Top

Bud White, 7/11/2008 This Week in Organized Jewry

July 13, 2008

Comments

14 Responses to “Bud White, 7/11/2008 This Week in Organized Jewry”

  1. Tony on July 15th, 2008 5:17 am

    To Bud White, what a horribly embarassing show that was with that Susan woman. It’s not in blacks’ natures to be mean? I guess it’s also not in blacks’ and spics’ natures to form gangs and rape, loot, and kill with impunity when the opportunity arises like it did during the Rodney King Riots or hurricane Katrina. Wiggers are as criminal as niggers? Is that lady some old braindead drugged out hippie? Does she know what stats are? Is she aware of the witchita massacre, the murder/tortures in Knoxville, the myriad disgusting butchering of thousands of whites at the hands of these feral animals all over the western world? The only reason these sub-animals weren’t “mean” prior to civil rights was because they knew a rope awaited them prematurely if they acted out. That sort of relativism is typical of liberals and nigger lovers, not white nationalists, and judging by her comments about having all kinds of friends from Jamaica and Trinidad, she probably is a nigger lover. And you guys just sat there like deer caught in the headlights suckin’ up to this bitch. Blacks would go back to being “Americans” if it wasn’t for the manipulation of the jews? So much for “white nationalist women”.

  2. William Burcker on July 15th, 2008 8:31 pm

    I agree Tony.

    I don’t listen to Patriot Dames. The one time that I did, one of them was talking about a black man that she worked with who was a “very hansome, good looking black man”….and I almost threw up!

    Its one thing to have FORMERLY been on the liberal side of things, much as I was in my college days when the liberal divershitty agenda was being shoved down my throat…but, thats the great thing about waking up…you WAKE UP! You realize inherent flaws in the politically correct, diversity agenda and you become sincerely concerned for the preservation of your race and all of the ethics and attributes that make it great…and against the support of falsely glorifying those racial elements that are worthy of quite the opposite of glorification.

    Bud White, I have been listening to every one of your shows for over a year. Excellent job you do! When you went hiatus for a while, I started wondering…”where the hell is he? we need this constant reminder and fleshing out of jewry!” That being said, the Patriot Dame seemed out of place on your show, brother.

    The Voice of Reason inherently to implies a sense of cognitive objectivity. Glorifying coloreds (lol) the way Tony points out, and calling them attractive and handsome seems more emotional, and in the worse kind of way…its in a way that implies both an attraction to them and a need to be seen as not a racist.

    Perhaps we should appeal to the voice of reason and question the actual role the Patriot Dames play here. Maybe they sufficently describe this role in their show, but I am quite uninterested in listening because I never know when I am going to hear something like what is mentioned in this and Tony’s post, which will make me want to vommit.

  3. William Burcker on July 16th, 2008 2:40 pm

    Firstly, I must say that I remember when you were first interviewed on show with Stan and Jim. After watching your videos, and hearing the interview, I had a feeling of affinity for the way you spoke out, and to a large degree, what you were saying.

    Secondly, I don’t appreciate being called a “Hater”. There is nothing hateful about what I said. I am not disparaging you, merely stating how your approach recently has made me aversive to what you have to say. Moreover, I am not attacking you. I am only trying to question what you role is HERE at this network.

    Where do we draw the line when it comes to defining our political interest as Whites? Do we draw it by saying all these glorifying things about blacks while concurrently disregarding the inherent nature of their differences? OR when we do mention the differences that have a bad effect on Whites, are we to attribute that to the jews and take responsibility away from the blacks?

    I find it quite humorous that you say: [Their comments stated that since I was not a pure black hater that I must be a ‘black lover.’] That is not my comment. Trying to turn my statements into an all or nothing generalization about you is quite inaccurate. My comments lean toward what it is that you emphasize, and what your true motivation is behind emphasizing what you do.

    If we think of Kant’s Categorical Imperative for a moment, and take the maxim behind the way that you speak, and will it into universal law…perhaps, then we will arrive at a reasonable outcome that follows from what you say.

    1. Lets talk about how handsome and attractive black men are.
    2. Lets say that blacks are good for Whites when you subtract the jewish influence.
    3. Lets take away ALL of the responsibility for the bad aspects of other races and place it on the jews.
    4. Lets glorify races whose differences affect us negatively, even without jew influence, solely because of specific examples that defy the general case

    The maxim that follows from these is clearly a liberal one which fails to address the harmful nature of diversity and succinctly trivializes any attempt to suggest that certain other races are INHERENTLY harmful and bad for Whites. The maxim that follows from these has, for the most part, already been willed into universal law (as per, the Categorical Imperative) in the form of Political Correctness (or in your case PC minus jews = Revised Political Correctness) and it is overwhelmingly shown to be bad for us!

    Here’s my answer to your open letter, which you obviously wrote as a vehemently emotional response on a network that is supposed to be centered around “Reason”. Calling me names, referring to me as a “Hater”, is not very reasonable when engaging in lightweight argumentation. Believe me, this IS lightweight…I have not even begun to attack integrity of your arguments. I have not even attacked you as a person. All I have done is question the details and nature of your presence here, and the role manifested by that presence. By ALL means, I certainly do not wish for you to leave the network. My vote is for you to be a mainstay, absolutely. I only want things to be defined as clearly as possible to strengthen the foundation of REASON that this network is built on. Unfortunately, your open letter as not clearly defined this.

  4. Susie on July 21st, 2008 3:53 pm

    William,
    Thank you for explaining yourself and what you believe Voice of Reason Broadcasting is all about. You question is ‘what is The Patriot Dames’ place on VOR. ‘

    First, I noticed you read my papers on Kant. Thank you. Let me break your questions and my answers down into concise points:

    I did not call you a ‘hater.’ I penned an open letter to All Haters, not wanting to specifically say that being a ‘white nationalist’ excludes other races.

    I have no problem with U.S. nationalism, but when that nationalism tightens up into describing just one race, I must disagree. The U.S. is a mixture of all other nations, including the indigenous people. I do not separate my English heritage from my Italian and certainly do not hold the English higher.

    I would be lying if I said every ‘white’ I met were incredibly handsome or unmercifully ugly. Same with blacks or Croatians or Slavs. My male/black sergeant in Juvenile was very fair. He did not shuck and jive with the black detectives, which made them hate him. He distributed the work evenly….no favorites. The blacks hated that. He was better looking and more dignified than most blacks and the other blacks hated him. So, when I describe him as he was….intelligent, fair, good-looking and kind…I am being objective. I won’t lie.

    One subject on VOR that has been talked about over and over again is to tell the truth. Our place on VOR is to tell that truth. My sister and I didn’t grow up using slurs or making fun of people. If I had to say something, I would say it to the person’s face. Given the choice between lying and telling the truth, I’ll take the truth.

    I did not get to this place in time because I lack guts or because I am a wide-eyed Liberal. I got here because I told the truth and the Jews in Columbus pretended I said it was every Jew, similar to your saying “Lets talk about how handsome and attractive black men are” in reply to my comment about one sergeant.

    That sergeant was terminated because he didn’t pay the ‘black game.’ He didn’t give blacks preferential treatment or throw paper-punch paper in the aisles at each other and laugh like hyenas as the other black supervisors did. He didn’t lie or cheat or loose his tempter but the other blacks, and a couple of whites, lied and set him up and he was terminated. It was a black thing, ya know.

    When someone beats you with a baseball bat, do you hate the bat? Will you attack the bat or the beater? Sure, sometimes I feel a twinge or unconscious flutter of the eyelid when someone says, ‘Oh we must help the black community.’ Help the blacks do what? Help them repair 40 years of damage caused by welfare? Help them get preferential treatment? Give them a job they are not qualified for? I find when you pet people, the more you have to pet them.

    To make a statement of truth and apply it in a universal way is incorrect and it is not what Kant intended. He believed most people felt the same way and responded much the same way to similar situations. Someone’s idea of handsome in Zimbabwe is going to be totally different from my idea of handsome in America. And my idea of handsome is deeply affected by character and integrity. Kant was talking about reactions, not describing someone.

    I have often said before that even if ALL the world were populated with blond hair and blue-eyed people, we would STILL have these problems of superior, inferior, and power.

    What is our place with VOR? Probably one of speaking about different topics concerning our nation. To point out to our nation WHO, WHAT, WHERE and WHY we are having problems. Fixing these problems will not return us to a White Nationalistic Society because we were not there to begin with.

    Oh, and while I realize saying, “vehemently emotional response” conjures up female stereotypes, I felt no emotion when I wrote the open letter or this response to you. I love writing and to me it is like being an artist. painting a picture. I consider this letter a Picasso.

    Your letter was also well written and thought out. Don’t add a lot of baggage to a statement a person makes. Sometimes it really is as simple as ‘he was handsome.’
    Susie

  5. William Burcker on July 21st, 2008 7:39 pm

    Very nice articulation.

    My questions have been answered thoroughly. You serve the purpose that you have stated quite well, and obviously VOR is benefitted by having you.

    Sincerely,
    William.

    PS. Sometimes, “a cigar is just a cigar”.

  6. Susie on July 21st, 2008 8:46 pm

    William,

    LOL on cigar. And something else to consider. I was going to be terminated from the Columbus Police Department because I was “racist” or “anti-semitic.” Here we just argued about me being pro-racial. We are pro-American.

    You can see this is a harsh world and people speaking out can’t please everyone. I appreciate your support and opinion. Thank you.

    Susie

  7. Susie on July 22nd, 2008 10:46 am

    William,
    Because I like the way you think and believe you can make a positive difference in the U.S., I would like for you to watch this video.

    NOT because of Chevron, not because of any race, not to promote a YouTube site but because what this man is saying is worth listening to….all the way to the end.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmAIxbyE_84

    Let me know what you think. Sometimes the message is too important to worry about the messenger.
    Susie

  8. William Burcker on July 23rd, 2008 8:25 am

    There seems to be a lot of similarity between White America and Chevron as he describes it in this video. I am not sure if the author realizes it or not though.

    He seems like a nice enough guy, no doubt. He takes a little too long go kind of….get to the point, but its interesting to see someone like him realize the perspective that he realizes.

    I am sure there are 100 or so white folks out there who bring this point home in a quicker more succinct (not to mention “relative to something”) kind of way…but, they will not get attention. This black guy gets attention because it is amazingly rare to see someone of his heritage speak and care about such things.

    So, I fail to see what is so special about his message. I can say in 1:00 minute what he said in 10:00 minutes AND THEN actually formulate a conclusion that is implicitly developmental, instead of dragging out a couple of facts so tediously without leading to the macroscopic indication.

    In my honest opinion: This guy seems quite over-glorified by you. I feel like I am listening to a 2nd grader. My inner dilogue while I was listening to him was something like, “aww, thats very good little johnny…wow, i am quite impressed with your finding’s little johnny…you are very impressive for a 2nd grader”. But, in this case he is not a 2nd grader. He is a Negro.

  9. William Burcker on July 23rd, 2008 8:29 am

    spelling correction =
    2nd Paragraph “go” = “to”
    last paragraph capitalize “Littler Johnny”

  10. Susie on July 23rd, 2008 11:31 am

    William,
    What I found amazing about this guy is that he did research and compared what the media tells people with what he found out actually happened. His delivery is kind of slow, I agree.

    And when you said a similarity between white America and Chevron, I got the same feeling. I thought ‘who is this guy?’

    There is a white guy on YouTube that delivers great messages but YELLS the whole time, and I mean yells. If I’d encountered someone like that on the street I would be inclined to mace him.

    So, everyone has different approaches. Thanks for your insight.
    Susie

  11. William Burcker on July 23rd, 2008 12:44 pm

    I must say, your counter-approach to objections is quite noble. It is apparent that you have been honing your argumentation skills for quite some time.

    I am thinking it would be quite useful to introduce your broadcasts to my mother. Your style would DEFINITELY appeal to her, no doubt. She is quite patriotic, but at the same time brainwashed by FOX News. The things I say have an effect for some time, but then after not talking with her for a couple months or so, she slips right back into trusting “some” of what she sees on that network, Glen Beck and the like. What, in your opinion, would be the best one of your videos/broadcasts to send her?

    Thanks.

  12. William Burcker on July 23rd, 2008 12:47 pm

    subract the three instances of “quite” above. i am used to being able to edit after I post something…now I have to get used to scanning it real quick before I post. -sorry.

  13. Susie on July 23rd, 2008 2:49 pm

    William,
    Thank you for letting me pick a video for your mother to watch. I’ll do that. But first, this is the guy that YELLS his messages. DO NOT send this to your mother:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuWlNiavTDE

    We really like the Jewish Propaganda ones:
    Part one
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlXFVWoeXGU
    Part Two
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQCfIe2gaTg&watch_response

    Let me know what she says about them. Thank you. No problem with mis-typed words….I do it also in emails.
    Susie

  14. Susie on July 23rd, 2008 3:37 pm

    William,
    My reply to you did not post. Let’s try it again.

    How about sending your mother the one we did on Jewish propaganda? It is in two parts:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlXFVWoeXGU

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQCfIe2gaTg

    Let me know what she thinks of them. Thank you.
    Susie

    And here is the one from the Yelling guy….DO NOT send this to your mother:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuWlNiavTDE

Bottom