BLM Toronto leader believes white people are sub-human, calls them 'genetic defects'

Sure. If you look at it in the most simplistic way possible and don't examine their actual words and actions. Lets take their words and actions and prove them to be lies.

"a world...where every Black person has the social, economic, and political power to thrive".

Since this is the U.S., every black person has the ability to thrive. I can't account for Africa, but then Black people control most of Africa, so its not exactly a white person problem. So getting back to this country since thats really all that matters, there isn't a law on the books or HONEST study available and certainly NO statistic available that shows black people and black people ALONE have any less opportunity to thrive then anyone else. That statement is socialist Marxist screed in their 2nd paragraph. We are all afforded the same rights and opportunities. Every person is not GUARANTEED the ability to thrive and expecting it is NOT this country and never was this country. Opportunities are improved through wealth, but wealth or poverty is not limited by race. White people in the boonies have no less opportunity than black people in the inner cities. You could easily argue poor white people in Appalachia have even less opportunity and are completely IGNORED. So strike 1.

They also claim state SANCTIONED violence and racism. WRONG. There isn't any approval of racism or violence EVER. Isolated instances are NOT the rule. So strike 2.

Then they go into Trayvon Martin, who was killed by another minority in self defense because he maliciously attacked and tried to murder someone by repeatedly slamming their head onto concrete. Strike 3!

Then they support Brown who ALSO attacked police officers after resisting arrest and robbing a store. NO INJUSTICE WHAT SO EVER in those 2 examples. Strike 4!

They say "We intentionally build and nurture a beloved community that is bonded together through a beautiful struggle that is restorative, not depleting." Too bad they also burn down these communities, rob and kill people, destroy businesses with countless examples of them actually promoting to hurt white communities(local social media where I live had tons of posts about attacking neighborhoods of white people), so lets call this statement hypocritical to say the least. (check out black twitter or videos where you can hear them) And if you want to claim those people weren't a part of BLM, sorry, BS. It happened BECAUSE of BLM and BLM refused to condemn it. Not to mention, CHAZ, violently taking over part of a city where people got murdered. So, STRIKE 5!

Then they say this..."We are guided by the fact that all Black lives matter, regardless of actual or perceived sexual identity, gender identity, gender expression, economic status, ability, disability, religious beliefs or disbeliefs, immigration status, or location." Sorry. B.S yet again. If ALL Black Lives mattered they would protest all the murder in the inner cities. Strike 6!

Then they go into delusional cisgendered insanity, sexism and misogyny...HELLO RAP MUSIC!!! So hypocrites AGAIN. Strike 7.

They also go into patriarchal practices and mothers having to work and then they tear down the nuclear family, which is of course, completely INSANE and has nothing to do with race! Strike 8.

"We embody and practice justice, liberation, and peace in our engagements with one another." So, looting, rioting, tearing down statues, and killing each other in record numbers is peace, eh? Strike 9!

Now a few statements above would make PERFECT sense if and ONLY if they actually condemned EVERYONE and not just white people. And that's where the whole movement falls flat on its face. It ignores the SYSTEMIC issues in its own community which are the root cause of most of the real issues they're claiming are because of anti-blackness. You can't claim police are targeting ONLY black people when they kill 2X as many white people every year. You can't claim white people are preventing black people from entering STEM fields when there are simple far less black people trying to enter STEM fields. That's just math. They REFUSE to condemn all the false flags we keep seeing and fake acts of racism. Its all too hypocritical.

If there was systemic anti-blackness, there wouldn't be BLACK ONLY scholarships which makes it easier for black people to attend college than white people.
There wouldn't be SAFE MINORITY ONLY spaces on campuses. Yes, white people aren't made to feel welcome there. Why would black people not feel "safe" in college? Evil white people hunting you down there? Really?
There wouldn't be BLACK ONLY business loan programs.
There wouldn't be BLACK ONLY measures corporations take to fill quotas, sometimes giving jobs to unqualified people simply due to race. Yes, it happens.
There wouldn't be BLACK ONLY conferences, and loads of other special govt. and private sponsored programs that discriminate by race.

You could easily argue there is far more anti-WHITENESS being pushed in the MSM, in corporate life and certainly political fronts.

BLM is phony because it doesn't matter what they write on their website. Its in their actions and words their leaders speak. Black Lives ONLY matter when they're taken by white people. It can't be argued. There is NO EVIDENCE what so ever BLM leadership or its supporters care about ALL Black lives, because its just not there. You can't claim ALL Black lives matter unless you condemn the actions against ALL Black lives. Its a racist, Marxist(admitted by its leadership) and misguided almost terrorist organization, bent on spreading racial unrest, the exact opposite of what they claim.

 

Can you qualify that statement with a quote from one of them?

 

I can only imagine how this must make you feel given this was said about black people for nearly thousands of years by white people.

Of course, two wrongs don't make a right. Technically, skin color can come from recessive genes, but recessive doesn't mean sub-human obviously.

If anything, this should make you more aware of just how painful and wrong racism in any form is. I expect you will take this lesson to heart and apply it to your own life as I will to mine as opposed to using it to consistently affirm your current views that racism only comes from others.

 

Again: I didn't mention the Germans. Nice straw man argument you've got there bud.
Scramble for Africa: Yes something that occurred, but also something numerous "white" people and "white" cultures fought to halt, along with race based chattel slavery when it was briefly (historically speaking) a practice. For your theory of it being intrinsic to genetics to hold, they'd have to still be into it, and they'd have to have been into it from the jump when they weren't see the cultures I cited you. The Romans didn't engage in race based chattel slavery, neither did the Normans, or the Celts or the Norse, all of whom had contact with Africa in some respects. Your theory isn't even swiss cheese, because though holed swiss cheese will stand up on its own. Yours won't even stand with you propping it up.

As to the Norse being "more like albinos": 1) No, they are not; 2) That would make them low melanin phenotype individuals and their lack of participation in race based chattel slavery still breaks your by genetics theory.

Additionally: No, Norse culture did not revere persons from the south as "god like", you've spun that out of whole cloth. And that's not even the silliest **** you've posted in this thread.

 

in nature, the birds who survive and bread are the ones who blend in and develope an almost camouflage outer layer.

since many ppl mistake germans for celts it was intended as a response to that.

they wouldnt have had to have been "into it" from the beginning since ideologies develope over time and whether they are "still into it" is clearly open for debate.
that the norse didnt get involved is a strawman since norse are not the same melanin content as central europeans.
whether the norse revered african civilzations is not the point here but it should go without saying that EVERYONE who knew about Kmt would have been in awe but idigress.

 

Emphasis mine of course. You mean like bright as **** parakeets and other visibly striking birds? Come off it.
Additionally: BREED. Bread is food. The past tense of to Breed is bred. No A.

I didn't mistake the Germans for the Celts so you can miss me with that strawman bullshit and that weak ass excuse for it. When you're fairly caught don't dissemble, its just insulting.

They would indeed have to have been "into it" from the jump since you're saying its inherent to their genetics. There is no race based chattel slavery allowed in North America or any part of Europe currently. There was much struggle and conflict, between white persons mostly, about ending same. It was ended, and has remained so. For your theory to hold true, we never would've stopped doing it or opposed it in the first place, any more than cats demand vegan cat food.

Furthermore: As stated they are not albinos and if your theory is that low melanin content causes those individuals effected to engage in race based chattel slavery, the fact that you claim the Norse have less melanin would make them MORE likely to participate not less likely. If your theory held. Which it doesn't.
Indeed such foolish absolute horseshit is not the point here, but you went ahead and ran your mouth about it anyway so I'm going to go ahead and amend my statement to point out that it is the 2nd most foolish thing I've read on this forum, the 1st being that we should eliminate voir dire and the rules of evidence to ensure a fair trial and which only occurred contemporaneously with this post. Sorry you got beat out, the competition here is fierce.

 

He should be arrested? That is absurd. They already tried to arrest him once, and he violently resisted and fought and tried to use a taser on the officers. Do you think he was going to just let them arrest him a second time, for assault of an officer? No, he would have fought even more violently and resisted even more than he had before. Some of you need to understand that the violent criminals out there are not your friend. They would harm you just as easily (actually more likely) as they would harm police officers. Violent criminals don't care for us law-abiding citizens, and they need to be removed from society. Can you imagine how good our society would be if all the violent criminals were removed? But nah, some of you want to stand up for violent criminals rather than for your law-abiding neighbors. It is a sickness.

 

Sometimes you don't have to officially belong to an organization. Remember when the left misquoted Trump when he said 'find people?' All it took was that misquote to label him a supporter of Nazis, and that then had the left saying Trump's supporters were also Nazis. We've been accused of that many times.

But BLM started the rioting, looting, arson, beatings and a few murders. If a person marches along side of them, they are by association part of them regardless of their organizational structure.

 

"We?" Who are you talking about? Suggesting BLM is racist organization because they have a racist in their organization is propaganda.

Sandy Hudson, a spokeswoman for BLM Toronto a few years ago, is a PR disaster:



(She is so obnoxious that it's worth watching.)

Yusra Khogali is a racist. Huffington Post called for Khogali's removal three years ago. Is Khogali still on the BLM Toronto steering committee? No. Why is she gone? Don't know.

You're going to drill down on her addled nonsense? Egads.

"Those people?"

Do you need someone to explain to you why you can't generalize about BLM from the racist tweets of one member?

 

Now BLM are actively attacking Christian churches. This is how you define courage. Standing up to an angry hateful mob of miscreants without flinching. They did themselves proud.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1279151637915992065

https://www.lacortenews.com/n/video-blm-activists-triggered-by-ar-15-giveaway-attack-church-goers

 

like these pretty things?



so celts are not a germanic tribe, what are they then?

into it or out, you have to crawl before you can walk, rome wasnt built in a day, you get the point. that there is no race based chattel slavery in america today doesnt negate the idea that many still long for the good ole days, hence why race based chattel slavers are not only fondly remembered but celebrated as pillars of a society that once was but whose principles are immortalized through giant monuments. it was ended because the rebellions from the growing numbers of so called african americans willing to fight for their rights but you dont want to talk about that do you, no, its all about the white saviour right?

you stopped because it became too difficult to manage so you adopted a plumage more akin to survival, you didnt want to end up like the parakeet. that doesnt mean to say you abandoned your ideology, far from it. this forum is the perfect example of the embers that didnt fade.

it was you that mentioned "low melanin content" my position was that of the central european melanin content. so your theory that this theory of low melanin content being related to an individuals propensity to embark on race based chattel slavery is one from that straw man you made, not mine, hence why it was stated that the norse may have been in awe of Kmt given the twos limited interaction in history. already its been conceded at that point that melanin level is not a factor in race based chattel slavery but rather a particular melanin level.

 

They're Celts, a distinct ethnic group that is not the Germanic ethnic group. You realize that "white" is about a proper descriptor as "black" is... right? That is to say it is woefully inaccurate.

Speaking of Rome, they had plenty of contact with Africa and a literal raging hard conquer the world priapism that lasted centuries. Why no race based chattel slavery? Eh?

The fact that white people fought and died to end the practice does indeed matter. For it to be a genetic trait, they'd have to be down to clown. Clearly, they were not and remain so.

Since the population of those slave revolts was minor in comparison to the majority populace of the nation at the time, and they therefore did not pose the threat you seem to think they did, its not so much about it being about a white savior as the fact of the matter being that it was mostly white people fighting and dying to end the practice that ended the practice.
Its not like no black person contributed, I'm not saying that at all. I'm simply pointing out they did not, in fact, make up the majority of union soldiers and that, in fact, white men made up the majority of union soldiers.

Except your theory is based on their low melanin amount, and your laughable theories about cosmic magic and melanin.

What exactly is Kmt? Things the Norse were in awe of, they wrote about. Have you a legend of norse awe of the inhabitants of the African continent?

Keep moving those goal posts. Mighty white of you

 

so where did celts originate?

because as stated, rome wasnt built in a day, ideologies develop over time, what became of them is whats called destiny or in your words, genetic.
we all have the devil in us to a degree, its a matter of suppressing that urge, some of us had a harder time doing it than others and its been stated that a certain melanin level has the hardest time doing such.
the population of those revolts was massive, what are you on about. it was the true word of god that helped to suppress the urge in the slavers and their minions, not the empathy of white folk. you are continuing to parrot the narrative that still pervades our society, that of a white saviour, neglecting any mention of so called african american resistance. these are the dying embers mentioned above.
yes my theory is based on A low melanin content but its not determined by how low or high but rather a specified level.

hence why it was stated earlier that HAD the norse known about Kmt they would surely have been in awe. there would surely have been some learned norse who had read the bible at least but they were probably burned at the stake

its not moving goalposts, this is not a gaming website it is a discussion forum, things change, rapidly. keep up sport.

 

In the early period of Egypt, during the Old Kingdom, Egypt was referred to as Kemet, or simply Kmt , which means the Black land

 

That's a point of some small debate. Central Europe is the general consensus for both theories before they migrated all over the ****ing place, getting as far as Anatolia and Ireland and everywhere in between. They are a distinct ethnic group from the Germanics. You do understand that multiple ethnic groups can have the same 'homeland' over so large a timeline as the one we're looking at? Particularly when they go through more than one diaspora as the celts did?

Rome was long since built, and they didn't dip into the practice despite every opportunity. Were it part of their genetics as you posit, they would have.

And a man once told me his **** was purple and he thought it tasted like rainbow sherbet. That doesn't mean he was correct.

The population of those revolts was incredibly minuscule compared even simply to the armies fielded in the civil war much less the demographics of the nation entire.
Yes it was God acting through, by the numbers, mainly Christians who happened to be white people, because there were simply more of them to hand at the time. Nothing wrong with that fact unless you're a racist who can't take being helped out by a "sub-human" "genetic defect" population. In that case, I could see how that fact might sting a bit.

"hence why it was stated earlier that HAD the norse known about Kmt they would surely have been in awe. there would surely have been some learned norse who had read the bible at least but they were probably burned at the stake"

No, they would surely have not been in awe. The Norse never met another culture they weren't willing to pillage. And the Varangians DID get to travel as far as Africa so... maybe you don't know what you're talking about?


And it is moving the goal posts. You pose one thing, then when disproven you say no no I meant this. When I disprove that its no no no I obviously meant something else. Such deflection is tiresome.

 

so in your opinion, where was the celtic homeland?