Swastikas are band on Stormfront

Swastikas are band on Stormfront!

Shock! Horror!

Or so says ‘Sam’, a race warrior from Victoria.

Apparently, the ban is a result of Don I have a cunning plan Black’s recent decision to clean up the image of the racist trash on Stormfront.org.

No easy task.

In the thread devoted to discussing this about-face, poor old ‘apteryx’ — another “fair dinkum Aussie patriot”, and member of the forum since August 2001 — was not happy, Don. And neither, apparently, was Don’s disciple, ‘Steelcap Boot’ aka Paul Innes (aka ‘Beanie Baby’), who has promptly “band” apteryx, presumably as a result of his whinging. “This is what happens when mental midgets rule” howled apteryx in protest at the removal of his God-given right to fly the swastika online.

Another pea-brained member (and ah, ‘anarchist’), PanEuropeanAnglo, explains the ruling this way: Swastikas “have a bad rep due to mass brainwashing about being a “hate” symbol”. A sensitive new age racist, PEA-brain reckons that fans of the swastika should “Let SF be a cot for pro-white infants… it needs to have a softer approach. After all, type in anything vaguely to do with whiteness and pride in Google, SF is the first hit each and every single time”.


Note that PEA-brain claimed credit on behalf of the New Right/National Anarchists for the complaint lodged by the owners of mathaba.net regarding my blog; note further that Welf Herfurth, Der Führer of NR/NA, is a regular contributor to the self-styled ‘alternative news service’.

From under his blanket, a local Ku Klux Klown strongly disagrees with Black’s decision to whitewash Stormfront.org. “If the newcomers had any brains at all” — a rather dubious assumption, I suspect — “they would easily overcome the symbolism [and] eventually … face the fact [that] the swastika [is] a major part of our history, so the best time to learn this is right at the start of their awaking”. By which term I think the man in the white bed sheet means ‘awakening’.

Another fair dinkum Aussie patriot incredulously asks: “What’s next? Holocaust denial?”

Surely not!

But it gets better. In response to apteryx’s tearful complaint:

Steelcap Boot: “I do not class Mr Don Black a mental midget.”
PEA-brain: “I don’t believe [apteryx] was referring to Don when he made that statement.”



Sam: “I understand censorship perfectly. Fact is that swastikas are band, news or not. We have a lot of people coming on to this site who are guest if they see thousands of swastikas they will think we are just a bunch of Nazi’s which isn’t true.”
Steelcap Boot: “Perhaps this is the same type of thing that the police have to deal with. Police have to unhold the law of the land. Land says indicate when turning a corner. Driver passes test to get license.”

Somehow, I don’t think Mensa will be rushing to induct the brains trust at Stormfront any time soon.

The nightmare continues:

Sam: “Its important that people take us seriously and we are not the stereotype that the Jew portrays us to be.”
Manolis Turbo: “Much agreed but that don’t mean we have to bend to their will. I understand that Stormfront is not a democracy but the swastika is a powerful symbol of our ancestors and it should not be banned because it offends the status quo. I’m 100% Romanian but I grew up in the States and have US citizenship and the swastika is part of my ethnicity. Part of who I am. It is an old symbol used by my ancestors as well as by their descendants such as my grandfather and my great grandfather, both of whom fought under the swastika. Succumbing to PC rules of not offending Jews with an ancient symbol of White heritage means rolling over for our enemies and promulgating cowardice among our own kind.”

Unfortunately for Mister Manolis, Mister Black disagrees.

Everybody has the right to be stupid, but some people abuse the privilege

And one of the worst offenders is ‘Tony Whitemore’; his offences, which have been many, have been committed on my alternate blog during the course of April 2008. I submit the following evidence into the court record.

Exhibit A

Hey, that’s funny, I never mentioned race on neither one of my comments — trying to pull that ‘Race doesn’t exist’ non-sense, garbage, rot on myself. Just explains your ignorance and prejudice for not throwing that towards the Indigenous Australia’s when they plea for their God-given rights.

Oh, yeah, is you believe race doesn’t exist, why are you able to make distinctions?

…that’s right, it’s because you wish to see White Europeans destroyed.


Tony: During this time, Europeans made up roughly 30-40% of the world’s population — now, it’s around 5%. The fact is, Europeans are being displaced around all corners of the globe.

Andy: Huh? During what time? What are you talking about? Further, what do you mean by “displaced”?


[A graph / The End of Europe, Robert J. Samuelson, The Washington Post, June 15, 2005 / All 10 million Europeans: demographic collapse, Paul Treanor]

Stop playing!

Just admit what you are and stop interfering with Europeans’ future.

(I’ll post your article ‘Anarchy 102’ on Storm Front to get responses.)
Tony | 05.16.08 – 10:24 pm

Exhibit B

…I forgot, you are a hypocrite!
Tony | 05.16.08 – 10:35 pm

Exhibit C

Andy: “In other words, what do you mean by ‘European identity and culture’?”

That is a fairly dickhead question, so I’ll make it nice and simple.

Here’s a map of Europe.

Here’s the contents of Europe:

[Pictures 1, 2, 3 and 4.]

Andy: “Further, if anarchism and anti-fascism, for example, may be considered as being in some important respects a product of this culture, why shouldn’t anarchist and anti-fascist concerns be embraced by proponents of ‘European culture and identity’?”

First of all, anarchism is not a product of Europe:

3rd intermediate period (1070-712 B.C.) Another period of anarchy and chaos. For a short time the Libyans conquered Egypt and ruled as part of the 22nd dynasty.”

The Warring States period is usually interpreted as a time of endless brutal wars that came as a result of friction among the seven states and that this unfortunate state of affairs could end only with one state bringing all into one empire. This interpretation is probably propaganda for the “One China” policy. First of all the Warring States period was not so bleak. It was a time of great intellectual ferment. The Confucian philosophers Mencius and Hsun-tzu taught and wrote during the period. Administrative systems were developed for territorial states to replace the methods that worked only for relatively small city states. The wars that occured were not generally ones due to diplomatic or territorial frictions among the seven states but instead were wars stemming from one state attempting to conquer and control all of the states. In other words, the formation of the empire came not as a result of anarchy but as a result of greed and drive for power. The wasteful and bloody conquest of the separate states was justified as an unfortunate necessity to end the era of anarchy, but the wars were primarily those of empire-building”

…and define ‘Anti-Fascism’?

Can you prove that the [arbitrary] term ‘ Anti-Fascism’ doesn’t necessarily = anti-white?

[Anarchy 101: Race and Anarchy 102: Race]

Those article are a mere representation of yourself: long… and makes very little sense… but more importantly, doesn’t answer my questions.
Tony | 05.17.08 – 12:15 am

Dion: December 12, 2007: “As I stated on the [Bombshell] forum Andy, you are a liar, a hypocrite and no better than the trash that you fight against.”

About @ndy

I live in Melbourne, Australia. I like anarchy. I don't like nazis. I enjoy eating pizza and drinking beer. I barrack for the greatest football team on Earth: Collingwood Magpies. The 2024 premiership's a cakewalk for the good old Collingwood.
This entry was posted in !nataS. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Swastikas are band on Stormfront

  1. yobo yoyyy bobby says:

    apteryx is a kiwi.

  2. @ndy says:

    yes. and a kiwi who should obviously stop putting his sticky beak into don black’s business.

  3. Whitemore says:

    Hey, Andy, you are still dodging my questions.

    If a large group of Europeans decided to band together and form their own society: Would you show a profound opposition; or just think it’s a silly idea and ignore it?

  4. Whitemore says:

    I will ask you a question:

    If a group of Europeans decided to form their own society, would you go out and oppose it, or ignore it?

  5. @ndy says:

    (The above two comments were caught in the spam filter.)

    A. It depends. In a thread on Sydney Indymedia, in response to local fascist arguments in favour of establishing white enclaves in contemporary Australia, I referred to two examples of ‘Europeans’ — Australians and Germans — attempting to establish a white separatist community:

    “It wouldn’t be the first time such attempts have been made, the most famous of which, in terms of Australian history, was William Lane’s attempt to establish just such a community, ‘New Australia’, in Paraguay in the 1890s. Then again with the settlement of ‘Cosme’. Both flopped, as did ‘Nueva Germania’, also established in Paraguay (by German White supremacists, inspired by a mis-reading of Nietzsche).”

    My reaction, if someone were to attempt to do so again, would be to point out its racist underpinnings, and suggest that it’s likely doomed to failure. Beyond this, I probably wouldn’t care all that much.

    So, that’s the answer to that question. Apparently you have more…

  6. @ndy says:

    On ‘race’:


    The term ‘race’ is an artificial construct used to classify people on the basis of supposed physical and cultural similarities deriving from their common descent. The Runnymede Trust (1993) provides a useful discussion of the word ‘race’:

      The words ‘race’ and ‘racial’ are much used in modern society – in everyday conversation, as also in legislation and in the media. Phrases such as ‘race relations’, ‘race row’, ‘racial equality’, ‘racial group’, ‘racial harmony’ and so on are in frequent use. However, they are not at all satisfactory. They are remnants of a belief formed in previous centuries, now discredited, that human beings can be hierarchically categorised into distinct ‘races’ or ‘racial groups’ on the basis of physical appearance, and that each so-called race or group has distinctive cultural, personal and intellectual capabilities.

      Modern science has shown that the biological category of race is meaningless when applied to the human species. Biologically, the human species shares a common gene pool, and there is much more genetic variation within each so-called racial group than between them (p 57).

    Despite having no biological basis, the idea of distinct races still exists as a social construct. In many societies it is a basis of social action, a foundation of government policy and often a justification for distinctive treatment of one group by another. Divisions in society continue to be made along perceived racial lines and associated disadvantages exist for those groups who are assumed to be physically or culturally different from the dominant cultural group. Although there is no scientific evidence to support the existence of human races, human beings tend to assume racial categories and to take them seriously. They do so for social, not biological, reasons.


    Audrey Smedley, Brian D. Smedley, Race as Biology Is Fiction, Racism as a Social Problem Is Real: Anthropological and Historical Perspectives on the Social Construction of Race, American Psychologist, January 2005 (PDF)


    Race: The Power of an Illusion, PBS documentary series, 2003

    On ‘race’ in Australia:


    John Pilger:

    Fixed Race, August 21, 1999
    Australia: the 51st State, March 1, 2007


    The class issues behind Australia’s race riots, Socialist Equality Party, December 22, 2005

    On anarchism:


    An Anarchist FAQ Webpage


    Peter Kropotkin, Anarchism, Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1910


    Anarchism: From Theory to Practice, Daniel Guerin (English translation, 1970)

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.