I didn't realize that Whites were represented by those with blonde hair and blue eyes. What tiny percentage of the White population is that way? Yeh, I thought so. When are the North Gaul types going to realize that they don't speak for the "rest of us"?
Name:
Thelema2007-07-20 10:14 ID:XcyY/jG9
I'm a North Gaul type, but I think they really mean they speak for aryans and that they are ''''''''pure whites''''''''.
Well, #6, since they are a tiny minority of the White racial type, they are perfectly free to retreat to Finland or something, where us darker-eyed types can be stopped via immigration laws from bothering their blessed purity. Well, THAT, and we can ship them contaminated toothpaste to foul the maintenance of their perfect Nordic smiles.
#12: {wiping tears} That's the most profound compliment I've had recently. Thank you, honestly. Yes, everyone should be RedCream, since RedCream is many times more sensible than the average twit who comes to 4chan to talk some smack.
Of course, Thel, you must realize that it's possible that posting under my moniker is done to confuse others and discourage debate. If that's truly the case here, do you want to let them win? The choice is yours.
Name:
Thelema2007-07-20 10:34 ID:XcyY/jG9
>>>That's the most profound compliment I've had recently. Thank you, honestly.
Heh, it's nice to hear it.
I shall brandish my gaulic longsword and defend myself from the hordes of Redcream's if it is neccasary, or maybe accept them with open arms...
Thel, I believe it's "Gallic". Additionally, if you actually think it's healthy to accept 4channers with open arms (definably, when all your sensitive areas are exposed) than I can only urge you to stop and think that one through with more clarity. He hee!
Speaking of chicks brandishing longswords in their ancestral fashion, did you see the movie with that red-haired woman from ER? {frantic googling} Aha, Alex Kingston in "Boudica" (i.e. 'Braveheart with a Bra'). Great movie.
Name:
Thelema2007-07-20 10:49 ID:XcyY/jG9
Sadly not, but I've already heard alot of Boudica.
>Thel, I believe it's "Gallic".
You're right, maybe I should stop smoking the ol' jamaican woodvine.
Back to topic.
No neighborhood should tolerate the presence and actions of niggers, be they White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, Indian, etc. Decent folk are completely incompatible with niggers.
First you must determine if the Black kids that move in are niggers or not.
If not, then everything is OK.
If so, then burn a cross on their lawn. In some places, this may backfire, so be careful in judging the usefulness of the burning cross. You never know when Liberals will pop outta the woodwork and try to make a "poor downtrodden Blacks" issue out of it. Liberals don't understand (or want to understand) that the issue is not about Blacks; instead, it's about niggers.
If a cross-burnin' is not in order, then you'll have to wait and watch like a hawk until all the niggers leave the residence for some reason. Even work-averse niggers have to leave the house for some reason, eventually ... like to go get another bottle or pack of whatever niggers are addicted to nowadays. Once the home is temporarily empty, burn the home down. You don't have to actually destroy the home; just burning the niggers OUT would work. Note that there's no need to be concerned about the landlord, if any ... since landlords that rent to niggers are niggers themselves and deserve no consideration.
I don't feel any reluctance to a-burnin' thangs since niggers not only bring the ghetto with them by association, but that niggers intentionally restructure their neighborhoods as ghettos in the first place. The ghetto is the natural habitat of the American nigger, just like fast food is the natural diet (I think of McDonald's as "nigger chow").
Again, this is not a racial issue. The majority of niggers in America are White. There's no natural right to bring crime, fear and despondency into a working man's neighborhood. I'm sure the Liberals disagree, but they're fucking Liberals and we can rightfully dismiss their opinions therefore.
[misbehaves on 4chan as LaCosaNostradamus]
Name:
Thelema2007-07-20 11:06 ID:XcyY/jG9
>>First you must determine if the Black kids that move in are niggers or not.
I had an arguement with one, bad idea, they just call the fucking race card if you try to reason with them, he nearly landed me in prison, but gladly police are racists.
The niggers aren't making ghettos, the government is making ghettos for them, atleast in England where you have a designated 'bade area' (normally teraced houses/apartment complexes [I think you call them blocks or something]) and designated 'good areas' which aren't neccasarily better off, they just dump criminals in a specific place, literally.
I guess Liberals are pansies, but often I meet with 'niggers' and interact with them, they often have next to decent reasons as to why they are like that.
SWEET!!! My admirer is bringing out my K5 rants (#19)! Oh frabjous day! Immortality is mine!
Unfortunately for your sentiment, Thel, niggers DO form ghettos ... with the cooperation of government. I'm not sure who starts the process (I mean, other than White Flight) but as a nigger robs, the government gets tired of chasing him, then the nigger learns to rob some more, etc. The next thing you know, homes need bars on the windows and no matter how much patrolling, the police can't stop crime.
#22, not all the people native to the Caucasus (hence, Caucasian) are blue-eyed blondes (BEBs). The BEBs are a Nordic subset of the Caucasian race and in NO WAY lead the racial phenotype by characteristics. In reality, the BEBs are a tiny minority and if there's any stomping to be done on the basis of minority, it would be THEM who would be stomped. So, be careful with all that stompin', WhitePower freaks!
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-20 18:14 ID:2J0ktUBR
Jesus, namefags are faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaags.
#24, you sound like you're in NEED ... in need of namefag SEED, freshly fired from the cockhead a-quiver, and steaming wetly in the cool morning air. Open your mouth, big boy! It's time for the Human Howitzer to fire off a few range-finding rounds.
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-21 8:20 ID:QIQZsIPu
>>25
Dammit, ive excited it, now we will never get rid of it.
And, there's nothing wrong with that, Thelema Clone #28/12ZJb930. Anal sex is assuredly part of the pleasures that are open between one person and another person, between whom there is at least one penis, even a dildo of sufficiently filling girth.
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-24 10:35 ID:TD5Fb/AZ
>>29
What if your penis is larger than most dildos, is this bad?
From the ads in pr0n mags, and the use of them in pr0n itself, most dildos seem to be of such size that one might get a complex about it, if one didn't know it's just marketing hype. Contrary to popular assumption, women don't have much use for such prodigious prongs. Sucking them off is more work, and enveloping them in cuntflesh can be painful. So, there's a significant chance that having a penis larger than most dildos (which are fairly sizable in the first place) is a bad thing. You'd have to find a woman whose mouth is the size of Carly Simon's (if not actually being Carly Simon herself, but I don't know her schedule for cocksuckery), and/or a vagina the size of a porthole.
From the answers I've obtained by asking directly, women have a preferred size for the penises they take into their bodies, and that size is not as large as Hollywood would have you believe.
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-24 23:08 ID:stNif3z3
It ain't length. Its width.
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-25 0:21 ID:iwMeH93W
*cough* attention whore / troll's attempt to start a flame war. If it is not, then the person is a damn idiot. enough said.
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-25 1:21 ID:ucVAIxR1
chinks = sexy
dark lovely black girls = sexy
blonde/ blue eyes = sexy
old = not sexy
Jewesses = sometimes sexy
Indians = not really sexy
my 2 cents
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-25 2:21 ID:/kLD5GPl
native americans = incredibly sexy
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-25 2:47 ID:wFw11qJ9
>>35
Damn straight. I love me a busty Nordic babe, but a sweet little Kiowa gets my blood going.
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-25 3:25 ID:9j32d/cQ
This thread is racist!
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-25 4:57 ID:aPSSQaRl
chinks = sex object
dark lovely black girls = object of pleasure
blonde/ blue eyes = marriage + genetically superior kids
old = As a general rule if they can run 100 minus their age multiplied by 10 in metres they remain sexy into old age.
Jewesses = old age sexy rule applies to them even when they are young
Indians = sexy if they are not plump, with other races plump but not too fat works, with indians they just look fucked up
I'm glad I've finally been able to get my conspiracy theory about the evil jew media trying to convince me that my tiny penis is a problem has finally been exposed! Take THAT hollywood!! all you girls who were sexually unsatisfied by me, you've been BRAINWASHED
Bush sent ANOTHER envoy to China (NOT Paulson this time) to beg them to buy our junk bonds (i.e. mortgage-backed securities). So, Bush and Cheney ARE acting like our bankruptcy trustees. Good call!
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-30 2:30 ID:rVUy0PjR
White isn't a race. you can be german, hungarian, italian, etc. and if you're mixed.....well, you're inferior.
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-30 16:35 ID:EfzV6/pE
So how do you guys handle the science fact that mankind started off in Africa? Or that Jesus was not only indeed jewish but was most likely arabian?
Your race fallacy has been already covered in the Strumfaggotry thread. Why haven't you replied?
The first to challenge the concept of race on empirical grounds were anthropologists Franz Boas, who demonstrated phenotypic plasticity due to environmental factors (Boas 1912), and Ashley Montagu (1941, 1942), who relied on evidence from genetics. Zoologists Edward O. Wilson and W. Brown then challenged the concept from the perspective of general animal systematics, and further rejected the claim that "races" were equivalent to "subspecies" (Wilson and Brown 1953).
One of the crucial innovations in reconceptualizing genotypic and phenotypic variation was anthropologist C. Loring Brace's observation that such variations, insofar as it is affected by natural selection, migration, or genetic drift, are distributed along geographic gradations; these gradations are called "clines" (Brace 1964). This point called attention to a problem common to phenotypic-based descriptions of races (for example, those based on hair texture and skin color): they ignore a host of other similarities and difference (for example, blood type) that do not correlate highly with the markers for race. Thus, anthropologist Frank Livingstone's conclusion that, since clines cross racial boundaries, "there are no races, only clines" (Livingstone 1962: 279). In 1964, biologists Paul Ehrlich and Holm pointed out cases where two or more clines are distributed discordantly—for example, melanin is distributed in a decreasing pattern from the equator north and south; frequencies for the haplotype for beta-S hemoglobin, on the other hand, radiate out of specific geographical points in Africa (Ehrlich and Holm 1964). As anthropologists Leonard Lieberman and Fatimah Linda Jackson observe, "Discordant patterns of heterogeneity falsify any description of a population as if it were genotypically or even phenotypically homogeneous" (Lieverman and Jackson 1995).
Finally, geneticist Richard Lewontin, observing that 85 percent of human variation occurs within populations, and not among populations, argued that neither "race" nor "subspecies" were appropriate or useful ways to describe populations (Lewontin 1973). Some researchers report the variation between racial groups (measured by Sewall Wright's population structure statistic FST) accounts for as little as 5% of human genetic variation².
A. W. F. Edwards claimed in 2003 that such conclusions are unwarranted because the argument ignores the fact that most of the information that distinguishes populations is hidden in the correlation structure of the data and not simply in the variation of the individual factors.[21] While if true it would make Lewontin's argument unwarranted, Edward's paper does not address the existence or absence of human races. (See Lewontin's Fallacy.)
Name:
Anonymous2007-07-31 11:07 ID:x8MpVHNT
>>54
"This point called attention to a problem common to phenotypic-based descriptions of races (for example, those based on hair texture and skin color): they ignore a host of other similarities and difference (for example, blood type) that do not correlate highly with the markers for race."
Blood type has little effect on the ability for a person to survive as a hunter gatherer, thus blood types were distributed evenly. Racial characteristics, such as superior intelligence, did have an effect which is why there are differences in intelligence between races.
#55, considering all the White, educated people now laboring under adjustable-rate mortgages that they really can't pay, I'd have to say "White intelligence" is as highly specific to time and place as any other race. Whites were behind an expansion of civilization that required a lot of victims, both domestically and abroad. We can see from history how the USA grew so impatient with the victimization plan that they imported slaves from Africa ... which is the opposite of the modern era's victimization routines of outsourcing and offshoring.
When the chips are down (i.e. there are no more easy resources to steal), Whites are shown to be just about as stupid as any ghetto chimp.
>>56
The entire planet consisted of tyrannies up until 50 years ago so you must admit all other races are capable of evil aswell or you are racist. The fact they were ruthless is not the reason for western civilisation's success, their success is due to technological growth and the fact that the nazis were not succesful and did not exterminate all non-whites is due to libertarianism.
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-01 21:07 ID:cxmWo9S0
don't you think it's time to be an hero?
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-01 23:35 ID:BewQHDSR
#58 +10 PTS
#59 Only if you get the good parts...
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-02 3:46 ID:9JfdO8UN
stfu nigger
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-02 4:49 ID:2aRmbhfq
Strange I thought the Jews ran the world?
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-02 19:29 ID:86Hpsj4J
LULZ
Name:
Anonymous2007-08-03 22:51 ID:kjy3u2hi
:P, nazi run the world, yankees run the world, jews run the world, money run the world... i'm getting confused.
are jews considered white?
and what about ethiopian jews?