yes, but death was a definite possibility. all so they need not carry any personal risk or struggle themselves. they decry weakness, mock fecklessness and worship strength, and in this worship of strength they radicalize and find the solution. diversity is weakness, unity is strength radicalization of western men the radicalization of young western men is not just unavoidable, but inevitable. the notion of a racial future or destiny is as foreign to them as social responsibilities. what do you want? due to the threat of ethnic replacement and our own horribly low birth rates, we do not have 150 years or even 50 years to achieve positions of power. diversity by its very definition belies equality. no. new zealand was not the original choice for attack, i only arrived to new zealand to live temporarily whilst i planned and trained, but i soon found out that new zealand was as target rich of an environment as anywhere else in the west. traitors deserve a traitors death.
australia, just like the rest of the colonies of europe, is simply an off-shoot of the european people. until these interlopers are repatriated to their peoples lands, then europe has no true sovereignty, and anyone, no matter their ethnicity or beliefs can call europe their own. lobby those in power to show your support, protest outside embassies of those nations that do not support the nation, and if need be attack them. even if we were to deport all non-europeans from our lands tomorrow, the european people would still be spiraling into decay and eventual death. because if we do not destroy the invaders first, our own birthrates will mean nothing. a gradual change is never going to achieve victory.
>by the definition, then yes.