Reanimating the Corpse of Humanity
Christopher Jon Bjerknes
http://www.jewishracism.blogspot.com
Biological definitions of “life” which distinguish living organisms from inanimate objects tell us that white Europeans are dead. Advanced living organisms are self-sustaining, procreate, have a will, respond to stimuli, communicate, fight for their survival, defend their young and their societies, solve problems and adapt. White Europeans fail on all counts. The Jews have subverted each of these elements which render us alive.
The recent wave of hope which emerged as a tidal wave when Erdogan criticized Israel reminds us of what it is to actually be alive. We can solve our problems if we acknowledge and face them. We can better our existence and create a peaceful World. We can live and enjoy life. We can secure a future for our children. But we must be alive, in the literal biological sense of the term, to do these things.
It is the nature of a living organism to repel and destroy a parasite. We are not alive if we do not fight back and defeat the Jew. Remaining passive renders us as inanimate as a coffin, as dead as a rock, as lifeless as a ball of wax, as rotten and sour as the bloated corpse of a maggot infested fish washed up on the sand.
But if there is any life left in us, we can reinvigorate humanity and the natural response will be to eliminate the Jews from the healthy organism, though not through segregation of the tribe which has never worked, but rather through isolation of the individuals.
If we are to live, we must awaken our spirit, that will to control our fate and better our lot, our drive to destroy our enemies, which distinguishes the living from the dead, or worse, the inanimate. The Jews have perniciously persuaded us that it is wrong to be alive, that it is immoral to live. They have killed our spirit of life. To regain the spirit of life, we must remove that which kills it.
June 25, 2010
Posted in: Racism News
|
Fair Use Disclaimer
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.
Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:
"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:
Loading ...