Gaul Atreides (@gaulatreides)

Normally, a massive surge of armed invaders is repelled by firepower, without much worrying about the moral implications by those defending the homeland. The moral justification is settled by the simple goal of protecting the people and the territory from aggressive overrun by foreigners. But remove the weapons from the invaders, and the morality becomes trickier for a lot of Whites who have a finely calibrated sense of fair play. The same invasion, but with human bodies instead of human bodies armed with guns, gives pause to Whites conditioned on the concept of 'just war'. Whites will have to get over their squeamishness. The end result will be the same whether the invaders are armed or unarmed: territorial expansion by invading foreigners leading to the subjugation of native Whites when the mass of invaders pass a critical threshold of numerical dominance. The judeocracy understands this basic nature of Whites, and uses it against them. Bum rush the borderlands, but do it under the guise of "migration", "refugees", "asylum", or even "unarmed invasion", and Whites will be paralyzed to inaction. If we allow ourselves to be played by hostile mindfuckers, then we will lose everything. EVERYTHING. So make the tough choices now before it's too late.