being allies, when the First World War was drawing to a close.

    The British and the French were the ones who established the Mandate system of exploitation of which was represented by figurehead puppets, who were used, duped and tricked earlier by them. The most notable are Prince Faisal and his brother Abdullah. Although the British were not necessarily the ones to plant nationalism in the Ottoman Empire and its eastern territories, they definitely incited it. Arguably it was the Ottoman Empire that kept the devils of Wahhabism at bay through traditional-religious legitimacy and moderation since the Caliph was based in Istanbul. The British Empire destroyed the Caliphate by having the Turkish Republic absolve it since they feared the movement that arose in India that wanted to preserve the Caliphate. The head from the body was severed and as you can imagine this process thereby divided the Dar-al-Islam or House of Islam even more. The effects are felt to this day where a Muslim has to have some sort of documentation to go on the Hajj because Saudi Arabia is an independent state. This is absurd if you're familiar with how governance under Islam should work theoretically.

    So yes, there has been quite a bit of turmoil, strife and conflict within these regions and it still continues to this day. It's undoubtedly related to European Imperialism, at least partially. While one could say that the British endorsed Zionism, it was only the British Government that supported the movement, as evidenced with arrangements that took place during the war, most notably the Balfour Declaration. The British Military was Pro-Arab, perhaps in part because Muslims did make up some of the ranks, then again Jews and Hindus did as well. However, little did any of these soldiers know what was going on behind the scenes back in the British Isles.

    Quote Originally Posted by velvet
    Beside that the Turks today are racially different from us, this is the main reason why Turkey should stay seperated from Europe.
    They are racially different from your ideal or at least most people who live in Germanic countries, I agree. Anyway, you can't generalize the country's population or people as Turkey is an ethnic mosaic which revolves around the designated territory of itself and the areas adjacent to it IE the Balkans and further East and South of Anatolia. With this in mind, there technically are Turks who are essentially "European" in the West of the country, not counting the large Kurdish migrations that have took place over the past few decades to Istanbul.

  6. #216
    Senior Member
    velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    Sunday, March 8th, 2020 @ 03:10 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    47
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    5,000
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,295
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,476
    Thanked in
    672 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Vlad Cletus
    Albanians and Bosniaks like the majority of Turks in present-day Turkey are overwhelmingly related to the settled populations of their respective regions. Just because most of them don't look like Northwest Europeans does not mean that they are *mixed-race*.
    Well, whatever they are, they are not European.

    When you say, that your ethnicity is not important (as stated in your profile) am I right to assume that you arent European either?

    Quote Originally Posted by Vlad Cletus
    How they look today is overwhelmingly a result of the British Empire and to a lesser extent the French. They drew up the artificial borders which did not concern or regard the differences whether it was tribes or religious variation like Shia and Wahhabism. The borders were drawn up through various arrangements like the Sykes-Picot agreement, although they often conspired against each others interests despite being allies, when the First World War was drawing to a close.
    This sounds a bit like the common accusation of the "evil white man's oppression of the poor {insert any non-white ethnicity}".

    A cheap excuse for being unable to run a country properly and then blaming everyone else for the problems one has caused himself through greedy grabbing for other people's property. Islam tries for centuries to get a foot into Europe. And when those people are unable to learn that they are not welcome here, they cant really whine when their borders are drawn for them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vlad Cletus
    The British and the French were the ones who established the Mandate system of exploitation of which was represented by figurehead puppets, who were used, duped and tricked earlier by them. The most notable are Prince Faisal and his brother Abdullah. Although the British were not necessarily the ones to plant nationalism in the Ottoman Empire and its eastern territories, they definitely incited it. Arguably it was the Ottoman Empire that kept the devils of Wahhabism at bay through traditional-religious legitimacy and moderation since the Caliph was based in Istanbul. The British Empire destroyed the Caliphate by having the Turkish Republic absolve it since they feared the movement that arose in India that wanted to preserve the Caliphate.
    This is just another problem. Islam doesnt belong into India, it was imposed unto them and perverted Hinduism a lot. So when you talk about the "Ottoman Empire" in clash with the "British Empire", you actually talk about India. Islam wasnt rightfully there anyway, and the Indians are way better off with Britain as leaders than with Islam.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vlad Cletus
    The head from the body was severed and as you can imagine this process thereby divided the Dar-al-Islam or House of Islam even more. The effects are felt to this day where a Muslim has to have some sort of documentation to go on the Hajj because Saudi Arabia is an independent state. This is absurd if you're familiar with how governance under Islam should work theoretically.
    Yeah, right, Islam is just another version of the NWO / OWG, which tries to eradicate tribal differencies, souvereign nations and the right of self-governing of the resulting nations.

    Islam means submission, and the Dal-al-Islam, the so-called house of peace, with which Islam so much likes to translate that (a planned mis-translation in best islamic tradition of deception), still has on the other side the house of war, the non-Islamic world, and EVERYTHING is allowed to enforce submission to Islam. Islam therefore is war.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vlad Cletus
    So yes, there has been quite a bit of turmoil, strife and conflict within these regions and it still continues to this day. It's undoubtedly related to European Imperialism, at least partially.
    Islam isnt any less imperialistic. Unlike Britain, which to a certain degree always respected the indigenous cultures they added to their empire, Islam always comes as a package. Kill the culture, kill the people, build the ugly mosques and impose a religious state. Islam is the perfectionism of imperialism and the Quran a handbook of conquering and submission.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vlad Cletus
    They are racially different from your ideal or at least most people who live in Germanic countries, I agree.
    Simple fact: they are not European, and they are not Germanic.

    Better, worse, I really dont care. They are incompatible. They dont belong here, they dont belong into our cultures, Islam doesnt belong into our countries.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vlad Cletus
    Anyway, you can't generalize the country's population or people as Turkey is an ethnic mosaic which revolves around the designated territory of itself and the areas adjacent to it IE the Balkans and further East and South of Anatolia. With this in mind, there technically are Turks who are essentially "European" in the West of the country, not counting the large Kurdish migrations that have took place over the past few decades to Istanbul.
    They might be Caucasian. They are not European though, they are not white, they are not Germanic. And as such, racially incompatible.

    And the problems the islamic world has, are self-made. You can replace the culture of a people, you can replace the original religion of a people. But you cannot change what they are: their race. Race makes culture, race makes a difference, even sub-race does, race defines certain character traits, behavior, values. You can subdue it, enforce rules and morals; the race though, and the problems that result from there in multi-racial societies, remain.

    Therefore, the Dal-al-Islam is just another fallacity, a megalomanic utopia of an earth-placed paradise, another futile attempt at a one-world-government, another cheap excuse to wage war for war's sake. Islam is no different from Zionism in this regard. Makes no difference whatsoever.
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  7. #217
    Senior Member
    Gary in TX's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Online
    Wednesday, April 12th, 2017 @ 04:19 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Danish, English and Scottish.
    Ancestry
    Anglo-Saxon, Scot and Dane.
    Subrace
    Borreby
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Politics
    Pan-Aryan Nationalist
    Religion
    Odinist
    Posts
    194
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Vlad Cletus View Post
    Those don't sound like Croatian sources to me. If anything, the majority of Croatian sources I've gone through overwhelmingly favor the claim that the Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) are actually Croatians that converted to Islam. Neznavisna Dr˛ava Hrtvaksa or the Independent State of Croatia officially embraced the Bosniaks as "Croatians of the Muslim faith".
    What you're talking about there is Franjo Tuđman's initial idea/belief that Bosnian Muslims were just Croats who had converted to Islam in the previous centuries, that doesn't neccessarily mean that all Croatians felt that way (besides, even he changed his mind pretty rapidly as the war progressed which is why he went for the idea of a Greater Croatia later on...intitially he had just envisioned a Croatia within the framework of Yugoslavia too, that idea also went right out the window as well).

    This is what I think that you're talking about....(it's from one interview)...

    Franjo Tuđman :
    As far as Bosnia and Herzegovina was concerned, Tuđman was more ambivalent: Tuđman did not take a separate Bosnia seriously as shown by his comments to a television crew "Bosnia was a creation of the Ottoman invasion [...] Until then it was part of Croatia, or it was a kingdom of Bosnia, but a Catholic kingdom, linked to Croatia." He thought that Bosniaks are, essentially, Croats of Muslim faith and will, freed from Communist censorship, declare themselves ethnically as Croats, therefore making Bosnia a predominantly Croatian country (with 44% Bosniaks, 17% Croats and 33% Serbs). But, these illusions were soon dispelled.
    That notion ended once losses started piling up and once that happened some real ethnic hatred was born (on all sides). The situation was somewhat fluid and things changed.

    Otherwise why did the Croats go to war against the Muslims and ethnically cleanse them from their areas using the HOS and the HVO? See my point? Once the war began all that crap about them being Croats of the wrong religion went right out the window along with the idea of co-existing within Yugoslavia (just with more autonomy for the Croatian People).

    I'd also have to agree with Velvet on the issue of them being European.

    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    Simple fact: they are not European, and they are not Germanic.

    Better, worse, I really dont care. They are incompatible. They dont belong here, they dont belong into our cultures, Islam doesnt belong into our countries.

    They might be Caucasian. They are not European though, they are not white, they are not Germanic. And as such, racially incompatible.

  8. #218

  9. #219
    Senior Member
    Gary in TX's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Online
    Wednesday, April 12th, 2017 @ 04:19 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Danish, English and Scottish.
    Ancestry
    Anglo-Saxon, Scot and Dane.
    Subrace
    Borreby
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Politics
    Pan-Aryan Nationalist
    Religion
    Odinist
    Posts
    194
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    "White" isn't really the best concept to determine this, because it is very hard to define whiteness. And even if we use this concept, I am not convinced that they aren't white. All Bosniaks I've met/seen were whiter than I am (and I surely hope to be placed in this category). They really had a pale white skin colour, but most of them had pitch black hair.
    Well from the short time I've been on this forum and since I've had a chance to talk with some of the forum members from Europe I've come to the conclusion that the term 'White' doesn't really hold much value for many of you (except for some people from the UK).

    Over here in the US and Canada it's a little different.

    Over here the term 'White' has a certain meaning and whenever I use it personally then it basically means people of Northern European Heritage. Living in North America, South Africa and Aus/NZ there are several different European Nationality's represented due to European Immigration into these different countries.

    On this side of the pond people of European Heritage are from all over, not just from one country. So someone had to come up with a term for those people...'White' was the term pretty much everyone went with.

    For instance I'm half Danish, with the rest being Anglo-Saxon and with one great-grandmother being from Scotland. My wife and most of my friends are the same exact way. I guess that we could use the term 'European-American' much as Blacks have tried to use the term 'African-American', but it's much simpler to say that someone's 'White' or 'Black'.

    Most of the people that use this term don't get hung up on skin tone either, some Japanese have skin that's very pale and that's basically white in color....doesn't mean that we'd want them included.

    For us it has to include a variety of factors besides skin color (hair color and texture, skeletal structure, facial features, eye color, build, intelligence, skull size and brain size etc etc).

    I'd pretty much go by J. P. Rushton's definition of the term 'White' (although I don't agree completely with all his conclusions, most but not all).

    This has been talked about in other threads and I'm not looking for a re-hash of those same arguments, but I didn't want anyone to think that people that use the term 'White' over here just go by skin color and that's it. Since the term 'White' is included in the thread title I thought it might be useful to clarify this.

    However I completely understand if you have no use for the term and I'm NOT suggesting that anyone use it if they don't feel that it best describes them.

    When typing in the term 'Bosnian Muslims' into a Google Search they looked like most of them are of mixed race to me.

    Pictures of 'Bosnian Muslims' on Google (*Click*)

    That is all...=)

  10. #220
    Quote Originally Posted by Gary in TX
    This has been talked about in other threads and I'm not looking for a re-hash of those same arguments, but I didn't want anyone to think that people that use the term 'White' over here just go by skin color and that's it. Since the term 'White' is included in the thread title I thought it might be useful to clarify this.
    I agree with you that the term 'white' shouldn't be a real problem in America and that it is the easiest way do distinguish between your people and the ones coming from Africa, which perhaps are the two most important ethnic groups in America. There aren't any other autochthonous white ethnicities in America. But in Europe there are other white ethnicities than ours and therefor 'white' can be a confusing term when used as a way to make a distinction between certain ethnicities.
    I do understand that to be white mostly means more than just skin colour and that Americans would not accept a white looking Turk or something like that in there country. But when people are caucasian but not white (as it was said in the post I quoted), then what does white really mean? The term looses its meaning, if it even had one in a European or physical anthropological context, and is reduced to nothing more than skin colour. So my comment was mostly directed at the statement that some people are not racially compatible because they are not white although they are caucasian. The question I then ask myself is: When is someone white or not and therefor racially incompatible because of a lack of said whiteness? Ethnical or racial terms are thus in my opinion better concepts to determine whether someone is compatible or not.
    I hope this clarifies it a bit.

Similar Threads

  1. Dutch Study: White-Muslim Marriages Don’t Assimilate Either Group
    By Nachtengel in forum Netherlands & Flanders
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Monday, October 16th, 2017, 02:30 PM
  2. White Males Now Classed As a 'Minority Group' at University
    By Hersir in forum Education & Schooling
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Thursday, June 1st, 2017, 08:18 AM
  3. ‘White Nationalism’ Group Registers to Lobby in Washington
    By blutundboden in forum The United States
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Monday, June 18th, 2012, 10:49 PM
  4. Another Elderly White Man Attack by a Group of Blacks
    By OnePercent in forum The United States
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Friday, October 21st, 2011, 04:52 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •