Whites will be slaughtered unless they give up all their land for free-says leading S Africa's politician
« prev   Racism   next »

2
3

Whites will be slaughtered unless they give up all their land for free-says leading S Africa's politician

By anonymous following x   2017 Nov 1, 7:06am 1,329 views   58 comments   watch   quote     share    


http://whitegenocideproject.com/whites-will-slaughtered-unless-give-land-south-africa-says-leading-politician/ #Racism #Genocide

Julius Malema, the leader of South Africa’s Economic Freedom Fighters (Communist and very anti-White), literally says that they won’t slaughter Whites — yet — as long as they give them what they want.

“The land must be expropriated without compensation.”

“We are not calling for the slaughter of White people, at least for now.”

“The rightful owners of the land are Black people. No White person is a rightful owner of the land here in SA and the whole of the African Continent.

« First    « Previous     Comments 19 - 58 of 58     Last »

19   Quigley   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 3:09pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Ever wonder what pre-colonial African society was like? Wonder no more.
The tribes were split into a two part caste system. Zulus were the warrior caste, and they lived separate from the Bantu class which were not allowed to have much in the way of warriors and certainly no fortified defenses. The Zulu chief or king of the area they claimed for their own would set his warriors to prey upon neighboring Bantu tribes, raiding them for grain, cattle, and women. These raids were always bloody, as they had a dual nature: to pillage and also control Bantu population.

The Zulu caste controlled its own population with a rigid code. The chief decided who would marry and when. If you pleased the chief with your exploits as a warrior, you would be allowed to take one or more wives. If not, you were prohibited from impregnating any woman on pain of death for you both!

So the Zulus existed as pirate kings of the Serengeti, and the Bantu were their cattle to be farmed and slaughtered as the chief saw fit. This went on for probably thousands of years, man emulating nature. Disney’s The Lion King contains more truth about tribalism than it lacks. The lions control the herbivore population and also control their own population with infanticide. Much as the Zulus performed that role.

Perhaps if you dream of living a green and natural life in perfect tune with ecology, this would seem ideal. But consider the life of a lowly Bantu, working to scrape out a living and raise children when both could be taken and slaughtered by the Zulus at any moment.

Africans under colonialism fared objectively much better. They had more more to eat, better order, and the whites killed enough Zulus to keep them in line.

Communism broke the system before the blacks were educated and acculturated enough to become equal partners with the colonialists. Blacks were encouraged to rise up and attack the whites and drive them from the land. Some of the first places this happened were Mozambique and Rhodesia, which the latter is now known as the failed state of Zimbabwe.
SA resisted this for much longer, but couldn’t keep it up in the face of world condemnation.
As soon as the blacks were given the vote, the government changed entirely, with the whites now on the outside looking in.
Whatever happens now, it will be at the orders of black leaders, not white.
21   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 3:24pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Quigley says
Ever wonder what pre-colonial African society was like? Wonder no more.


You have a long way to go on representing all African societies, pre 1800s. That fills many many books worth.

Quigley says
Africans under colonialism fared objectively much better. They had more more to eat, better order, and the whites killed enough Zulus to keep them in line.


Slaves fared better under their masters as well right? Next you will tell me the newly formed S.A. really was under threat from the Zulu's and needed to go wipe them out, al-la justification or the Zulu wars?

Quigley says
which the latter is now known as the failed state of Zimbabwe.


You cannot insert yourself into a country, destroy the progression and society of the people, take their right of self determination, and when you leave suddenly expect things not to revert back to where they were or typically a lot lot worse. Countless historical examples.

As to European triableness: What did Germany look like pre-Roman Empire? Post? Before unification into the german state? A class system present at any time? Slaves?

The point is, historically, human nations and civs. all have horrible points in their histories. A European 'superiority', or kindness in its colonialism of Africa, was anything but. Laughable to think they were "better off". The entire continent would have been better if Europeans never set a foot on the soil. Europe and America are however overwhelmingly rich today due to our continued exploitation of the region. Hold up your smart phone.
22   Satoshi_Nakamoto   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 3:29pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

anon_4ca64 says
If people of different ethnicity are equal in intellectual capacity, but widespread social inequalities endure, it must be the case that whites have some deviate, structural and hidden ways to ensure their superior wealth.
In this context, it makes sense that they should donate most of what they have as a way to right a wrong and atone for their past crimes.
Any attempt for them to resist this is tantamount to white nationalism. It can only be justified by the deliberate racism and willingness to oppress people of color, and, yes, at some point in the future it may justify a slaughter.


And once their own white compatriots have been slaughtered they will rely on outside whites to constantly bail them out of various shitty situation they find themselves in. Case in point - Haiti.
23   Strategist   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 3:46pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Quigley says
The Zulu caste controlled its own population with a rigid code. The chief decided who would marry and when. If you pleased the chief with your exploits as a warrior, you would be allowed to take one or more wives. If not, you were prohibited from impregnating any woman on pain of death for you both!


Sounds like the Zulus discovered 'natural selection' before Darwin did.
24   APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE   ignore (5)   2017 Nov 1, 3:54pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

This is EXACTLY! what Obamam did in the USA!

Time to nuke Jo'burg!
25   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 4:05pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

KimJongUn says
And once their own white compatriots have been slaughtered they will rely on outside whites to constantly bail them out of various shitty situation they find themselves in. Case in point - Haiti.


Another fine case of colonialism and occupations by rival European tribes. Hey, America even got in on the action for fear that Germany might lay claim first!
26   anon_4ca64   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 4:12pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Whether it is justified or not, resentment of people of color against whites seems to be on the rise.
After 2 Obama mandates, they throw out King's 'dream' , and cultivate that resentment.
27   anon_4ca64   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 4:14pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

The worst that could happen in the US would be for the Democrats to become THE party representing people of color, and the republicans representing whites only.
28   anon_4ca64   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 4:15pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
See any worthy anarcho-primitivism critique of why human genetics or racial differences are bogus with regards to cultural dominance of a race.


I don't see any worthy "anarcho" anything.
29   Quigley   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 4:29pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
The entire continent would have been better if Europeans never set a foot on the soil.


Better off perhaps in the same way that an untouched nature preserve is better off for being untouched. Africans in subsaharan Africa were going nowhere as far as civilization is concerned and hadn’t in millennia. You can argue differently about Ethiopia and other northern nations which had been in contact with other civs for millennia and grown in sophistication as a result.
30   anon_52708   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 5:47pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Strategist says
The world is full of crazy wack jobs. We need to change our laws to prevent them from spreading their filth


great timing. This was followed by:

Tenpoundbass says
I'm all for a Global "Put that thing back where you found it" day.
31   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 1, 6:34pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Quigley says
Ever wonder what pre-colonial African society was like? Wonder no more.
The tribes were split into a two part caste system. Zulus


Nice, except the part where the Zulu kingdom didn't exist in pre colonial Africa. The colonization of Africa stared with Antonio de Noli mid 1400's. The Zulu kingdom arose in the late 1700's. The Zulu kingdom was centered around Bulawayo stretching roughly from Port Natal to Richards Bay. That would be about .001% of africa.
32   epitaph   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 8:44pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      



Looks like South Africa has a tough road ahead.
33   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 9:20pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Quigley says
... were going nowhere as far as civilization is concerned and hadn’t in millennia.


Which is actually the standard state of human existence. Alien invaders, essentially, robbed them of ever being able to rise to anything else, and still do to this day. The only defense of that is (shrug), it's tribal human nature.

Europeans are not some gift to humanity or the world. We got lucky.
34   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 10:09pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

anon_4ca64 says
The worst that could happen in the US would be for the Democrats to become THE party representing people of color, and the republicans representing whites only.


Almost there and making quite a lot of steps toward that with Trump in office.
- 8% of the black vote, and just over 1/4 of the Hispanic and Asian-american vote to Trump.
- He is barley carrying 20% of non-white voters now. Women and minorities well over 60% strongly disapprove. (according to FOX's last poll)
35   lostand confused   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 10:43pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
Alien invaders, essentially, robbed them of ever being able to rise to anything else, and still do to this day. The only defense of that is (shrug), it's tribal human nature.

Liberal logic as usual. Arabs invaded and occupied Spain for four centuries. Then theyw ere kicked out and Spain colonized alrge swaths of the world. A small country like Portugal colonied amny parts of the world.

Teaching people to be lifelong vicitms-leftie mantra-neevr helps them. Fight, get back on your feet and sometimes you can't accept -but stop with this colonial nonsense. India and China were huge powers for long, they fell and now are rising again.
Japan was bombed -look at the difference between N and S Korea. Leftis ideology always keeps people down-becaus eit teache syou nothing is every your fault.
36   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 11:26pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

lostand confused says
Liberal logic as usual. Arabs invaded and occupied Spain for four centuries. Then theyw ere kicked out and Spain colonized alrge swaths of the world. A small country like Portugal colonied amny parts of the world.


When your culture is made to fail by external oppression, it takes a little bit of time to "get back on your feet" once that oppression is removed. The longer the oppression lasted, and the more brutal it was, the harder it is to recover.

I'd argue today that most African nations still have quite a ways to go in both removal of foreign interest, and their timelines of 'development' essentially being reset.

lostand confused says
India and China were huge powers for long, they fell and now are rising again.


90% of the African continent was under European control by the beginning of WWI. India and China had kicked out the Brits over 50 years prior. African nations are some of the youngest on the planet.

Have you read any single African history book, or literature, at all? If so, please provide the title.

Have you ever been to any African country? Which country(ies)?

Do you understand the advantages and disadvantages to the development of human civilizations with regards to low bio-diversity regions of the planet and how that compares to high bio-diversity regions? Do you know what it means for farming and ranching?

lostand confused says
teaches you nothing is every your fault.


Republican leanings these days seem to be quite hypocritical on the point of personal responsibility (Trump, O'Reilly, etc.).

I cannot make any logical leap which says the invaded and colonized are at personal fault for what befalls them. Would you care to extend blame to those people who have genocide and war crimes committed against them? What about those that get assassinated, murdered, or just robbed?

If we follow that to its logical conclusion, no law or order is needed, since victims are always at fault. If a person doesn't want something bad to happen to them, just don't let it happen, right?

I find your thinking here simplistic and ignorant. Sorry.
37   Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 1, 11:46pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

lostand confused says
Japan was bombed


Why did the US and allies put reconstruction of Germany and Japan as a primary goal post WWII? Why didn't we treat them like Germany post WWI?
What did we do to rebuild them? And how is their WWII occupation and reconstruction different from the dawn of post-colonial African nations from the 40s to 60s?

If you can answer those questions, you can understand how asinine it is to compare Japan's post WWII state, with African post colonial states.

Vietnam is a closer compare, but not by much.
38   HEY YOU   ignore (7)   2017 Nov 1, 11:54pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Anyone have a clear title back to Adam & Eve?
39   lostand confused   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 2, 4:45am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
When your culture is made to fail by external oppression, it takes a little bit of time to "get back on your feet" once that oppression is removed. The longer the oppression lasted, and the more brutal it was, the harder it is to recover.

I'd argue today that most African nations still have quite a ways to go in both removal of foreign interest, and their timelines of 'development' essentially being reset.

As usual you ignore evidence. Spain was ruled over by Arabs, they came out of it and kicked ass. india was ruled by the British, they are kicking ass. You are not helping these people. Rwanda was not being ruled by colonial powers when they had the genocide.

As a non white, I hate these patronizing. I believe everyone is equal-hold them accountable. Kumbayah, kumbayah, whit privileged blah, blah.

Rew says
Why did the US and allies put reconstruction of Germany and Japan as a primary goal post WWII? Why didn't we treat them like Germany post WWI?
What did we do to rebuild them? And how is their WWII occupation and reconstruction different from the dawn of post-colonial African nations from the 40s to 60s?

If you can answer those questions, you can understand how asinine it is to compare Japan's post WWII state, with African post colonial states.


You are so racist/whatever. You actually believe our little help is what helped them. Nobody helped India or China or Singapore or Malaysia-look at them now. As usual evidence, facts never help. Who helped Spain who got out of four centuries of Arab rule-they got out and kicked ass. It is asinine to keep countries in chains and blaming what someone did decades or even centuries ago-you are not treating them s equals-you are being racist and saying they are beneath others and incapable of doing things and being successful on their own even after decades. All because it makes you feel good and superior.

Have you even been to any big African city like Nairobi or Durban or Cape Town or Cairo??
40   anon_2d50f   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 2, 6:32am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says

Europeans are not some gift to humanity or the world. We got lucky.


Something that always gets totally ignored. A fortunate combination of domesticable crops, domesticable animals, temperate climate, vast mineral resources, fertile land, and deciduous forests. that didn't exist anywhere except Europe until the discovery of America that allowed for sustained growth for 2 millennium. Only China is the only place that even began to approach Europe’s natural resources.
41   anon_2d50f   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 2, 6:35am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

lostand confused says

Liberal logic as usual. Arabs invaded and occupied Spain for four centuries. Then theyw ere kicked out and Spain colonized alrge swaths of the world. A small country like Portugal colonied amny parts of the world.


Muslims were run out of Spain in the 12th and 13th century. Spanish conquest started in the 16th century. Shall we wait another 350 years and see how Africa does?

lostand confused says
Have you even been to any big African city like Nairobi or Durban or Cape Town or Cairo??


I've been to Cape Town, 4 yeas ago. It is NOT a big city and it is not very black. What is your point?
42   Quigley   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 4, 10:26am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says

I'd argue today that most African nations still have quite a ways to go in both removal of foreign interest, and their timelines of 'development' essentially being reset.


Without the foreign influence, they’d still be chucking spears and sacrificing newborns to Kali while living in mud huts and putting bones in their noses.
If that’s progress, it’s too slow. They didn’t have the Luxury of being able to be tribals for another three thousand years. Throughout history, more competitive organisms displaced less competitive organisms. It’s Darwinian and harsh, but it’s Nature.

I’d argue that culture is the best predictor of progress. Theirs was adapted to their environment, but that very adaptive trait made it perfectly stagnant. No change means no progress means eventually the culture must die. The Europeans had a kick ass culture developed over hundreds of years that was the reason they overcame every other civilization they encountered. Advanced technology was a product of the culture, not an innate trait of Europeans themselves.

Culture is still the most defining trait of any civilization or ethnic group. It determines how successful its members will be. Not successful? Probably not because of oppressive Europeans. It’s because your culture SUCKS and can’t compete with a better one.

Multiculturalism is a naked attempt to say that all cultures are equal, but historical evidence CLEARLY shows that they are anything but equal.
43   Quigley   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 4, 10:29am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

anon_2d50f says
Something that always gets totally ignored. A fortunate combination of domesticable crops, domesticable animals, temperate climate, vast mineral resources, fertile land, and deciduous forests. that didn't exist anywhere except Europe until the discovery of America


And America was already inhabited! Millions of American Indians lived here and had their own civilization. They didn’t progress despite having ridiculous amounts of resources. Once again, you are wrong. CULTURE is the reason! It’s always the reason!
44   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 4, 12:21pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Quigley says
And America was already inhabited! Millions of American Indians lived here and had their own civilization. They didn’t progress despite having ridiculous amounts of resources. Once again, you are wrong. CULTURE is the reason! It’s always the reason!


What civilization didn't they have? There were quite a number of advanced civilizations in the Americas in the pre columbian era. Europe wasn't all that advanced in the 15th century either. European culture is 35,000 years old. The Americas is only 13,000 years old. How advanced was Europe 22,000 years ago despite having ridiculous amounts of resources?
45   Quigley   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 4, 1:36pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

bob2356 says
European culture is 35,000 years old.


Don’t confuse race with culture. The fact that you made this statement means you have no idea what culture even is.
46   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 4, 2:20pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Quigley says
bob2356 says
European culture is 35,000 years old.


Don’t confuse race with culture. The fact that you made this statement means you have no idea what culture even is.


Europe isn't a race. There were many races in europe dating back to Palaeolithic times. Races like nordic, alpine, dinaric, hither asiatic, east baltic were all part of middle Palaeolithic and subsequent cultures.

Want to tell me what culture is and why everyone except you calls it pre historic cultures then?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_table_of_the_principal_old_world_prehistoric_cultures
47   FortWayne   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 4, 2:27pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

They sound like the left wing these days, aka Democratic party.
48   Quigley   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 4, 6:00pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

bob2356 says
Want to tell me what culture is and why everyone except you calls it pre historic cultures then?


Culture is the set of traditions and values a society uses to shape the preferred actions of its citizens. These are subject to change, and change occurs every generation to some extent. Religion usually plays a HUGE part in shaping culture, and European culture was greatly shaped by religion. Religion acts as a force for cultural stagnation, keeping culture from changing radically from generation to generation. Each time a new religion is adopted, it transforms a culture drastically. Clearly, the change of religion (to Christianity) in Europe shaped the various cultures of the region and served as the common denominator between the nations of Europe. So probably the traditions of that religion contain the elements of cultural transformation. It’s really the only thing they all had in common.

Clearly, the resultant European cultures had little to nothing to do with “ancient cultures from 35,000 years ago.” Sheesh!
49   Strategist   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 4, 6:08pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rew says
lostand confused says
Japan was bombed


Why did the US and allies put reconstruction of Germany and Japan as a primary goal post WWII? Why didn't we treat them like Germany post WWI?
What did we do to rebuild them? And how is their WWII occupation and reconstruction different from the dawn of post-colonial African nations from the 40s to 60s?

If you can answer those questions, you can understand how asinine it is to compare Japan's post WWII state, with African post colonial states.

Vietnam is a closer compare, but not by much.


In the old days the loser would get plundered, pillaged, raped, and enslaved. We now have a better way....Remove the dictators, emperors, and kings, give them democracy, help them rebuild, and their will be peace and prosperity for all. Everyone benefits.
We tried that with Iraq, but did not work there, because of Islam.
50   TwoScoopsMcGee   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 4, 6:24pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

How about the Chinese occupation of Vietnam over the ages?
The Islamic Conquest of India (and North Africa, and Syria, Israel, Lebanon...)
The Mongol Conquest of Siberia and Eastern Europe?

In any case, culture has real effects. If you believe that worship of agriculture is the epitome of a good society, you'll disassemble Zheng He's ships. You'll burn whatever is left of the Library of Alexandria because if it's in the Quran, it's superfluous; if it contradicts the Quran, heretical.

Ironically, the real boom in science 700-1000 was because the Greek speaking not-yet-converted Egyptians had the crushing burden of the Byzantine-Persian wars removed from them. As Turks and Mongols began invading the Muslim World, Islam turned on science and skepticism in favor of obscurantism and a re-devotion to hardcore religious belief, starting with a huge "crescent-sade" to Islamize the remaining Hellenized Eastern Med. A few centuries later, the Europeans would begin to privilege science and reason (which started with failing in love with Latin and Greek writings, ironically brought to Italy when the Orthodox Greeks fled intolerant Muslim Arab demanding conversion, and the fall of Byzantium by the Turks) over religion and superstition, and thus the superior European culture choice began to create dividends.

There was no reason China couldn't have conquered the world in 1400, it didn't do so not because Chinese are nice, but arrogant. They felt they lived in the middle country, the most central under heaven, and barbarians should come to them with presents. When the Europeans arrived in the 1700s and 1800s, the Chinese dealt with them the same way they dealt with Turkics... it didn't work, because the Europeans "came from the Southern Ocean" and didn't have to schlep through the arid plains of Xichang province.

A culture who believes Heavy Infantry should come to grips with the enemy as soon as possible, tends to win battles against Flower Warriors who are looking for prisoners to sacrifice, in order to gain promotion and reknown when the prisoners are sacrificed to the blood hungry sun.
51   anon_6a185   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 4, 6:47pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Quigley says

Culture is the set of traditions and values a society uses to shape the preferred actions of its citizens.


Then you are agreeing by your own definition that there were a number of advanced cultures in the america's pre columbus.

Quigley says

Clearly, the resultant European cultures had little to nothing to do with “ancient cultures from 35,000 years ago.


So you think the stone age (especially the neolithic period when agriculture, social, and technological development came about) leading to the copper age leading to the bronze age leading to the iron age leading to written records leading to classical antiquity had little or nothing to do with the development of modern European culture? What a bizarre thought.
52   Quigley   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 4, 8:54pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Little difference between that and what happened in Africa since we all came from African back then! Agriculture, flint knapping, bronze working and even iron working were all common to every continent (except the americas) long before colonial times. The Africans were like the townies who never left to see the wide world, and got stuck in the same rut their ancestors were in for countless centuries. Anyone who left a small town for the big city will relate. You come back “home” and everyone seems so quaint and backwards it’s almost laughable.
53   HEY YOU   ignore (7)   2017 Nov 5, 9:27am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Rhymes with White Eyes taking Native Americans' land.
54   TwoScoopsMcGee   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 5, 9:44am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

They could only work the softest metals, no Bronze or Iron. They didn't have sea going vessels, something the Old World had for 1000s of years already (taking a canoe to the beach != sea going vessel)

Aztec culture was violent and brutal and oppressive. The Triple Alliance fought "Flower Wars" to gather prisoners and rip out their still beating hearts to satisfy their Great Feathery Lizard. They demanded tribute from conquered people, which is how Cortez ended up with thousands of Aztec-oppressor hating Indians fighting by him.

They didn't even employ the wheel, FFS
55   TwoScoopsMcGee   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 5, 9:50am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

HEY YOU says
Rhymes with White Eyes taking Native Americans' land.


Learn from history. Restrict immigration.

LEFT : "Ha, ha, Middle America Bigots, you're afraid of millions of immigrant Aliens. Muh Juuuubbbbsss! LOL, dumbasses. Also, you should feel bad and personally responsible for dispossessing the Indians when millions of Whites immigrated to the continent." ?!?!?!?!

Also LEFT: "Fuckin' Israel, give the land back to the Palestinians. Fuckin' America and Fuckin' Europeans, you better invite Africans, Mid Easterners, and South Americans by the Millions!"

Shit you'll never hear Lefties say: "If Trump wins I'm moving to Venezuela or Angola" It's always Canada or Japan, homogenous countries with very little "Diversity".
57   Strategist   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 5, 7:03pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

LOL. ROFL.
Booger, can you post more of this shit? It was awesome.
58   Strategist   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 5, 7:07pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

And Yes, there is a strategy of distributing the land when you take it from the white people:
You will have to first Fuck your way through all the Black people.

« First    « Previous     Comments 19 - 58 of 58     Last »


Comment as anon_2a68a or log in at top of page: