Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old March 21st, 2009 #21
SidW UK
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,956
Default

I think know where you are coming from, indeed I remember a telephone conversation we had along those lines a few years ago. My attitude was that young people were being brainwashed with pop/rock music, while being taught that more sophisticated, intelligent, timeless classical tunes were boring and "uncool". If I remember you agreed, but rightly pointed out that most people would struggle to understand this.

Personally I like all kinds of music, from Pink Floyd & Queen to Skrewdriver & The Blackshirts to G F Handel & L V Beethoven, but if I need to focus it has to be classical music every time.

Good luck with this message, I hope people are listening and understanding that all popular music is, is an intentional sub conscious hypnotic based on the beating of the jungle drum.
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #22
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,898
Default

Well, I'm going to be a twat and disagree. Clearly there is some music and some genres that are purely against the white race by their inflammatory lyrics and not-so-subliminal messages. There are also some musicians who subliminally destroy our race by promoting either the wigga style of dress and behaviour, making it appear to be cool to be in a mixed race relationship or simply by the sub-culture of drug usage that goes along with certain genres.

But what about the all white (not necessarily pro-white - just all-white) bands who don't preach any kind of drug culture or who don't dress as wiggas or who don't appear in public with black girls draped all over them, but simply create music?

The music isn't giving anything to our race, sure, but it isn't taking anything away either - how is that wrong? Sure, it would be better for us if they preached a pro-white message, but they don't. I don't see how this is harmful <other than> people could be listening to something else with a more meaningful message.

I do understand and agree with the generation gap analysis.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #23
Joe Owens
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 4,920
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by odinsgal88 View Post
Well, I'm going to be a twat and disagree. Clearly there is some music and some genres that are purely against the white race by their inflammatory lyrics and not-so-subliminal messages. There are also some musicians who subliminally destroy our race by promoting either the wigga style of dress and behaviour, making it appear to be cool to be in a mixed race relationship or simply by the sub-culture of drug usage that goes along with certain genres.

But what about the all white (not necessarily pro-white - just all-white) bands who don't preach any kind of drug culture or who don't dress as wiggas or who don't appear in public with black girls draped all over them, but simply create music?

The music isn't giving anything to our race, sure, but it isn't taking anything away either - how is that wrong? Sure, it would be better for us if they preached a pro-white message, but they don't. I don't see how this is harmful <other than> people could be listening to something else with a more meaningful message.

I do understand and agree with the generation gap analysis.
Can you give me an example please.
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #24
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,898
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Owens View Post
Can you give me an example please.
Off the top of my head - Def Leppard. All white members, clean lifestyles, no scandals or anti-social behaviour (dodgy hairstyles notwithstanding ) and harmless lyrics.

"
Cry wolf, given mouth to mouth
Like a movin' heartbeat in the witching hour
I'm runnin' with the wind, a shadow in the dust
And like the drivin' rain, yeah, like the restless rust
"

"
Just a little bit of letting go
I don't want you to know
I wanna cry
But I breathe a sigh

Overflow of emotion
And a hurt that'll never heal
If you close the door forever
The fate of pain is sealed
"
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #25
Joe Owens
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 4,920
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by odinsgal88 View Post
Off the top of my head - Def Leppard. All white members, clean lifestyles, no scandals or anti-social behaviour (dodgy hairstyles notwithstanding ) and harmless lyrics.

"
Cry wolf, given mouth to mouth
Like a movin' heartbeat in the witching hour
I'm runnin' with the wind, a shadow in the dust
And like the drivin' rain, yeah, like the restless rust
"

"
Just a little bit of letting go
I don't want you to know
I wanna cry
But I breathe a sigh

Overflow of emotion
And a hurt that'll never heal
If you close the door forever
The fate of pain is sealed
"

Those that don't push a multi - racial line push a feminised one. All the males have long hair like women and sing about their little angel or sugar. They sing about how they can’t go on any further without Love. Men are not supposed to be acting like this in Mother Nature’s scheme of things. The male is supposed to be the dominant one and not the other way round. The Jews in the music industry have cleverly reversed this role, and made our men cry, when their girl leaves them. This is partly to blame for when men kill their kids to spite their partners, having been dumped by them. Men have become feminised by music and the general attack on the white heterosexual male. Look at the links of the so - called hardmen of rock. Also, no one ever seems to have a stable relationship in these videos, do they? It’s all about dysfunctional living, and attacking the male.

YouTube - Guns N' Roses--Don't Cry
YouTube - Whitesnake - Is This Love

Last edited by Joe Owens; March 21st, 2009 at 01:19 PM. Reason: update
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #26
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,898
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Owens View Post
Those that don't push a multi - racial line push a feminised one. All the males have long hair like women and sing about their little angel or sugar. They sing about how they can’t go on any further without Love. Men are not supposed to be acting like this in Mother Nature’s scheme of things. The male is supposed to be the dominant one and not the other way round. The Jews in the music industry have cleverly reversed this role, and made our men cry, when their girl leaves them. This is partly to blame for when men kill their kids to spite their partners, having been dumped by them. Men have become feminised by music and the general attack on the white heterosexual male. Look at the links of so - called hardmen of rock. Also, no one ever seems to have a stable relationship in these videos, do they? It’s all about dysfunctional living, and attacking the male.
YouTube - Def Leppard - Love Bites

YouTube - Guns N' Roses--Don't Cry

YouTube - Whitesnake - Is This Love

I see your point, (and agree to some degree) when you put it like that. (But you picked a bad example with the GnR "Don't Cry" - he's dumping her. )

Men should feel some emotion though - not fully feminised by a long chalk but some emotion is necessary for anything - hate, love, any action taken for love be it love of a woman, race, country, child, animal, whatever. If you can't or don't feel, you can't or don't do.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #27
Sándor Petőfi
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: In your head
Posts: 5,325
Default

Quote:
Those that don't push a multi - racial line push a feminised one. All the males have long hair like women and sing about their little angel or sugar. They sing about how they can’t go on any further without Love. Men are not supposed to be acting like this in Mother Nature’s scheme of things. The male is supposed to be the dominant one and not the other way round.
What do you think is the subject of the best part of Aryan lyrical verse? Me caveman, you come here, ooga booga? Love, as conceived by the poets, the bards, the troubadours, is one of the highest spiritual states of the Aryan and one that sets him apart from animals. You're just parroting Jewish trash-talk yourself.
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #28
Joe Owens
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 4,920
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by odinsgal88 View Post
I see your point, (and agree to some degree) when you put it like that. (But you picked a bad example with the GnR "Don't Cry" - he's dumping her. )

Men should feel some emotion though - not fully feminised by a long chalk but some emotion is necessary for anything - hate, love, any action taken for love be it love of a woman, race, country, child, animal, whatever. If you can't or don't feel, you can't or don't do.

I could have posted plenty but this makes my point. G N' R have plenty of the same if you care to look. Also, they all push the same message no matter what group it is. You hate what threatens what you love, that is natural. You love your family, this is natural. Yes, men do have emtions. But the Jews have twisted it so love is in more abundance.
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #29
Joe Owens
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 4,920
Default

A classical example of the new modern feminised male is this idiot. Look at the way he holds himself. And read George Lincoln Rockwell’s analogy on it. I did post it at the beginning.

AMERICANA

The “BEATLES”;--A GLASS EGG to fill a Jew-created VACUUM!
When I was a kid, they use to put phony, glass eggs under hens to give them “ideas.”

Now the liberals and Jews are doing the same thing to our kids to give them BAD ideas.

As I write this, the “Beatles” have arrived. Our teenagers are mobbing them with hero worship.

Most intelligent people look on with horror and disgust. That’s one thing wrong with intelligent people. The reason for the kids’ wild carrying on is their need for heroes.

But there is a reason for the wild carrying on of the kids. The Jews know what it is, and very brilliantly cater to it. Our few, non-Jewish leaders have no idea what it is, and leave a huge vacuum in the lives of our teenagers.

That vacuum is the need for heroes.

Kids’ need “heroes”. They must have them to grow emotionally and spiritually.

The heroes used to be Sam Houston, Daniel Boone, Tom Mix, Gen. MacArthur, etc.

But the Jews want our people EMASCULATED, weak, feeble AND COW-LIKE.

So they have tried to make us ashamed of “violence”, gun fighters, war heroes, etc.

Instead of these eternal hero-types for all kids in all times, the Jews have set up Ralph Bunche, Sammy Davis, Jr., Lenny Bruce, etc., as our “heroes”.

But these gents don’t have the emotional wallop to reach the kids.

So the Jews promote more and more pansified SINGERS and HIP-WRIGGLERS for the kids’ to worship. And it works with millions and millions of helpless little kids.

But not always! In every high school in America, there are “cells” of kids who still worship TOUGHNESS, STRENGTH, GUTS, MANLINESS, and real HEROISM! Most are too scarred of their good instincts to dare to write to us. But enough kids to write us, so I know they are out there, MILLIONS of them. They write for armbands, pamphlets, and books on NAZIS. Like White Men for centuries, they worship STRENGTH, GUTS and HEROISM--not niggers and pawn shop Jews. When “caught” with what is perfectly legal in this supposedly “free” America, (this nazi stuff) they are hit with everything in the book and out of it. But they are STILL there, millions of them.
Kids need HEROES. When you deflate real heroes and punish the kids for worshiping them, the hero worship turns to anything else it can find. There is a vacuum. So the Jews fill the vacuum with the “Beatles”--or “Chubby Checkers”.

That’s why our kids grovel at the feet of scum.

The Rockwell Report

Vol. 3 No. 9 February 15, 1964

 
Old March 21st, 2009 #30
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,898
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Owens View Post
Yes, men do have emtions. But the Jews have twisted it so love is in more abundance.
I'm not denying the hand of the jew wherever anything appears to be twisted or working against us but it's a fact that love songs sell better than songs about war. Perhaps if we could change that attitude then we could change our future.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #31
Joe Owens
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 4,920
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sándor Petőfi View Post
What do you think is the subject of the best part of Aryan lyrical verse? Me caveman, you come here, ooga booga? Love, as conceived by the poets, the bards, the troubadours, is one of the highest spiritual states of the Aryan and one that sets him apart from animals. You're just parroting Jewish trash-talk yourself.

Romeo and Juliet is natural love and emotion. Not this silly crap via music.
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #32
Joe Owens
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 4,920
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by odinsgal88 View Post
I'm not denying the hand of the jew wherever anything appears to be twisted or working against us but it's a fact that love songs sell better than songs about war. Perhaps if we could change that attitude then we could change our future.
They may sell more because of the age we live in. Also, the Jew has cleverly manipulated our emotions. We don't need the love John Lennon sings about, that's for sure. Anyway, forget about love and start hating your enemies. Western Civilisation was not built on love but hate, and killing our enemies. However, love is reserved for your/our family and what we believe in.

Last edited by Joe Owens; March 21st, 2009 at 01:52 PM. Reason: update
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #33
blueskies
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,392
Default We’ve been had.....

Old Article touches upon modern music and the rebellion against social order of family and clan.. sixties was the height of chaos judea-masonic motto. the Beatles and so forth paved the way for - ekwality. civil rights coon march. reverse of immigration laws. homosexual alternative lifestyle etc etc. the rest is history.







by Grugyn Silverbristle.


So what is “Rock-Culture” anyway? What is it supposed to mean? I could never figure that out. If “rock” is being used as a verb, as in a boat, it doesn't make sense. Does it mean “Rockabye Baby, on the tree-top,” an inducement to infantile behavior? I don't like the sound of that, especially coming from the mouth a Jew booking agent (or his record-company, theatre, stadium, radio & TV station or motion-picture studio). Does it perhaps mean a stone, a clod of dirt, a return to the primitive state? The most disturbing feature of “rock” is that, over the past fifty years, one can observe a progressive devolution. The Beach Boys still sang four-part harmony; but “heavy metal” destroyed tonality and led the way to new-wave, punk, hip-hop and Gothic

Have any of my readers ever observed how “Rock” produces no baritones; not even a true tenor, much less a basso. Male “Rock” vocalists always sing in falsetto - an abnormally high voice mimicking a castrato. I don't think this is over anyone's head. Why is it that “Rock Music” is always sung in falsetto by men? What is the effect of this, and to what extent does it represent infantile behavior? And why is it that women in Rock will freely range from the highest shriek to the lowest croak, indeed as if they were themselves men? To what extent is this just “art” and “culture” and no longer simply entertainment? Can you be so sure there are no deeper and longer-term effects than what you admit to? We can observe that “Rock Culture” has been a leading indicator of social behavior, and so to what extent is this social behavior being intentional conditioned?

[Upon this “rock” I will build my church!]

Can you be so sure there is no malevolent force behind this? Do you doubt that there are others who have studied “Rock-n-Roll” far more than you or I, who have studied it scientifically, psychologically, and sociologically? Do you really believe that those who created “Rock” -- a synthetic culture -- would release their findings, obtained at great expense, for our gratification? Why should they tell us what they know ... especially when they are making so much money with it?

It is not unfair to say that “Rock” is permeated with narcissism -- erotic gratification derived from admiration of one's own physical attributes -- about as good a definition of “Rock Culture” as I ever heard. The cult is degenerate, synthesized, plastic, fake ... achieved by electronic amplification, full of sound and fury and thriving on mass psychosis. Consider the swooning false intimacy achieved when a vocalist crams the microphone down his throat: sex, sensuality and self-gratification. Then take a long look at the first President we've ever had (William Blythe Clinton) who was raised on this crap: his infantile behavior and lack of self-control.

“Rock Culture” is anti-tradition, anti-culture and anti-generational; it is inherently divisive against family and clan. It is primitive and unskilled, falsely-rebellious and wholly atheistic. It is global, multicultural and proclaims a false individualism that is really peer-group conformism. Its purpose is mainstreaming, creating a series of isolated generational paradigms, and inculcating the philosophy of just “getting-by”. It emphasizes selfishness, cynicism and pursuit of momentary pleasure, seeking sensation instead of wisdom, or even beauty. It is the Cult of the Child (Horus).

I will admit that the phenomenon of rock-degeneracy is too big to lay at any one doorstep. There are multiple forces at work. I had witnessed the emergence of “Rock” culture in the 1950s. It was simply meant to be “fun”, not taken seriously. It was “party” music. I remember the Beatles' international explosion in 1962-63. I remember the “British Invasion” that followed. I remember the fusion of “Rock” and negro “Blues” (and yet the audience remained “lilly-white”) that coincided with the Communist-led Civil Rights movement. Negro music was proudly black and anti-white. White “Rock” was pro-black and anti-racist. Is it any wonder we were confused? I was at Woodstock, where the main topic of discussion was Jimmi Hendrix's addiction to “reds”, not Vietnam. There were hardly any blacks or ragheads at Woodstock, excepting on the stage. The anti-war movement was also a secondary-theme and hardly anyone talked about that. The kids were absorbed in “counterculture”: negrophilia, sex, drugs, mass-spectacle and thrills. Absent a sense of historicity, already caught-up in the Great Lie, we were naive children. We had no way of knowing that we were being manipulated. We thought that we were rebelling against materialism ... not realizing how what we embraced was just that.

The main attraction that “Rock” held for us in those days was that it was a way to meet girls. In fact, it was the only way to meet girls once you were out of school. The girls followed the bands and the boys followed the girls. “Rock” culture is a perpetual Maypole dance, a fertility-festival staged to bring the female into heat and overcome her religious and cultural inhibitions. It represents the commercialization of sex and courtship, the afterbirth of multiculturalism. Following the breakup of family and clan, church and community, “Rock” fills the void left by the collapse of antecedant cultural institutions. Absent a common cultural heritage, courtship now takes place in a vacuum. “Rock” culture represents the least common denominator within its constituent age-group.

I find that young women are even more addicted to “Rock” than the males, even as the female is more vulnerable to mass-psychosis and media manipulation. I am reminded that the herding instinct is stronger in the female than it is in the male.

Last edited by blueskies; March 21st, 2009 at 05:16 PM.
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #34
varg
...
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 9,741
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Owens View Post
Those that don't push a multi - racial line push a feminised one. All the males have long hair like women
Uh havent White men generally always had long hair throughout history?
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #35
Joe Owens
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 4,920
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by varg View Post
Uh havent White men generally always had long hair throughout history?

We don't go round like Vikings now, because we have evolved since them days. People in the West had short hair until the 1960's came along. Right at the start of the counter - culture.

Last edited by Joe Owens; March 21st, 2009 at 05:30 PM. Reason: update
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #36
Joe Owens
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 4,920
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueskies View Post
Old Article touches upon modern music and the rebellion against social order of family and clan.. sixties was the height of chaos judea-masonic motto. the Beatles and so forth paved the way for - ekwality. civil rights coon march. reverse of immigration laws. homosexual alternative lifestyle etc etc. the rest is history.







by Grugyn Silverbristle.


So what is “Rock-Culture” anyway? What is it supposed to mean? I could never figure that out. If “rock” is being used as a verb, as in a boat, it doesn't make sense. Does it mean “Rockabye Baby, on the tree-top,” an inducement to infantile behavior? I don't like the sound of that, especially coming from the mouth a Jew booking agent (or his record-company, theatre, stadium, radio & TV station or motion-picture studio). Does it perhaps mean a stone, a clod of dirt, a return to the primitive state? The most disturbing feature of “rock” is that, over the past fifty years, one can observe a progressive devolution. The Beach Boys still sang four-part harmony; but “heavy metal” destroyed tonality and led the way to new-wave, punk, hip-hop and Gothic

Have any of my readers ever observed how “Rock” produces no baritones; not even a true tenor, much less a basso. Male “Rock” vocalists always sing in falsetto - an abnormally high voice mimicking a castrato. I don't think this is over anyone's head. Why is it that “Rock Music” is always sung in falsetto by men? What is the effect of this, and to what extent does it represent infantile behavior? And why is it that women in Rock will freely range from the highest shriek to the lowest croak, indeed as if they were themselves men? To what extent is this just “art” and “culture” and no longer simply entertainment? Can you be so sure there are no deeper and longer-term effects than what you admit to? We can observe that “Rock Culture” has been a leading indicator of social behavior, and so to what extent is this social behavior being intentional conditioned?

[Upon this “rock” I will build my church!]

Can you be so sure there is no malevolent force behind this? Do you doubt that there are others who have studied “Rock-n-Roll” far more than you or I, who have studied it scientifically, psychologically, and sociologically? Do you really believe that those who created “Rock” -- a synthetic culture -- would release their findings, obtained at great expense, for our gratification? Why should they tell us what they know ... especially when they are making so much money with it?

It is not unfair to say that “Rock” is permeated with narcissism -- erotic gratification derived from admiration of one's own physical attributes -- about as good a definition of “Rock Culture” as I ever heard. The cult is degenerate, synthesized, plastic, fake ... achieved by electronic amplification, full of sound and fury and thriving on mass psychosis. Consider the swooning false intimacy achieved when a vocalist crams the microphone down his throat: sex, sensuality and self-gratification. Then take a long look at the first President we've ever had (William Blythe Clinton) who was raised on this crap: his infantile behavior and lack of self-control.

“Rock Culture” is anti-tradition, anti-culture and anti-generational; it is inherently divisive against family and clan. It is primitive and unskilled, falsely-rebellious and wholly atheistic. It is global, multicultural and proclaims a false individualism that is really peer-group conformism. Its purpose is mainstreaming, creating a series of isolated generational paradigms, and inculcating the philosophy of just “getting-by”. It emphasizes selfishness, cynicism and pursuit of momentary pleasure, seeking sensation instead of wisdom, or even beauty. It is the Cult of the Child (Horus).

I will admit that the phenomenon of rock-degeneracy is too big to lay at any one doorstep. There are multiple forces at work. I had witnessed the emergence of “Rock” culture in the 1950s. It was simply meant to be “fun”, not taken seriously. It was “party” music. I remember the Beatles' international explosion in 1962-63. I remember the “British Invasion” that followed. I remember the fusion of “Rock” and negro “Blues” (and yet the audience remained “lilly-white”) that coincided with the Communist-led Civil Rights movement. Negro music was proudly black and anti-white. White “Rock” was pro-black and anti-racist. Is it any wonder we were confused? I was at Woodstock, where the main topic of discussion was Jimmi Hendrix's addiction to “reds”, not Vietnam. There were hardly any blacks or ragheads at Woodstock, excepting on the stage. The anti-war movement was also a secondary-theme and hardly anyone talked about that. The kids were absorbed in “counterculture”: negrophilia, sex, drugs, mass-spectacle and thrills. Absent a sense of historicity, already caught-up in the Great Lie, we were naive children. We had no way of knowing that we were being manipulated. We thought that we were rebelling against materialism ... not realizing how what we embraced was just that.

The main attraction that “Rock” held for us in those days was that it was a way to meet girls. In fact, it was the only way to meet girls once you were out of school. The girls followed the bands and the boys followed the girls. “Rock” culture is a perpetual Maypole dance, a fertility-festival staged to bring the female into heat and overcome her religious and cultural inhibitions. It represents the commercialization of sex and courtship, the afterbirth of multiculturalism. Following the breakup of family and clan, church and community, “Rock” fills the void left by the collapse of antecedant cultural institutions. Absent a common cultural heritage, courtship now takes place in a vacuum. “Rock” culture represents the least common denominator within its constituent age-group.

I find that young women are even more addicted to “Rock” than the males, even as the female is more vulnerable to mass-psychosis and media manipulation. I am reminded that the herding instinct is stronger in the female than it is in the male.

Interesting article. But like George Lincoln Rockwell says "It fills the Vacuum".
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #37
varg
...
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 9,741
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Owens View Post
We don't go round like Vikings now, because we have evolved since them days. People in the West had short hair until the 1960's came along. Right at the start of the counter - culture.
I fail to see your logic. How is having long hair part of 'the counter culture'.. when most of White culture was by men with longer hair?
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #38
Joe Owens
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 4,920
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by varg View Post
I fail to see your logic. How is having long hair part of 'the counter culture'.. when most of White culture was by men with longer hair?

The Beatles started the craze in the 1960's. By having long hair at that time it was rebelling against Order and Discipline. Long hair came with modern music of the counter - culture. What modern period are you refering to with long hair?

"Long hair turns white middle-class youth into niggers."

Jerry Rubin.

Last edited by Joe Owens; March 21st, 2009 at 07:00 PM. Reason: update
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #39
MikeTodd
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
Default

Could you please tell us; what exactly are the parameters for length and cut of hair in order to be considered a "true" WN?

Heretical minds want to know.
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.
 
Old March 21st, 2009 #40
Cernunnos
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The underworld
Posts: 1,934
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Thou hast aroused my ire, O Joseph. You will not escape with an ounce of credibility, being the fool you are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Owens View Post
The Beatles started the craze in the 1960's. By having long hair at that time it was rebelling against Order and Discipline. Long hair came with modern music of the counter - culture. What modern period are you refering to with long hair?

"Long hair turns white middle-class youth into niggers."

Jerry Rubin.
Are you calling me a nigger, Joe? As to order and discipline, though I am usually disorganised, I speak three languages and made a perfect 4,0 last semester. There is a difference between rebellion against the natural order and rebellion against an artifice. Is not cutting one's hair a rebellion against its natural form, seeing as it does so harmlessly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Owens View Post
We don't go round like Vikings now, because we have evolved since them days. People in the West had short hair until the 1960's came along. Right at the start of the counter - culture.
Let us pre-suppose that they changed hair-styles somewhere between the Viking days and 1960. That does not mean they cannot be changed again, or Asgard forbid that people decide for themselves what is upon their head instead of yielding to a herd-like mentality? Is that not the mentality that has allowed for jewish parasitism?
 
Reply

Tags
metallica, metallica bash, mob, punk

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:55 AM.
Page generated in 0.58027 seconds.