theoccidentalobserver.netは安全ですか？

There's NO malware on this site! Jeez, how low do the haters have to stoop to silence free discourse? If one does not agree with the views expressed on this site, then don't visit it. Simple, isn't it? If all you haters had your way, we would be living in a '1984' type world where any thought outside of the State Established norm would be considered a crime. Wait...what? Oh....That's exactly what you want? OK, now I get it....you're facists.

This is a safe site. It contains political and philosophical opinions. Because of this, some people claim that it is unsafe, or has "hate speech". This is a plain and simple attempt to keep you from visiting the site. It is an attempt by some people to block opinions that they do not like = censorship. The site is safe.

First of all, any claim that this site will cause malware infections is complete BS. Privacy on the site is fine. I have found the articles to be pretty well written and thoughtful (several contributors have PhDs, including the site editor, Kevin MacDonald), and they come with plenty of citations. The focus is on "White interests" (defending White people and Western Civilization against "multi-culturalism" and "cultural Marxism") and on social/political activism on the part of Jewish individuals and organizations which are deemed to be detrimental or antagonistic toward whites as a group. The content is more of a critical examination of these topics than the venting of "hatespeech" (which I equate more with organizations such as Hammerskin Nation, Vanguard News Network, etc.). The nature of the material is definitely controversial, but it's written well enough that it's worth a look.

People who rate this site negatively are simply sheep to frightened of a differing opinion. Facts scare the fanciful; those who want to live in a world where it's the fad to resent the colour of their skin or their heritage because they feel some perceived guilt (for something that a) hasn't been a part of American History for generations, as the only slaves in America are the ones who pay taxes (what do you call it when the fruit of your labour is taken from you and 'distributed' to others who didn't share in the work?). Also, slavery was accepted the world over, LONG before the Founding Fathers signed their first document; but the practice of keeping another human being as property ENDED here (another shot heard 'round the world). Look it up, the first legal slave owner (would have made democrats proud, as he exploited the legal system) in the US was a black man. So if you want to hate, go hate the real hate sites, like planned parenthood, peta, FSTDT, NBPP, NAACP, ACLU and anything al-jazeera--those are the real faces of hate.

Visiting theoccidentalobserver.net may harm your computer Yandex has detected malware on this site that may harm your computer or gain access to your personal information. http://yandex.com/infected?l10n=en&url=theoccidentalobserver.net

I do know why people rate this site unsafe, but a difference in opinion is no reason to do such a thing, the only reason to rate a site poorly is real danger, such as Trojans, viruses, root-kits or the fact that a site would use your data in a wrong way... None of these apply to this site, so this site has to be rated fairly, and thus has to be rated safe... To all who rate this site badly, how would you guys feel if people who disagree with your opinion would rate you or your site's as dangerous, just based on their opinion of your ideas? Do any of you know who said "I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it"? If we, together, as a people do not live up to those words, the day will come that you will be silenced, as censorship never stops, and always expands into all areas and opinions... Remember the inquisition? Nobody was safe, even the greatest saints lived in fear... This is the only outcome if you go down the road of censorship... So please, rate sites not on their ideas, but only on their safety to be surfed without danger...

Yet another site that doesn't conform to the establisment view and is pilloried. As the person below says better than the NYTimes and many other so called pillars of the journalistic establishment Upgrade it right away I say. Hey I can read it on Twitter