recent tweets

Armed Black Militia Declares Race War At Stone Mountain


Barely a peep from the mainstream media which had a meltdown over Charlottesville. This is how it is being covered in the new age of “moral clarity” in American journalism.

Reuters:

“(Reuters) – A predominantly Black group of heavily armed protesters marched through Stone Mountain Park near Atlanta on Saturday, calling for removal of the giant Confederate rock carving at the site that civil rights activists consider a monument to racism. …

It features the likenesses of Jefferson Davis, who was president of the 11-state Confederacy, and two of his legendary generals, Robert E. Lee and Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson.

Stone Mountain has long held symbolism for white supremacists. The Ku Klux Klan, a hate group that was formed by Confederate Army veterans and has a history of lynchings and terror against Black people, held its rebirth ceremony atop mountain in 1915 with flaming crosses. Klansmen still hold occasional gatherings in the shadows of the edifice, albeit now met with protesters behind police tape. Many of those cross-burnings took place on or around July 4.”

Nothing “dark and divisive” took place at Stone Mountain yesterday.

It was Donald Trump’s speech at the Salute to America that was “deeply divisive” which “sought to deepen racial and cultural divisions in America” during our “reckoning on racism in America.”

Suppose for a moment that the League of the South had led an armed march on Stone Mountain, harassed and brandished weapons at black motorists, openly invited blacks to come and show up to start a race war and declared a willingness to use violence to establish a White ethnostate. What if the League of the South and the Alt-Right had just shown up and marched around with tiki torches? Everyone knows the result would have been 24/7 nationwide hysteria about the rebirth of the Ku Klux Klan.

Isn’t it telling that this happened in the middle of what CNN has called our “national reckoning with racism”? What does it say about “racism”? The definition of “racist” now simply means “White person.” The definition of “anti-racism” now means anti-whiteness. Only White people can be “racist” now. Black people cannot be “racist.” It doesn’t matter what they do. White silence is violence. When black people engage in or threaten racial violence, it is non-violence. When black people threaten White people, it is actually an act of “anti-racism.” Defending yourself as a White person is White Fragility. This is “moral clarity.” It is clear White people have to go.

What would happen if a group of black people went to Stone Mountain in 2020 and declared themselves to be the black version of the Ku Klux Klan? What if they started engaging in violence against White people? What if they started lynching random White people? By definition, that would not be “racist” and it would be “anti-racist” to lynch a White person. It would be “racist” for a White person to resist. White people who organize to defend themselves from these attacks would be labeled “hate groups.” The media would declare any form of White resistance to be “racist” and “dark and divisive.”

Does this sound like the beginning of the dystopian plot of The Turner Diaries?

“A framing device which takes place in 2099 (a hundred years after the events depicted) gives the novel’s main text a historical context, which is presented as the journal of Earl Turner, an active member of a white revolutionary movement. As the story begins, the federal government has confiscated all civilian firearms in the country under the Cohen Act. Turner and his cohorts take their organization underground in order to wage a guerrilla war against the System, which is depicted as being under Jewish controlThe “System” begins by implementing numerous repressive laws against various forms of hate, by making it a “hate crime” for white people to defend themselves when crimes are committed against them by non-whites even after all weapons have been confiscated, and pushing for new surveillance measures in order to monitor its citizens, such as requiring them to possess a special passport at all times and in all places in order to permanently monitor where individuals are.”

What would old William Pierce have had to say about the events of the last month?

Originally appeared at: Occidental Dissent