Ban Tacho

13»

Comments

  • NegrophobeNegrophobe Regular
    edited October 2011
    That was unwarranted?
    I think it's more to do with the fact that he's a hypocrite.
  • tachosomozatachosomoza Regular
    edited October 2011
    I wonder why everyone on the internet chooses a racist persona. :o

    Either way, I'm done with this nonsense.
  • NegrophobeNegrophobe Regular
    edited October 2011
    I wonder why everyone on the internet chooses a racist persona. :o

    Either way, I'm done with this nonsense.
    More people are racist online and offline much more than you'd like to imagine. Far right politics are in rising support, especially throughout Europe, and race realism is becoming more and more prevalent in the sciences. Glad you took the hint and decided to fuck off from this thread, we're making progress; next stop the website, then hopefully your existence.
  • tachosomozatachosomoza Regular
    edited October 2011
    Negrophobe wrote: »
    More people are racist online and offline much more than you'd like to imagine. Far right politics are in rising support, especially throughout Europe, and race realism is becoming more and more prevalent in the sciences. Glad you took the hint and decided to fuck off from this thread, we're making progress; next stop the website, then hopefully your existence.

    Stange...we've never had a candidate from a right wing, white nationalist party win election here. And Nick Griffin is irrelevant, loathed and despised by the British public as an insult to the country. Your persona's views are dying out. And rightfully so. You can continue to delude yourself into thinking you're nothing more than a joke and a candidate for a boot party, though. The world and the human species will progress regardless of what troglodytes think or do.

    As for the site, I have as much a right to be here as anyone else. You can leave if you desire.
  • tachosomozatachosomoza Regular
    edited October 2011
    You people are telling me that you'd decline an invitation to meet with the President of the United States because he's black?
  • NegrophobeNegrophobe Regular
    edited October 2011
    You people are telling me that you'd decline an invitation to meet with the President of the United States because he's black?
    Well technically, he's more white than black; needless to say he is liberal to the core and I do not see what good would come of me meeting with Barack Obama or vice-versa, unless it was a suicide mission, which I have no desire to do so. Taking out Barack Obama would achieve nothing in the long run. I have no desire to meet with the president of the United States. What point are you even trying to make here, you stupid 'groid?

    @sanchez; no bootlipped cunt has ever called me a honky, cracker or dared to kick up a fuss when I wear BUF badges and various other far-right insignia. A Paki called me pale years back in college because I'd called him an annoying paki because he kept swinging the blind cord past me when I was trying to get on with my work; I then told him to go and take a bath, before he and his friends walked out. Needless to say this was in a predominantly white class, with 4 Pakis (3 of which were friends and backed each other up), and 2 coons. I had to do a lot of crafty talking to the teacher after that so I didn't get reported. Needless to say, nothing happened, these curry niggers stayed away from me, with the exception of one of them who made small talk with me when we saw each other before we went to take exams; oh, and this Paki girl who I believe fancied me, or atleast she tried flirting with me alot and tried to engage me in conversation. I was civil enough to her.

    No one in my class other than 3 of the 4 rat eaters GAVE A SINGLE FUCK, not one of them, that's because no one in the class liked them. I got on with the teacher quite well too, had some good banter. Sure, people talked for a few days and thought they'd bring trouble my way, but nothing happened and it carried on as normal.
  • tachosomozatachosomoza Regular
    edited October 2011
    Negrophobe wrote: »
    Well technically, he's more white than black; needless to say he is liberal to the core and I do not see what good would come of me meeting with Barack Obama or vice-versa, unless it was a suicide mission, which I have no desire to do so. Taking out Barack Obama would achieve nothing in the long run. I have no desire to meet with the president of the United States. What point are you even trying to make here?

    So am I, as are a lot of African-Americans. I speak a European language, was raised by a white woman, and have spent a majority of my life around white people. So what the fuck are you hounding me for? Also, people of mixed ancestry in the USA identify as black because of the one drop rule, in which any known fully black ancestor means that you are identified as black.

    Also, I find it funny how people emphasize the white ancestry of every black person that makes good.
  • tachosomozatachosomoza Regular
    edited October 2011
    Many, many people who "look white" aren't "white". See the stupidity?
  • NegrophobeNegrophobe Regular
    edited October 2011
    So am I, as are a lot of African-Americans.
    While the average AA does have a significant amount of caucasoid ancestry, you're not mainly caucasoid at all. Obama is not comparable to most AAs. I had this discussion with Dr.Watson back on zoklet last year; I'm not having it again with your dumbass.

    The caucasoid ancestry in a negro and to the degree it is in is EXACTLY what makes a negro less primitive and more civilized.
  • NegrophobeNegrophobe Regular
    edited October 2011
    The one drop rule is the most retarded theory in the history of white supremacy. I myself agree with David Lane on whose white
    I'll take genetics over David Lane's and most self-proclaimed white nationalist's ideaa. Fisher's rule should apply rather than the one drop rule.
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited October 2011
    Stange...we've never had a candidate from a right wing, white nationalist party win election here. And Nick Griffin is irrelevant, loathed and despised by the British public as an insult to the country. Your persona's views are dying out. And rightfully so. You can continue to delude yourself into thinking you're nothing more than a joke and a candidate for a boot party, though. The world and the human species will progress regardless of what troglodytes think or do.

    As for the site, I have as much a right to be here as anyone else. You can leave if you desire.

    Please, you are not from England. I spoke to you in TS and you told me where you are from. That and your accent completely gave you away. Don't worry though your secret is safe...
    You people are telling me that you'd decline an invitation to meet with the President of the United States because he's black?

    I would not meet with him because he is a treasonous socialist prick.
    and a nigger
    When did I say that? I'd meet with him to tell him that he's ruining this country and that I'm onto his plan to destroy the American dollar in order to convert us to the Euro in an attempt to establish a one world currency and order at which point he will attempt to become president of the UN and usher in the end times.

    He will never be the world leader, but you are on the right track over all.
  • tachosomozatachosomoza Regular
    edited October 2011
    Negrophobe wrote: »
    While the average AA does have a significant amount of caucasoid ancestry, you're not mainly caucasoid at all. Obama is not comparable to most AAs. I had this discussion with Dr.Watson back on zoklet last year; I'm not having it again with your dumbass.

    The caucasoid ancestry in a negro and to the degree it is in is EXACTLY what makes a negro less primitive and more civilized.

    Actually, I'm more "civilized" by your ridiculously convoluted logic. My mother is Sephardic Jewish (Portuguese), Dutch, French and Apache Native. My father is mainly African (Benin) with German traces, and probable Seminole/Creek as well. Obama's mother was Irish, English, Welsh, German and French, and his father was 100% Luo. So, he's not mainly anything. It's impossible to judge someone's ancestry solely based on phenotype.

    haroldfordmug.jpg

    barack-obama-stari_1111370c.jpg

    SNOzw.jpg

    In the United States, all three of these people would be considered black, but in Africa they would not.

    african_man.jpg

    See how race is an arbitrary definition?

    Not that it matters. I know Africans who were fresh off the boat with no Caucasian ancestry whatsoever who are businessmen, scientists, university professors, and doctors.
  • tachosomozatachosomoza Regular
    edited October 2011
    Please, you are not from England. I spoke to you in TS and you told me where you are from. That and your accent completely gave you away. Don't worry though your secret is safe...


    I meant the US. I wasn't referring to the UK.
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited October 2011
    The right is gaining ground as people wake up to the fact that the left leads to state sponsored slavery.
  • tachosomozatachosomoza Regular
    edited October 2011
    http://www.gallup.com/poll/28417/most-americans-approve-interracial-marriages.aspx
    PRINCETON, NJ -- Gallup's recent Minority Rights and Relations survey updated a long-term trend that asks Americans if they "approve or disapprove of marriages between blacks and whites."

    More than three in four Americans say they approve of marriages between blacks and whites -- similar to the results measured in 2003 and 2004. As recently as 1994, less than half of Americans approved. The vast majority of whites and an even larger majority of blacks approve of interracial marriages. Older Americans -- regardless of race or ethnicity -- are less inclined to support interracial marriages than are younger Americans, but still, older Americans show majority support.
    The poll was conducted June 4-24, 2007, interviewing 2,388 adults nationwide, including 1,302 whites, 802 non-Hispanic blacks, and 502 Hispanics. The total sample is weighted to reflect the proper proportions of each group in the U.S. population. About one-quarter of the interviews with Hispanics were conducted in Spanish, with the remainder in English.
  • NegrophobeNegrophobe Regular
    edited October 2011
    I declared war on the admins. After my 5th ban without breaking any rules I decided to copy/paste the info on Zokiet into my old posts. They caught on eventually and perma-banned me.
    Ah. I've got by the skin of my teeth just about. Since I cleared a few things up with wires I've been infracted a lot less, the most recent one was by Paragon, IIRC and that was for threatening Tach.
  • tachosomozatachosomoza Regular
    edited October 2011
    That wasn't an infraction, douchenozzle.
  • dr rockerdr rocker Regular
    edited October 2011
    Stange...we've never had a candidate from a right wing, white nationalist party win election here. And Nick Griffin is irrelevant, loathed and despised by the British public as an insult to the country. Your persona's views are dying out. And rightfully so. You can continue to delude yourself into thinking you're nothing more than a joke and a candidate for a boot party, though. The world and the human species will progress regardless of what troglodytes think or do.

    I think you will find people do not vote for the BNP because of their policies other than those that relate to race and religion. As for Griffin, people do not really loath and despise him, rather, they find him an odd, bong eyed greasy pole climber. Any one with any polical knowledge at all can see right through the man. He could have joined any party and became a councillor, he has enough political skill for that - I would wager he could capture a marginal seat if he had stood for a mainstream party, but oh no, he decides to become head of a bunch of people who have some fucking crazy ideas, simply to be leader. A pole climber, but the pole he chose to climb, while giving him some status, was not very tall.

    If you were to actually come to the UK, you would see that views on race and religion that you say are 'dying out' are actually growing. Only those whoes minds are entrneched in leftism would argue against restrictions on immigration, the erosion of our national religion and against the breaking up of the monopoly some groups have on housing and so business and public services in some areas.

    I live in one of the most socialist areas of the UK, where voting for any other party than labour is something people just cannot comprehend. These peoples polictical opinions are changing however - while cognitive dissonance stops them from publicly saying 'I agree with Tory ideals', when they begin to think about actual policy, they move closer and closer to identifying themselves with the popular right.
  • NegrophobeNegrophobe Regular
    edited October 2011
    That wasn't an infraction, douchenozzle.
    Douchenozzle? That's cute, the first thing that comes into your head to call me is the thing Paragon inserts into your bug infested ass regularly before he fucks it. Even he isn't that dirty, although you wouldn't think it to look at him. Who cares if it was an infraction or not, it was as good as, since I'd done nothing to even deserve a warning other than make you a little bit more uneasy about clicking links.
  • NegrophobeNegrophobe Regular
    edited October 2011
    Nick Griffin is just running a ponzi scheme; Andrew Brons would make a much better chairman. Personally I believe we need another Oswald Mosley type.
  • tachosomozatachosomoza Regular
    edited October 2011
    This went from a discussion of banning me, to a discussion of how white someone has to be to be smart, to a discussion of British politics, to a discussion of Negrophobe's infractions, to a discussion of British Politics.
  • NegrophobeNegrophobe Regular
    edited October 2011
    Yeah, someone just needs to close this thread and ban Tach now.
  • dr rockerdr rocker Regular
    edited October 2011
    This went from a discussion of banning me, to a discussion of how white someone has to be to be smart, to a discussion of British politics, to a discussion of Negrophobe's infractions, to a discussion of British Politics.

    I recognise this may confuse you, I am yet to be given evidence of a black polymath. Unless you care to enlighten me?
  • tachosomozatachosomoza Regular
    edited October 2011
    There's no reason for me to be banned.
  • tachosomozatachosomoza Regular
    edited October 2011
    Sure there is. You're a filthy nigger.

    And you were defeated in the Civil War.
  • dr rockerdr rocker Regular
    edited October 2011
    There's no reason for me to be banned.

    Unless you accept the fact that blacks sold blacks into slavery. If your black ancestors had anything about them, you would still be in your shit hold of a continent, where as those that were transported were in fact the failures of your continent. Look at your original masters now. Victims of in fighting, disease spread by stupidity and mismanagement of growing land.

    Bow to those who have provided all that you have.
  • dr rockerdr rocker Regular
    edited October 2011
    And you were defeated in the Civil War.

    And to the South, it was not a civil war, just a defense of their ways. If the South had treated it as a war from the outset, your kind may still be in chains. The beginings of the civil war, the South won hands down, despite having 10% of industrial production - they did not want to beat or defeat the North, they just wanted to continue with their way of life. After they had shown they had could do such a thing, the North got pissy. If the South had been all out from the outset, rather than being magnanimous in their objectives, your ancestors would have ran to Canada if they were lucky.
  • tachosomozatachosomoza Regular
    edited October 2011
    dr rocker wrote: »
    Unless you accept the fact that blacks sold blacks into slavery.

    I never denied that blacks sold blacks into slavery. Hell, the richest plantation owner/slave breeder in South Carolina was a black guy named Ellison.

    dr rocker wrote: »
    And to the South, it was not a civil war, just a defense of their ways. If the South had treated it as a war from the outset, your kind may still be in chains. The beginings of the civil war, the South won hands down, despite having 10% of industrial production - they did not want to beat or defeat the North, they just wanted to continue with their way of life. After they had shown they had could do such a thing, the North got pissy. If the South had been all out from the outset, rather than being magnanimous in their objectives, your ancestors would have ran to Canada if they were lucky.

    The South fired the first shots of the Civil War. And no, the South didn't have the industrial capacity, equipment, money or manpower to continue a fight with the federal forces. Do you want an American history lesson?

    Also, my black ancestors were freed in 1815 and lived in Massachusetts. They returned South after the Civil War, where they set up a general store in Georgia and did quite well.
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited October 2011
    Not to mention the South had about 32.000 less miles of rail system which the north was able to use for supply, troop movements, and all manner of strategic and tactical applications that the south simply could not accomplish. The main thing that kept the south in the war was the superior tactical and strategic leadership of Lee. The north had a series of commanding generals that were fucks ups until Lincoln appointed Grant. And While Lee may have still had an edge on Grant it was not enough to overcome the lack of resource and logistical challenges with the south face and the north did not.
  • dr rockerdr rocker Regular
    edited October 2011
    The South fired the first shots of the Civil War. And no, the South didn't have the industrial capacity, equipment, money or manpower to continue a fight with the federal forces. Do you want an American history lesson?

    They were right to fire the first shots. They were removing an intruder who was not welcome on what they believed was their own soveriegn territory. Shows what a bunch of fucks the union troops were when they continued to fire on some one openly seeking parle. It may have been the opening hostilities of the war, but it was akin to me removing some one from my own private property.

    As I have said before, I believe if the Confederacy had wanted to pursue a war of gains, it could have easily routed the Union in the early years.

    If I wanted a lesson, I would go to a professor. Clearly, I do not seem to need one however.
  • Darth BeaverDarth Beaver Meine Ehre heißt Treue
    edited October 2011
    dr rocker wrote: »
    They were right to fire the first shots. They were removing an intruder who was not welcome on what they believed was their own soveriegn territory. Shows what a bunch of fucks the union troops were when they continued to fire on some one openly seeking parle. It may have been the opening hostilities of the war, but it was akin to me removing some one from my own private property.

    As I have said before, I believe if the Confederacy had wanted to pursue a war of gains, it could have easily routed the Union in the early years.

    If I wanted a lesson, I would go to a professor. Clearly, I do not seem to need one however.

    If you think the South could have won the war you clearly do need some instruction on supply and logistics.
Sign In or Register to comment.