NicoChristian wrote
I don't want our brethren to feel guilty if required to dispatch those creatures in not so honourable ways. Honorable combat is reserved for Whites.
In one of the call-in programmes hunter asked if it we had to treat bastards according to the Law; I think it is completely acceptable to lie/deceive etc.
http://christogenea.org/podcasts/open-l ... 12-14-2013In the last 20 mins or so.
Hitler tried to fight with some rules of honour, he didn't want to bomb civilians. But for non-whites the only consideration should be to be as efficient and effective as possible.
Teutonic wrote
Think of it more in terms of 'pest control' rather than an actual confrontation.
Exactly ...and to think just a few short decades ago we could have carried it out in just such a way, it wouldn't have mattered how many there were.
Mark wrote
And it reminds us of days past when a man's honor was something to be defended. It is virtually non-existent today.
I think in the past men would have been more conservative with what they said. These days they can get away with saying anything, the state protects them (in the sense that you can't 'settle things like men' anymore).
NicoChristian wrote
If we were to 'fight fairly' with beasts, then that is somehow suggesting that they are our equals.
You can correct a man and be corrected. A worthy opponent.
A bastard is irredeemable, a waste.
...and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.