Friday, January 23, 2009

president Barack Hussein Obama pushes sodomites and abortion agenda.

As has been reported here and throughout the White nationalist movement, Barack Obama before becoming president declared that he would continue to further the cause of the sodomite movement. He has wasted no time. Just hours after becoming president, the website has laid out Barack Obama's agenda. Under a section of that agenda titled Civil Rights is a very detailed outline of what Obama plans to do for the homosexual community.

First on the list is the expansion of "hate crimes" statutes to include extra punishment for crimes committed because of sexual orientation and gender identity. Highlighted is the president's political history of support for hate crimes legislation.

Obama has always supported full civil unions and federal rights for homosexual couples, and calls for repeal of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). As reported by, the president also is opposed to a constitutional amendment to protect marriage as only between a man and a woman. In addition, the president Obama calls for the repeal of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy to allow open sodomites to serve. "The President will work with military leaders to repeal the current policy and ensure it helps accomplish our national defense goals," says the website. Obama also wants to expand adoption rights for sodomites. The 44th president, states the website, "thinks that a child will benefit from a healthy and loving home, whether the parents are gay or not."

Also, on the Agenda section (The Agenda - Women) is a statement noting Obama's longstanding support for abortion rights. On that issue, the "consistent champion of reproductive choice" -- as Obama is described on the website -- promises to stand against any effort to overturn Roe v. Wade, increase funding for "family planning and comprehensive sex education," and remove any insurance restrictions against contraception. The picture on the right is a grotesque picture to even look at. A baby just after being aborted. This is the "reproductive" rights president Obama is for, and these are the type of pictures the abortion activists do not want you to see. As you can see this baby has a developed head, body, arms, legs, eyes, mouth, ear. But this is not a baby according to these butchers because this baby was not born in a hospital. This baby was ripped out, piece by piece. Just imagine what this baby felt. These butchers love to use soft words such as "reproductive rights", "fetus"...all words to paint a picture and create images of something different then what it is, a baby. And this is what president Obama is in favor of.

There is no mistake about it, this president will not be looking out for Christian ideas and values. Everything Christians are against and find grotesque such as sodomy and abortion, (and they should be against miscegenation-race mixing), president Obama is in favor. He favors sodomite "rights", the continuation of killing babies, and the continual destruction of our Christian heritage and culture. We as white Christians should continue to work to further our White European rights and interest just as every other race is encouraged to do. Our Children's future depends on it. Until then.

Tuesday, January 20, 2009

President Barack Hussein Obama 44th President

In honor of today and because of I'm depressed of what the future now lies ahead, I'm going to bed.

Sunday, January 18, 2009

The destruction of our White Christian America

Jon Meacham of Newsweek just wrote an article titled: OBAMA’S AMERICA Who We Are Now, "We have a new president. But he, too, has a new nation to lead, one that's changing almost beyond recognition." Published Jan 17, 2009. ( read the full article at It's an article that basically outlines why America is becoming virtually a non-White Christian Nation. One that will not reflect those that built this country, the White Europeans. Instead, it is fastly becoming and shortly will become a nation that will look like a typical third world nation (code word for non-White). The White Nationalist and Racialist movement for decades have been sounding this alarm. Few people would listen and most would just mock and say you are being paranoid. However, the White Nationalist Movement could see the writing on the wall, the destruction that was befalling on our country and our people. It hasn't been until the last decade that major newspapers such as Newsweek, Time, and others started to acknowlege that America was changing fast. Now with the election of Barack Hussein Obama (we just changed one Hussein for another), it just confirmed everything the White Nationalist Movement has been saying. In this article by Jon Meacham, he writes, "The message seemed mixed. It was 3 o'clock on the afternoon of Sunday, Oct. 3, 1965, and President Lyndon B. Johnson had come to the foot of the Statue of Liberty in New York Harbor to sign the unsexily named Immigration and Nationality Act. It was a grand and sentimental stage for Johnson, who loved the grand and the sentimental. There he was, less than a year into a term he'd won in the greatest of landslides over Barry Goldwater, at the mythic gateway to America, Robert and Ted Kennedy in the audience, the eyes of the press fixed on him in the shadows of the nation's most fabled icon of freedom. "Our beautiful America was built by a nation of strangers," Johnson said, reaching for political poetry. "From a hundred different places or more they have poured forth into an empty land, joining and blending in one mighty and irresistible tide." (Yes, strangers that came from white European countries that had a similar beliefs and culture, and was made up of the same people.) He continues, "But the president was openly ambivalent, too. "The bill that we sign today is not a revolutionary bill," he said, defensively, almost as though to reassure white Americans that they had nothing to fear. "It does not affect the lives of millions. It will not reshape the structure of our daily lives, or really add importantly to either our wealth or our power." "To borrow an old line about Winston Churchill, when Lyndon Johnson was right, he was right, but when he was wrong, well, my God." Jon Meacham continues, "On reflection, the bill LBJ signed on that October day was one of the most significant of his momentous presidency, and the virtually forgotten legislation played a key role in creating the America that made this week's inauguration of Barack Obama possible." See we are in the mess we are in by the most part because of that legislation that literally allowed millions and millions on non-White aliens to come to our country (excluding the millions and millions of illegal aliens coming across our borders).

Now, here are some startling facts that most aren't aware of that Jon Meacham proudly states: "The new reality is reflected in the NEWSWEEK Poll. Sixteen years ago, in the wake of the recession of 1991–92, anti-immigrant sentiment ran high, with 60 percent of Americans saying that they thought current immigration to the United States was a bad thing on the whole, and only 29 percent saying it was a good thing. Now the public is evenly divided, 44 percent to 44 percent. The percentage saying there are too many people coming to America from Africa has dropped from 47 percent in 1992 to 21 percent. Closer to home, public approval of interracial marriages (like the one between Obama's parents) has risen significantly in the past decade, from 54 percent in 1995 to 80 percent today. The percentage of Americans who say they know a mixed-race couple has risen from 58 to 79 percent since 1995, and more than a third (34 percent) say they or a close family member have married or live with someone of another race or who has a very different racial, ethnic or religious background, including a quarter (24 percent) who say it is specifically an interracial marriage or live-in relationship.
By and large, the younger you are, the more assimilated you are in this new tapestry of daily life. The key cohort is the 75 million-strong generation known as the millennials (those born roughly between 1980 and 2000). To state the obvious, the experiences of the younger generation—now voting and beginning their adult lives—are not the experiences of their parents or of their grandparents..."
"And 2009 is only the beginning of the story. According to Pew, if current trends continue, the U.S. population will rise from 296 million in 2005 to 438 million in 2050. Eighty-two percent—let me repeat that: 82 percent—of the increase will be attributable to immigrants arriving after 2005 and to their descendants. By that point, whites may make up only 47 percent of the country, ending centuries of a majority-white America." May we pray for God in this terrible time that He will give us strength to stay courageous and remain faithful to His laws, to His White-Euopean people, and to our Country.

Thursday, January 15, 2009

Louisiana forced to accept homosexual adoption

Two California homosexuals have won a federal lawsuit, allowing both their names to be on their adopted son's Louisiana birth certificate. According to, the state of Louisiana initially refused the request because homosexual adoption and same-sex "marriage" are illegal in that state. Oren Adar and Mickey Ray Smith then filed a lawsuit, which stated that leaving their names off the birth certificate "singles out unmarried same-sex couples and their adoptive children for the improper use of making them unequal to every one else." Mat Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel and dean of Liberty University's law school, comments. "What, essentially, you see happening are these other states, through the back door so to speak, bringing in same-sex unions through these other kinds of methods. It's not generally a direct, head-on, frontal assault with regards to same-sex marriage," he notes. "But the fact is, if a sister state is required to recognize same-sex adoption, even though it doesn't recognize it within the state, that is essentially a component that is a significant, central aspect of marriage." According to Staver, that lays the legal ground for future lawsuits to mandate recognition of homosexual marriage on other states. However, difficulties continue to arise in cases of unmarried same-sex couples who wish to adopt. Some registrars do not believe a man's name should be on the birth certificate space labeled "Mother" or a woman's name listed as "Father." The lawyer for Adar and Smith contends some states have "resolve[d] the problem" by changing the form to read "Parent 1" and "Parent 2" instead. Staver says the federal Defense of Marriage Act needs to be amended to so that no state is forced to accept homosexual adoption that is legal in a sister state. However, all this demonstrates the destruction of our Christian values in our government, and most importantly, our churches. Our government will follow the path of the church. Whenever our churches allow immoral activities, and accept "Biblical"sins such as mescegenation (race-mixing) and sodomy (homosexuality), our society soon follows. What we see in front of us is just this. Yet, many still wonders why this is happening in our government and courts. Just look at the teaching of our churches now and the teaching of the churches 60 years ago, and then look at our beloved America 50 or 60 years ago, and now look at our liberal social government today. Remember, we shouldn't pray for God to bless America, we should pray that we Repent and turn back to God's law. 2 Chron. 7:14. Until then.

Thursday, January 8, 2009

ACLU challenges Arkansas adoption law

The anti-Christian organization, the American Civil Liberties Union, or the ACLU has filed a lawsuit to challenge a new Arkansas law that prevents unmarried couples who live together from being adoptive or foster parents.
Act 1 -- approved by Arkansas voters in November -- limits adoptions to married couples, effectively barring singles, unmarried heterosexual partners, and homosexuals from adopting children. According to, "Jerry Cox of the Family Council Action Committee of Arkansas expected the lawsuit but believes the amendment is in the best interest of the children. "Well, you don't have to be a rocket scientist or social scientist to know that the best place for a child to grow up is in a home with a married mother and father -- a stable home like that," he points out. "Anything that departs from that moves in the wrong direction. We all know that." "This measure is not about the rights of adults," he contends. "It's about the welfare of children and the rights of children to be brought up in a good, stable home." The ACLU argues that the law discriminates against homosexuals who cannot legally marry in Arkansas. However, Cox says it affects heterosexuals and homosexuals equally. He adds that he is confident the lawsuit will fail and Act 1 will "remain on the books." The new law went into effect on January 1.

Sunday, January 4, 2009

Illinois pharmacists can sue Illinois Governor

According to, "Illinois pharmacists have been granted legal permission to challenge Governor Rod Blagojevich's executive order that forces them to dispense "emergency contraception" against their wills.
The pharmacists sued because the order violated their religious beliefs against selling certain abortifacients like the "morning-after pill." Brian Rooney of the Thomas More Law Center explains why the pharmacists filed suit. "There is a law in Illinois that allows pharmacists and pharmacies to allow their rights to conscience to take precedence over these kinds of things," he notes. Rooney believes the governor's executive order requiring them to dispense and sell the drugs was illegal. "When you have a duly enacted statute of law by the legislature, it always takes precedence over an executive order," he points out. Blagojevich's executive order, according to Rooney, has already hurt the pharmacy industry in Illinois. "There were businesses going out of business," he adds. "There were pharmacists that were being let go -- all because they had deeply held religious beliefs and deeply held moral beliefs." The state Supreme Court has ruled that pharmacists should be heard, so a trial will soon be held in a lower court." I encourage everyone to pray that pharmacists will be successful in their fight to not dispense "abortion" pills to the public because it violates their religious beliefs.