Are you waiting for terrorists to attack?

Personally, I cannot wait another moment. What is taking them so long? 9/11 is like a wet dream, in my rememberance- I wish I had appreciated it more at the time. The freedom fighters in Iraq should really bring the battle over here. They're not doing anyone any damage by killing faceless Iraqi women and babies, no one gives a shit about them. I want to see New Yorker WASPs blown to dust again.

Anyone else feel this way?

YEAH KILL WHITEY!

So liberals hate whites, we know. You do realise it was the WORLD trade center and not the WASP trade center? Many muslims and negroes died, don't you care about them?

liberals hate whites? i disagree.

>>4 then you're ill-informed. Liberals hate men and they hate whites and they hate WHITE MEN most of all!

What does this have to do with liberals? I never said I was a liberal, and I said nothing liberal.

And if you think that more negroes, hispanics, and muslims worked in the World Trade Center than WASPs with humvees and Aryan children you're a fucking retard. The only innocent lives lost were the janitors.

"The only innocent lives lost were the janitors."

Either you're trolling (in REAL bad taste), or you're the most evil scumbag I've ever read.

Someone who enlists in the military and dies in the line of service is sad, but understandable because it's part of their job. But you want to know something? In a civilised society, you do not deserve to die just because you punched the clock at your investment firm one day.

NONE of those people in that building deserved to die, period; and only a sociopath would think that they did.

Too bad they just can't attack bumfuck places like Tenessee and Alabama.

But then again, there's nothing there to blow up that's worth anything.

>>7
A society is responsible for its actions. There are no innocents. You think our wealth came without a price?

I don't troll. This is how I feel.

Attacking the empty mid-west would accomplish nothing and would retribute no one, it would just be murder. The hurt extends from the victims, not the terrorists, and the mid-west victims would not respond nor would they feel how the victim should feel in order for the attack to be meaningful.

"NONE of those people in that building deserved to die, period; and only a sociopath would think that they did."

I realize I'm just being pedantic, but c'mon now. You can't really believe that. Out of 3,000 people you figure that a least a few of them had to be baby rapists or something.

>>9

I think that you need to read less noam choadsky and gb2/economics 101.

>>11
Because money justifies sins. Typical American selfdeception. gb2 your willy loman lifestyle.

>>9
And what "price," pray tell, does someone pay if, say, a broker earns money in the stock market for his clients? Of course, you sound like one of the Chomskyites who is religiously convinced that capitalism is unspeakably evil and founded upon killing little babies and stealing non-whites' money, but communism is a wonderful, glorious economic system, and if only the retard bumfuck Jesuslanders would realize that becoming slaves of the State is a great thing, humanity could achieve ultimate enlightenment.

>>12
Stop making the Internet stupider than it already is.

>>5
WTF are you talking about? Do you even know what the terms Liberal and Conservative really mean? Liberals hate white people? There are many white liberals. You think they hate themselves?

>>13

WTF? Chomsky doesn't believe in communism. He believe in a peaceful anarchy.

U FAIL

>>14
Yes, most white liberals are afflicted with severe white male guilt and do, in fact and unjustifiably, hate themselves.

They really need to get some self-esteem, though maybe the white serpremists may take it a bit too far (better too far than not far enough thou, amirite?).

>>15
The US never had an enemy that Chomsky wasn't enthusiastic about during his lifetime, with the singular puzzling exception of Hitler.  Chomsky especially loved the Khmer Rouge.

>>16
You like shit talking. Then I guess Condolleza Rice hates herself too,cause she is black and conservative. You can't put a race on Liberal or conservative.White liberals and black conservatives are all over.

>>17

So the fuck what, dude? Chomsky doesn't believe in communism. That's just a fact. He's an anarchist and anyone who's even heard of Chomsky fucking knows this.

U FAIL AGAIN.

>>18 Although Condoleeza Rice is the oreo's oreo, your analogy falls down in that conservative rhetorhic lacks a specific anti-black streak. Hell, in the eyes of the conservatives, the more uncle thoms who advance the cause of Big Business; the better!

Conversely, liberalism has a large, pronounced anti-white, anti-europe bias to it.

In short; conservatives don't mind it if the blacks climb up to their level; and the liberals (particularly in academia) aren't happy unless they are tearing down the whites.

>>20
Also liberals support socialism which obliterates the chance of immigrants and ethnic minorities who have legitimately been handed a bad card in life and experienced real racism (how is wanting to reduce immigration inherantly racist?) from starting their own business and succeeding in life.

If more blacks were conservatives many white teenagers would see they are working and living fulfulling lives and not be driven to racism. Instead most of them are socialists who think their only call in life is to work as a labourer and hand over their property to the government and for no one to have a say or earn a position in the economy.

>>20

First of all, the percieved privilages of white skin need to end, regardless. Doesn't matter if it's liberals or whomever. In order for something to be "torn down" it has to have been built up in the first place. Are you admitting the whites have an advantage?

Secondly, "Conservatives" as we know them in America are all about Big Business and not at all about the poor. Is it a coincidence that whites possess a majority of the wealth and most blacks are poor? I'm not saying Conservatism is for whites or anything that banal. I'm merely pointing out that the Conservatism movement in the U.S is primarily white, not black.

>>22
If anyone else on the planet was just as smart you know what? THEY WOOD HAF DEES PREVALLAGES 2 DEEERRHUUUU.
I dare you to go to say, China and be as much of an asshole whitebread suburban kid there as one can get away with here. WURS UR WHAT PREVALLAGE NOW SONNYBOY?

>>22
As a conservative I can say no conservative supports racism. It is plain evil, unfair, illogical and anti-meritocratic. Any conservative who is a racist is just using conservative ideals to push for racism and is a fraud. Besides, why would we support racism when a sizable portion of our voters have family who fought fascism or are an ethnic minority? With this in mind, if we want minority racial groups to have the same opportunities as everyone else, we conservatives certainly do not want any ethnic group to be held in poverty or to be 2nd class citizens.

IF the majority of blacks are liberals and the majority of blacks are poor and conservatives are not in anyway racist. How can you deduce that conservatives are the source of the problem? Racism and liberalism are the problems. Racism has been reduced it still exists though, but liberalism has grown in leaps and bounds since Malcolm X was killed for quitting the "nation of pseudo-islam". MLK's message wasn't "BE A LIBERAL LOL" it was "Enough of this bullshit.".

Both liberals and conservatives address the problem of racism, but what liberals don't address is that if money spent on welfare were spent on education and if there was a yuppy culture amongst blacks instead of a "FIGHT THE POWER" culture they would be a lot better off. We live in a free democracy, there will be no revolution and if you want to get ahead in life you have to work for it and achieve productive goals. When someone legitimately gets in the way of achieving your goals, then you are supposed to attack them and reveal the injustice. If you sit on your ass reading socialist propoganda all day and become convinced you have been cheated out of something you never botherred working for in the first place, then that's all you will do for the rest of your life until you change.

More Bill Cosby, less Tuki.

Conservatism is about keeping the status quo. If slavery was still allowed they would be for it. It supports classism and racism is a subset of that.

But uh, yuppies suck.
fucking suv fags. Got no taste in entertainment either.
Anyway, because of the rampant racism whites actually don't have privilige, though they can get whatever job they want the easiest. (some big whoop that is, who commits suicide over careers most often again?) Walking around minorities is like standing in the middle of verbal minefields, why do you think they're all afraid of you? Lawsuits, that's what. But anyway look at it this way. You have to be a perfect ROBOT in order to get it. Minorities do not have this problem so much. If you're a minority it's relatively easy to find work even if you're a big fat whale with purple hawk claws. Try finding work if you're white and have this appearance. Trick question, you can't. This is what keeps all the punks and goths in out-of-the-way minimarts, rather than in boardrooms. Blacks especially need to rebel against nothing, they've already bludgeoned the system to death in their favor, a majority are just too stoned to figure out how to use it.

Regardless of what you say boardrooms are still made up of predominantly males and mostly white ones.

>>22
>First of all, the percieved privilages of white skin need to end, regardless.
Bullshit; you level the playing field by bringing the lowest up the the level of the highest, NOT by punishing the people on the top.

Otherwise all you have is a race to the bottom. which is why we currently have the vapid culture that we have now. There's nothing lower than 50 Cent and Paris Hilton; but our 'everything has to fit the lowest common denominator' mentality has made it so that everything has to pander to the stupidest of the stupid.

>Doesn't matter if it's liberals or whomever. In order for something to be "torn down" it has to have been built up in the first place.

No, most liberals want to destroy the center, the baseline, and put those who are white on the level of 3rd world druges.

Anyone who is sane, democrat or republican, opposes that.

>Are you admitting the whites have an advantage?

That's a straw man; I am saying that there is a baseline (the middle class) and that everyone should be brought up to that baseline. Instead, liberals -particularly in academia- simply want to make a world where the whites live in huts while the blacks and other minorities take the place of donald trump.

>>27
Blacks are on ALL levels of government and industry -from the janitors to the surpreme court and, yes, the boardrooms, so gb2/1972 when they actually WERE a persecuted minority, instead of being part of mainstream america.

>>27
Only in white countries

in asian countries, it's a differentm atter

>>29 likewise for african and south american countries.

>>27

I'm not in a boardroom. 45% of the people below the poverty line in the US are white. That's several times the number of any other minority. Those boardrooms are over-represented with non-white people in a white country. The only social privelege about is non-white privilege and Jewish privilege (which is terrifyingly strong, enough to keep most people's mouths shut.) How many of those people in 'boardrooms' aren't white but Jews? Hmm? And since when did you determine 'boardroom qualifications' by race rather than by qualification. You see, businesses are about making money. They don't care about race unless the government forces them to. That's how my experience was. Asians certainly don't have any problems getting into 'the boardrooms.' Oh well, silly me, blacks couldn't get in there in sufficient numbers, and since there are ABSOLUTELY no differences between the races except for skin color, so I guess that it must have just been just 'racism' as the reason why blacks couldn't get 'into the boardrooms.' One solution. Anti-white legislation against the entire white population, to keep them from getting jobs or education, was the only solution. (Hey, wait, wouldn't the rich whites in 'the boardroom' still be able to afford everything and only the poor whites affected by anti-white propensities? Hmm.. Oh, I guess I'm just THINKING too much...)

It's like all this crap with affirmative action, selection of non-whites for jobs and college purely because they are non-white. It's pure anti-white discrimination. It's not based on ability or anything. Just race. At first, it sounded like a great idea, strike one for the great white idealistic morality and humanitarianism although it's a bit hypocritical considering that nonwhite countries don't care a damn about whites and in fact quite frequently loathe us and put us in the lowest rung of their societies, but most minorities weren't satisfied with just a little 'diversity.' Hell, our self-hate trip had just begun! Now, here we are, years later, many colleges have a far greater representation of nonwhites than whites, in comparision to the actual population, which is rapidly changing ?30? million nonwhites in just the past couple of years and whites to become a minority by 2050. Still not enough diversity! You can have a black college in the US and happily get government money. That's diverse. Heck, you could have an Oriental one too! Aboriginal? No problem!

White? RACIST RACIST RACIST. Instantly, no government money.... Rather shallow white people in the streets trying to prove they aren't racists... Greedy nonwhites trying to get even more advantages..So, college campuses are scrambling for non-whites from wherever they can get them, from here in the US or from abroad. That means more money, and everybody wants more of that. That sounds a little unfair to whites, doesn't it?

Ol' Bob whitaker of http://www.whitakeronline.org/ has a little saying:
'Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.'

He was a professor you know. Economics I think. Political adviser as well, speech writer. Really interesting person, world traveller and all that. I think he even went to South Africa, before the blacks down there decided to start raping, looting, and killing the white farmers in mass. Taking their farms by force as the new black controlled government asked for the black population to take care of the native Boers. Wonderful people. Oh wait, I forgot! White people don't have any rights anywhere, even on land they've inhabited and built up for hundreds of years. Silly, that's racist speak! Anyway, one lady even made a lovely little device that you stick into a woman's vagina that has teeth. Rips off a man's dick, basically. Well, those black fellows, the you know the sambo black ones from North Africa that nearly killed out the indigenous hottentots that the South Africans ironically saved, just starting raping little white babies because they thought it would cure their aids, and don't forget the white women! I've never really understood the black fascination for raping black women. Oh, and they tortured thousands of farmers. Some they boiled with hot water. Some raped their family while they watched. Some used hot irons to torture girlfriends before they slaughtered the boyfriend, raped the girlfriend, and then killed the girlfriend. Haha, never could understand that. Why torture the girl and mess up their bodies and THEN rape them? I mean, wouldn't you rather rape and then torture them first? Silly blacks. Of course, those were evil white people that had been living in peace so they deserved all the evils they got. Breadbasket of Africa, stolen right from the soil using diabolical seeds on land they got through devilish trade! Right? Oh those curious blacks, lovely people fighting against the evil white oppressors, that say, "Stay off our land you kill people!" Oh, those evil white oppressors, there just isn't enough, hatred, I mean, JUSTICE, for those evil white oppressors. Devils created by Yacub and all that. Enslavers. Systematic exterminators. Nation-builders. World changers. Patrons of humanitarianism, trade, and prosperity. Technological magicians. Whoops. sorry, I'm getting off topic. 

Oh right... What was the message I was trying to get across again?

Whites? who cares about them? They don't have rights. They aren't even human.

Yep, that sums it all about up. They're just racist and evil. Original sin, from birth. That's what the holocaust and slavery are you know. Original sin. White people are brought into this world born guilty. They don't have any rights. They don't deserve anything. They shouldn't even defend themselves and should just spend all their time hating themselves and giving handouts to complete strangers to atone their original sin.

Political Correctness, it's a religion you know, a GOOD one.

So everybody entreat each other to gorge yourselves on the labor, property, terror, and horror of the white man in a whirlwind frenzy of twisted hatred and bottomless greed. That is, unless you're white. If you're white, we'll be nice and allow you to be the very first to slit yourself and your kinsmen first. We'll even let you prepare the sacrifical table. Isn't that nice of us? After all, it humors us to let you be the first to drench your brothers in their own slippery blood, and to condemn them to servitude and sorrow.

It's what you deserve. That's right, flinch and bow your feeble white head with its feeble white will. You've never had anything to be proud of, and once you're gone, you never will.

You'll never have a chance to remember who you once were or where you came from.

[Message from the reptalian humanoids and the greys]

-----Humans have not earned the right to exist.

45% of the people below the poverty line in the US are white.

No proof, no merit, so noted. :D

The idea that whites can't be discriminated against, can't hate itself or can't be impoverished is fundamentally racist because it operates under the premise that (a) white people exist and (b) that they are superior and should look to hold onto that superiority.

My question: Why are non-whites always villified in the white agenda of "protecting and ensuring the survival" of white people?

the KKK was HHHUUUGGGEEE!

>>33

Google and a little math does wonders!

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty04/table3.pdf

Total Below Poverty Line by Race

Whites - 16,870,000
Blacks - 9,000,000
Asian - 1,209,000
Hispanic - 9,132,000

Percentage of Total Below Poverty Line by Race

Whites - 45.6%
Blacks - 24.3%
Asian - 3.3%
Hispanic - 24.7%

Actually, it's closer to more like 46% of the people below the poverty are white.

You'll also need the total population, as well as the number below the poverty line.

http://www.census.gov/popest/states/tables/NST-EST2005-01.csv

http//factfinder.census.gov/...

To get the real hispanic and white you have to subtract the non-hispanic white from the white.

Hispanics aren't white, but hey, they have to find some way to increase the white crime rate (which is amazing low,) by putting the crimes of the illegals from mexico on our backs. Wonderful!

>>35

Yeah, math does do wonders, LOL.

NOW WHICH RACE IS THE MAJORITY IN AMERICA?

OH RIGHT.

WHITE PEOPLE.

Of course there's more poor white people than blacks....THERE IS MORE WHITE PEOPLE.

>>38

And! Those white people are the MINORITY of all whites (who are the majority) in America.

The MAJORITY of blacks (who are the minority) in America are below the poverty line.

Ok, so white people make up the majority of poor people in the U.S., but that doesn't matter because some other white people aren't poor.

So, because other white people are not poor then you should discriminate against them for everything from welfare to jobs to college. Those sorts of discriminations don't affect wealthy people, only poor people. So, in your pursuit of 'equality' you are just further impoverishing more poor people, who were in the US for longer and whose ancestors actually fought in the revolution.

You see, all this 'equality' crap is just that crap. You aren't interested in solving real problems like poverty, all you are interested is in making sure there are enough non-white people in positions of power in white countries.

You see, white is equated with being rich. Considering how my father was dirt poor and came from a household where his father had died in a war, and he somehow managed to work his way up to the middle class by going to college for more than a decade while working full time, I think he actually managed to deserve his position. He did tell me a couple of things though. He was actually turned down from college a couple of times because he was white. He was also turned down for monetary aid because he was white. Back then, people were a little bit more honest. The person advising him simply told him that although he was suitable in all other ways if they didn't reach their quota of nonwhites, they wouldn't get government funding. It's that simple. Nothing personal, buddy.

The typical argument is that it isn't fair that so many white people are well off in a frickin' white country, so you've got to give underqualified nonwhites an advantage over qualified whites.

Nobody ever mentions that the majority of poor people in the US are white, and actually since during my father's time the US was 90% white, then more like 80% of the poor people in the US were white. Heck, during this time, instead of actually attacking poverty they starting discriminating against poor white people and taking attention away from the rich and putting it on white people in general.

Nobody seems to recognize that all of the poor in white countries, the staggering amount that suffered greviously under industrialization, were all white. Sometimes I think this blaming whitey crap is a clever tactic used by the economic power bosses to keep attention away from them using a scapegoat.

When anti-racists start talking about the evils of ol' whitey they seem to completely forget that poor people in general have always been discriminated against, and not all nonwhites are poor, and white people make up the MAJORITY of the poor.

I've also noticed that you don't mention that Asian people in the US have a lower poverty rate than whites in the US. Instead, you just complain about ol' whitey who makes up the majority of the poor in the US. Ol' whitey just doesn't complain about anybody else I guess. Maybe we should discriminate against Asians? I mean they obviously got their benefits from some sort of Asian discrimination.

Oh, that's right. Asians aren't the race problem. whites are the race problem. Silly me. Original sin like that other guy mentioned.


BOB'S MANTRA
"Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries."


"The Netherlands and Belgium are more crowded than Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them."


"Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to "assimilate," i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites."


"What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?"


"How long would it take anyone to realize I'm not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?"


"And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn't object to this?"


"But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews."


"They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white."


"Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white."
 

Bob Whitaker

>>40
TRUTH was told.

saging this thread cus anarchy is the way

unsaging this thread because anarchy doesn't stop armed gangs from forming and turning the country into a despotism

>>40 So, in your pursuit of 'equality' you are just further impoverishing more poor people, who were in the US for longer and whose ancestors actually fought in the revolution.

Even so, you yourself didn't fight in the revolutionary war, now did you?  Neither did your grandfather.  Just because your ancestors did something doesn't mean that we should regard you with honor for it. 

Other than that, you make some good points.

This Whitaker guy is pretty smart for having such a stupid name.
Man I hate the name Bob.
owait what were we talking about again? Ah okay.
DOWN WITH BLACKY, DOWN WITH BLACKY!