Don't you find the term "White Genocide" hilarious regarding immigration in the UK/Europe etc?

reply to post by HomoSapiensSapiens

Yes,blacks have suffered tremendously throughout history,in the South under slavery,abducted by the Arab slave traders,and lived disenfranchised lives under Apartheid.No one is refuting that they had the short end of the stick for a very long time.
What is saddening and demoralising,is that the ANC government seems to have no will to move on,and take matters in hand-they are still blaming apartheid for everything thats not right in my country.Its been 2 decades-they have the same tax revenue at their disposal-yet the country has declined into a third world country since 1994-medical services(state,not private) the police,the army,roads and infrastructure,school curriculums-everything has declined under ANC rule.
I dont CARE if my government is black or white-i care that my country goes forward,and not into decline.As long as apartheid is used as an excuse for lack of will to address the problems by the present black government,nothing will get better.
My hubby caught a bit of President Zuma's recent state of the union speech-and he said Zuma attributed our high crime levels to..yeah-apartheid.A thing thats been dead for decades.An unwillingness to be honest with themselves and admit that the crime situation is not a priority for the current regime.

You cannot solve a problem if you are unwilling to look at the true root cause-which is unemployment,poverty,and a hatred for whites among many black citizens,fostered by the government telling them that apartheid,and the white man,is responsible for all their woes.

I wonder if in 50 years time,they will STILL be blaming the white apartheid government for their own gteed,corruption and ineptitude.

reply to post by HomoSapiensSapiens


First of all, interracial sex IS often forced. Over 10,000 white women a year are raped by black men in the US. Pakistani gangs rape white girls in Britain. Muslim immigrants are raping girls in Norway.

Moreover, intermarriage can not be considered a legitimately free choice because white girls are taught to hate white men. Consider the case of a white women who was raped by black men in Haiti. Here is what she said about the matter:

By Amanda Kijera, civic journalist and activist in Haiti

Two weeks ago, on a Monday morning, I started to write what I thought was a very clever editorial about violence against women in Haiti. The case, I believed, was being overstated by women’s organizations in need of additional resources. Ever committed to preserving the dignity of Black men in a world which constantly stereotypes them as violent savages, I viewed this writing as yet one more opportunity to fight “the man” on behalf of my brothers. That night, before I could finish the piece, I was held on a rooftop in Haiti and raped repeatedly by one of the very men who I had spent the bulk of my life advocating for.

It hurt. The experience was almost more than I could bear. I begged him to stop. Afraid he would kill me, I pleaded with him to honor my commitment to Haiti, to him as a brother in the mutual struggle for an end to our common oppression, but to no avail. He didn’t care that I was a Malcolm X scholar. . .

***

Truly, I have witnessed as a journalist and human rights advocate the many injustices inflicted upon Black men in this world. The pain, trauma and rage born of exploitation are terrors that I have grappled with every day of my life. They make one want to strike back, to fight rabidly for what is left of their personal dignity in the wake of such things. Black men have every right to the anger they feel in response to their position in the global hierarchy, but their anger is misdirected.

Women are not the source of their oppression; oppressive policies and the as-yet unaddressed white patriarchy which still dominates the global stage are. Because women–and particularly women of color–are forced to bear the brunt of the Black male response to the Black male plight, the international community and those nations who have benefitted from the oppression of colonized peoples have a responsibility to provide women with the protection that they need.

Get that? White women are taught to identify with non-white men as fellow victims of the "white patriarchy" rather than their own men. When non-white men brutalize their own women, that's the white man's fault. When non-white men brutalize white women, well that's the white man's fault too.

That is GeNOcide.

Whites are not allowed to have a school,church, or anything to ourselves. Integration is FORCED.



D

reply to post by HomoSapiensSapiens


It doesn't matter if Nigeria is getting black immigrants because it will still be black.

When are Chinese on schedule to be a minority in their own capital and then their own country?

White British are already a minority in London and have been told they will be a minority in the UK in 2066.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

Only white countries are being treated this way! Its GeNOcide.

reply to post by JustaWhiteMom


Beijing isn't a world city, it isn't a world capital. London is.

Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by JustaWhiteMom

 

Beijing isn't a world city, it isn't a world capital. London is.

I'm trying to have a legitimate discussion with you but that is just rubbish. Beijing is the capital of an emerging superpower.

Moreover its not just London, all white cities are told they must become "diverse":

www.npr.org...

reply to post by JustaWhiteMom


You say "interracial marriage" as if it's something outrageous - this is 2013, not 1913. If I, as a non-white person, deeply love a white girl and she loves me deeply too, we shall get married - we're not going to forego marriage because it's seen by backwards people as "interracial" and forbidden. This is the age of touchscreens and space stations, no darkness and ignorance.

reply to post by HomoSapiensSapiens


If you truly "love" a white girl why would you help with the genocide of her people by marrying her and ensuring that her children will look nothing like her?

I can't think of anything more selfish than that. If you truly love somehting, you don't wish to destroy it but to preserve it.

reply to post by JustaWhiteMom


But China does not allow as much immigration as other countries. Immigration in the UK is a different matter and whilst there is a history of immigration in the UK, recent mass immigration is not to ensure the annihilation of pale-skinned humans, but is rather due to economic issues (i.e. companies and whatnot wanted very cheap workforces etc).

reply to post by JustaWhiteMom


Erm... that doesn't make any sense. If I love her and she loves me and we want to spend our lives together, why on Earth wouldn't we get married?

The kind of thinking that you're advocating is mass segregation. The Human Race does not work like that and history shows this. Mankind got where it was today from working together and cooperating.

reply to post by HomoSapiensSapiens


You are talking about motive. Greed is often the motive for genocide and that doesn't make it anything other than genocide. Again the Aussie convicts, who were brought there against their will BTW, were just trying to make a living the only way they knew how. They stole aboriginal lands for cattle grazing. Its STILL genocide.

At least the Aussies are decent enough to reserve some tribal lands where aborigines can continue their way of life. Why is it wrong for whites to demand the same? Why are we called "white supremacist" etc for wanting a future for our people?

reply to post by HomoSapiensSapiens


You are using the term "segregation" to imply that racial separation is unnatural and forced. That is false the opposite is true. Why is the government of Sweden setting up an employment office in Ethiopia? Why do black Somalis get free housing and everything else in Europe?

www.thelocal.se...

The fact is whties are PAYING FOR their own genocide with tax dollars that are extracted from them by force. Whites are FORCED to hire and otherwise associate with aliens when naturally they would prefer their own.

It is your worldview that requires repression and social engineering not mine.

reply to post by HomoSapiensSapiens


BTW immigration to UK and US is not driven primarily by economics but by the desire for power:

“Mass immigration was the way that the government was going to make the UK truly multicultural . . . the policy was intended — even if this wasn’t its main purpose — to rub the right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date”. -Andrew Neather, former advisor to Tony Blair

“In Florida, there’s going to be hundreds of thousands more Latinos and African-Americans voting than there were last time. The demographics of some of these states are already improved, through nothing we’ve done.” -David Plouffe, Senior advisor to Barack Obama

"Hysteria, aggression and gerrymandering are a fading demographic's last hope to maintain political control. . .
The third and final defeat of the white South, its demographic defeat, is likely to be equally prolonged and turbulent. Fasten your seat belts." -Michael Lind, Salon.com

I don't see how you can't see that this is genocide.

Originally posted by WaterBottle
reply to post by skepticconwatcher

 

They want the world to be theirs and theirs alone. They don't want Black and Brown presidents and prime ministers and popes and ruling classes. They believe that power is only reserved for whites and whites alone. They see that power is fading and dying and they are freaked out about it because they don't know how to survive in a world without white privilege and preference. They don't know how to survive in a world where they actually have to earn their living.

They also seem to downplay any accomplishment of a non-white. Like with Obama...they'll say he got into Harvard because of affirmative action.. Or that he was voted in as president because of "white guilt" and minorities voting for him due to his race.

They can't handle that a non-white is smarter, more successful, and more wealthy than them.

They fear the competition.

(And I'm just using Obama as a relevant example, I personally don't care for his policies.)

edit on 23-2-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)

You may want to look for a better example. Or did you forget he is half white?

THE TERM "GENOCIDE"

The term "genocide" did not exist before 1944. It is a very specific term, referring to violent crimes committed against groups with the intent to destroy the existence of the group. Human rights, as laid out in the US Bill of Rights or the 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, concern the rights of individuals.

In 1944, a Polish-Jewish lawyer named Raphael Lemkin (1900-1959) sought to describe Nazi policies of systematic murder, including the destruction of the European Jews. He formed the word "genocide" by combining geno-, from the Greek word for race or tribe, with -cide, from the Latin word for killing. In proposing this new term, Lemkin had in mind "a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves." The next year, the International Military Tribunal held at Nuremberg, Germany, charged top Nazis with "crimes against humanity." The word “genocide” was included in the indictment, but as a descriptive, not legal, term.

THE CRIME OF GENOCIDE

On December 9, 1948, in the shadow of the Holocaust and in no small part due to the tireless efforts of Lemkin himself, the United Nations approved the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. This convention establishes "genocide” as an international crime, which signatory nations “undertake to prevent and punish.” It defines genocide as:

[G]enocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

While many cases of group-targeted violence have occurred throughout history and even since the Convention came into effect, the legal and international development of the term is concentrated into two distinct historical periods: the time from the coining of the term until its acceptance as international law (1944-1948) and the time of its activation with the establishment of international criminal tribunals to prosecute the crime of genocide (1991-1998). Preventing genocide, the other major obligation of the convention, remains a challenge that nations and individuals continue to face.

www.ushmm.org...

reply to post by HomoSapiensSapiens



your attempts at humour made me cringe

Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by JustaWhiteMom

 

But China does not allow as much immigration as other countries. Immigration in the UK is a different matter and whilst there is a history of immigration in the UK, recent mass immigration is not to ensure the annihilation of pale-skinned humans, but is rather due to economic issues (i.e. companies and whatnot wanted very cheap workforces etc).

that is PART of it, not the whole story- ffs a new labour flunkie recently admitted mass immigration policy was undertaken by labour to permanently alter the face of Britain

Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by JustaWhiteMom

 

But China does not allow as much immigration as other countries. Immigration in the UK is a different matter and whilst there is a history of immigration in the UK, recent mass immigration is not to ensure the annihilation of pale-skinned humans, but is rather due to economic issues (i.e. companies and whatnot wanted very cheap workforces etc).

there was a history of "immigration" in the Americas, the so called "natives" didn't just emerge out of thin air and who knows what conflict or peoples were originally there- but as they are non white you are happy to call them native, unlike whites in Britain

Originally posted by HomoSapiensSapiens
reply to post by JustaWhiteMom

 

Beijing isn't a world city, it isn't a world capital. London is.

I looked up reference books, atlases etc and looked for the capital of the world- there is none- London is and was a British capital, however it is increasingly not the case due to ridiculous levels of immigration

How can anyone justify mass immigration when several thousand people turn up for 8 jobs in a coffee shop

Some lies are being peddled

reply to post by Credenceskynyrd


Anti-whites never admit that Whites are native to any place because they don't want to acknowledge our right to exist anywhere on the face of the Earth.

Originally posted by JustaWhiteMom
reply to post by Credenceskynyrd

 

Anti-whites never admit that Whites are native to any place because they don't want to acknowledge our right to exist anywhere on the face of the Earth.

exactly