Raegus

Explain?

LOL. You denied you ever posted it. And lmfao at the title under your name. It's official, you're a faggot. Now begone.

You know what this post contained, iphone f*ck*ng me over.

Yeah Okay Jerry Fletcher.

Go suck off Venom you fruity kike f*ck.

Three now

Yes. Thought I was going to catch a ten.

Yes, I am Dr. Doom. I try to wake up my brothers to the threat whites pose to them; making whites show their racism is generally the best way to do it. All whites are racist just not all are willing to show it so quickly. Whites are our enemy because they CHOOSE to be our enemy. However in recent times I have tried to understand the other side. There's always three sides to a story after all; your side, their side and the truth. I try to keep emotions out of my racial teachings and stick to the facts. I see what you mean regarding different paths however we are not different species; we are both Homo Sapiens Sapiens. Although whites do, on average, have 1-3% Homo Sapiens Neanderthal in their DNA; as was discovered in 2011. But even 100% Neanderthals were the same species as us. It's almost irritating to me for me to be racist because I understand how superficial race is but I know if blacks don't adopt racist views then we will be destroyed. The best way to wake them up is to exploit the past.

Honestly if this isn't some planned in advance vip2 hype then this was the best possible outcome really. Now you know 1) She wasn't raped 2) This is just the tip of what she's prepared to do. Girls that cry rape are heartless; guarantee she would watch a man go down for 5 years for her lie without shedding a single tear. 3) You can cut her off right now and not be in any worse condition. Sometimes it's nice to have a girl emotionally attached to you but she is f*ck*ng next guys and lying about it to you.

Well I am a secondary school teacher.

I think you're focusing on one particular point I made when it wasn't my most important point. I know the Chinese are a smart bunch of people. But their civilisation was wholly self-sufficient (whereas Europeans mainly got wealth from warring other European countries). They tried to avoid interaction with outside people where possible. They had no real interest in conquering or even exploring the rest of the world. Nothing, after all, could be better than the Chinese (in their opinion). You were inferring that white people are naturally more intelligent (or more 'capable') than other races and this is how you managed to conquer a very vast amount of the world. Firstly let me say there WAS individual greatness among white people that allowed them to push forward at times when sheer force alone wouldn't have necessarily guaranteed success. White men who were able to masterfully manipulate tribal beliefs (the most notable example of course would be Cortez destroying the Aztec civilisation) and gain unprecedented access to non-white civilisations where they could then proceed to f*ck things up from the inside, lol. And I'm not even trying to suggest white people have done what they have done due to some insatiable blood lust or natural propensity towards evil; it's not like they were gaining nothing out of it and just wanted to f*ck with non-whites. They were making serious loot; individuals were making fortunes that their descendants today are still enjoying. We can all look at it now and say how evil and terrible they were but at the end of the day it was monetary gain that spurred them to do what they did. I don't think white people of the past were an indecipherable, incomprehensibly evil bunch of people, they wanted to get dat dough. Secondly, as I said before, gunpowder obviously played a massive role in the success of European invasions. They still lost a number of battles with Africans even with the technological advantage. What I'm basically saying is that individual whites, for good or evil, definitely did prove their intellectual capabilities were astounding. But I think it's almost unfair to them and definitely untruthful for you to turn around and ascribe their individual talents to the entire white race. All this does is make people want to discredit these people because you've turned them into some kind of pseudo-proof for white superiority. They were great individuals and I believe any race in that position would have also offered up great individuals on the same level. The majority of any race are idiots; it's the great among us that count but the great do not always get the chance to shine.

Just stfu thun please.

Japanese. It IS capability. But not a capability only innate in white people but in all. They took the invention of the Chinese (Gunpowder) and used it to conquer the world, but you make it sound like it was a level playing field and white people just used their innate intelligence or what have you. The Chinese gave you a weapon and they couldn't possibly foresee how you would use it. You then used this weapon to subdue the native populations of other places through superior weaponry. Were you still using swords (your own invention) you would not have got very far in your conquests. Had the Chinese used their own invention in the way you did I (or you) would be sitting here debating with a Chinaman whether he is innately evil or not. Had they sold it to black people (who WERE trading with China before Europeans arrived) and black people had used it in the way you did etc etc, you get the point. Gunpowder is the key to your success (and it has most definitely been a success story for white people, congratulations bud) not any form of superior intelligence.

i'm insinuating that maybe you shouldn't be so quick to pass the buck and that maybe somewhere hidden deep inside the negroe cranium there lies a place where blacks are capable of independent thought, sheltered from the evil winds of white influence I mean I recognise that there's an obvious difference between the handling of race-related topics in the uk media and the unchallenged reinforcement of a gap between 2 social classes and then abandonment by foreign forces in Rwanda but as picks up, asians are a familiar target for many newspapers n we are being pitted against each other everyday in the media. Yet no genocide... a foreign people with quite dramatically different, often alien, values, morales and traditions have set up small colonies in the heart of every city and significant town in the past few generations and now take up quite a significant population of the country, an entire new class you could say and yet despite this occurring without the consent of the english people, and new fear-mongering headlines in the newspapers every week, still no genocide... the belgiums arguably worsened relationships between two social classes already existing within the country, which once left to their own devices started mass killin each other in record numbers, but how much of the blame can you feasibly pass on to europeans? So you're Asian? I see. Telling your real views or just trying to create a gap between blacks and whites? I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say you're not being a tr0ll. Firstly I want to address your last point since you seem to have ignored my entire post. I specifically said it was not (the massacre) caused by white people but was CONNECTED to white people. A fair amount of the problems in Africa have not been directly caused by white people but if you go back far enough you'll often find the seeds planted by white people. But if we even acknowledge this fact then suddenly we're "just blaming whitey" and they go into full defensive mode. Many whites would have you believe not a single evil act was committed by them and all they've ever done is help people (they helped Native Americans with population control, they helped some blacks escape Africa by taking them as slaves, they helped the Australian Aborigine by stealing their mixed race children from them etc). Now, so quick to pass the buck? Another way to say blaming whitey I suppose. That's not what's occurring here. It's not 'passing the buck' to point out foreign influence. There's nothing, NOTHING, I've said that you can't go and research right now. And no, it's not the scary joos just tampering with history to make the white man seem like a bad guy; I'm telling the truth. How does that equate to passing the buck? If you break a window and I get blamed for it am I passing the buck by saying you did it? I think it would be you who is passing the buck by saying I did it. That genocide may be coming yet; haven't you noticed the growing resentment of Asians (and blacks of course, but to a lesser degree)? And you're not exactly building bridges with the black community.

Lord have mercy

Why should a train have separate classes though? We all know it's for money but is it ethical? Of course it's ethical. I don't want to be seated next to riff raff such as yourself.

whilst your clearly a reasonably intelligent man and you've shown yourself capable of using common sense and a knowledge of history to reach logical conclusions in this thread you continue to expose yourself as a brainwashed liberal numpty people try pass the blame so hard it gets to the point where blacks must be incapable of any real independant thought in some people's heads, jus vulnerable puppets in pinkys hand, whether it comes to genocide in zimbabwe, "gang culture" in the uk or a footballer wifin a white bird must be a pretty destructive mindset to have tbh, but hey.......probably just another cause of the slave trade What are you insinuating? Whites have played no part in the current condition of blacks?

Lol you can't dispute part of what I'm saying and then complain there's too much discussion on it.

Yet you still come on here and have lovers tiffs with your ex (Thun). Cute. Black people were subjected to HORRIFIC cruelty and human rights violations not matched by anything else in human history. I'm surprised you think I'm trying to say differently. All I'm saying is that the original black people taken to America were not life-time slaves and were not human property. For the next 200 odd years they were. My point is that race-based slavery was an invention; at it's earliest point they were still using Irish slaves in the Caribbean (and Indian slaves in Africa, which some could consider ironic).

Probably not race based before because people weren't as aware about it as they are now. The internet and a dominating media force this kind of information into the daily lives of people, whether it is one sided or balanced or completely fictional. I find that a lot of people, from my own experience (not stating it as fact) tend to base their current opinions of races or people because of things that happened in the past, and thus aren't willing to attribute to the past, harbour grudges and live life like that. The gang culture cropping up in major cities in England is what I consider an example of that, but could very well be in response for white supremacists like the EDL. I disagree. The world became race based LONG before internet and media took hold. The world became race based around 500 years ago; and communications weren't much better then than they were in the time of the Ancient Roman Empire. It's easy to think race and racism is such a natural thing because it has dominated everything for so long. It's almost hard to imagine a society that doesn't take race into account. But this was fairly commonplace in the ancient world (priority was placed on tribe and nationality).

Why are you even still here faggot you think people have forgot you alleged gay relations with other VIP2 members? And yes, blacks were taken as indentured servants. I think the word servant is confusing you; this means they were temporary slaves not life-long ones.

Of course not.

The problem now, though, is that white superiority is ingrained in the minds of white people. They have made a world race based when it was not race based before.

Well, that's what white nationalists are always crying about. No, I think Tim Wise is right when he said it was a way for the white elite to divide and conquer poor whites/blacks in America and to stop them from rebelling. The tactic is usually still used in third world prisons today; giving one group a few privileges that makes them feel better than the other group and causes the other group to resent them (keep them fighting amongst each other and not fighting the guards). Let's not forget the Ancient Romans also had black slaves (and blacks in all positions of Roman society). Not one incident of racism in ancient history is recorded; even when the different looks of races are recorded (like how Ethiopian is the Ancient Greek word for 'man with burnt face'; but was not meant in a negative way). This wasn't the first time whites had come into contact with blacks in history and when blacks first came to America they were NOT slaves, they were indentured servants, the same deal poor whites were getting and could eventually go on to own land. It was some time after the first group of blacks had been in America that the form of slavery we know today was established.

The rights of women are bad in a lot of places. I find it almost offensive, lol, that you would try to use this as a justification for the actions of America when women are suffering from so much more in other parts of the world. America did not give two f*cks about the women of Libya; once Qaddafi wanted to use money backed by their own gold that's when America decided to get rid of him. That was my point. The Anglo Saxons were the ones to enjoy the vast majority of the loot from other countries. Sometimes I find it necessary to remember that there ARE different white ethnic groups and not all of them participated in the numerous evil deeds committed in the past. Does it make a difference? Maybe not. But it's still fact. I don't really believe in eye for an eye as such but really; white farmers were begging for what happened to them. I would've preferred a peaceful redistribution of wealth but I think it unlikely the white farmers would've agreed to that without bloodshed anyway. Yes he definitely exploited the hatred/fear of Jews to gain votes. Let's not forget that harsh treatment of Jews was nothing new in Europe and had been going on for at least a thousand years prior to the holocaust. Yes there are a number of methods American corporations are using to extract maximum profits from the suffering and needs of Africa.