You see <saffuna> embarrassing himself on chessgames.forum?

Whatta old rat eh?>

Shameful. The libs are on the support forum mocking <tpstar> in death.

I told you before, the libs are wicked, wicked, wicked!

All this post does is ridicule White Genocide. The post does not address any of the points I brought up about White Genocide. This is one of the most common tactics of the liberals, they ridicule and mock with no substantive arguments.

I was going to delete the post. It does nothing but waste time an has no effect on most conservatives, who are aware of liberal tactics. I decided to leave it and comment on it as an example.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/c...

Snopes is a liberal propaganda site. It's completely unreliable if you're looking for the truth. They lie and parrot the liberal party line.

An example of Snopes' dishonesty is contained in the very thread GSM provided a link for. Snopes doctored the photograph of Cannon Hinnant. They gave Cannon light brown skin giving the appearance that he was a non-white.

I've seen photographs of Cannon. He was white, not light brown. It wouldn't do to show a white kid being the victim of a crime committed by a black. It doesn't fit the liberal narrative that white people can't be victims, so Snopes doctored the photo.

You don't refer to any specific instances, but your wording indicates that you are more than a bit biased about the details of some of these events. I know that I feel nervous whenever I'm driving and a police car starts following me, but I'm only worried that I'm going to get a traffic ticket, since my skin is white. I suspect that I would be more worried about coming to harm (and would have received more tickets and fewer warnings) if my skin were darker. Here's a thought experiment for you: how much more likely are you to be ticketed, jailed, or shot during a routine traffic stop if you were a white person pulled over by a white officer, as opposed to if you were a black person pulled over by a white officer? Ask some of your black friends about this.>

Blacks are stopped more because they violate the law more. Studies have shown they're actually stopped at a lower rate than whites. Such studies are suppressed by the liberal establishment.

Here's one such study, the New Jersey Turnpike study.

https://www.city-journal.org/html/r...

Blacks are lied to and told they're treated worse by white police. This is done by the anti-whites in the schools and the media in order to inflame blacks against whites.

It's part of the program of White Genocide. The anti-whites want blacks to attack white people and support anti-white measures. And they are.

<Gregor Samsa Mendel: <gezafan>--I did a brief Google search and couldn't find any evidence of anybody accusing Snopes of doctoring their photo of Cannon Hinnant.>

This is a typical liberal appeal to liberal authority. Liberals operate by looking to liberal leaders to tell them what to think.

All anyone needs to do is look at earlier pictures of Cannon Hinnant to see he is white and that some later versions of the same photos were doctored to make him look non-white.

<Examples that are very similar to the ones you use to support the existence of white genocide could be used to argue that "soft genocide" is currently being committed by any race against any other race.>

Complete nonsense. Show us these examples in the MSM.

<Certainly there are people who are convinced that "black genocide" is occurring in the United States.>

So what? Lots of people believe false things. There is a political motivation for the anti-whites to demonize white people by falsely claiming they are committing genocide against blacks. They want to promote hostility, hatred and violence against white people. it's part of the program of White Genocide.

<"...my experience has shown that whites and blacks can peaceably coexist.">

We could if blacks would stop robbing us, murdering us, raping us, torturing us, demanding special privileges over us while slandering us with false accusations of "racism."

<You, on the other hand, have already stated that whites are fighting against blacks for their very survival.>

Only partially correct. Whites are fighting for survival against non-white supremacists, including but not limited to black supremacists, and brainwashed white liberals.

<Do you believe that whites can coexist with blacks in the US?>

Blacks apparently don't believe they can. So why do they want to be with us so bad?

<If not, what sorts of solutions do you propose?>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l68...

(commentary)

"As long as they are blaming you, it means they are still jealous of you."

"You must not attempt to hold black people accountable for their actions."

"But racial discrimination against white people seems to be acceptable."

"Police are not allowed to describe offenders by race, as its seen to be 'racial stereotyping', and that's because its a minority that seem to be doing most of the offending, by head of population."

"Privilege is never being held accountable for your actions. Privilege is when society and the media excuses your anti-social behavior."

"If certain crimes are not believed due to skin colour I think we have to stop believing in our police forces. If this is how they act I can get behind the whole defund movement. Seems like they are a drain on public finances."

"So crimes can be committed because of skin color. Just identify as blm. You'll be fine."

"No race box on forms anymore, but 8 choices of sex?"

"What about when jussie smollett got attacked by them black brothers? whats that called?"

"When every race of people is forced to live together cultures are bound to clash so the question is how to prevent this without offending anybody and the answer is simple ... You can't do it. Study history and look at the races fighting their own people, and every other race for dominance. There never was peace in this world."

"Woe to those who call evil good and good evil. Who put darkness for light and light for darkness. Who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFE...

(commentary)

"Would have been easier and cheaper to have removed the students."

"Now nothing is exempt from being labeled racist."

"They've run out of statues now they're going after rocks."

"Students offended by a rock? I'd say the rock is smarter than the students.."

"Neither the rock, the students, nor the 100 year so called racist term was the issue. It was just them (globalist left) exerting their influence and power. Look forward to more of this: once they get started, NOTHING is safe!"

"Who's more of an idiot.. A) The people who put in these complaints? or B) the people that assessed them and thought they were valid enough to spend thousands in removing a rock."

"Utterly pathetic . But we allow it to happen . We allowed these loonies to dictate how we live."

"I have bunch of racist tree stumps and racist weeds I want removed from my backyard. Who do I call?"

"they'll eventually start protesting against clouds - you know, being white and all."

"The rock was screaming ... "I Can't Breathe" ... as it was being towed away."

"Poor displaced rock. Humming away "I am a rock I am an islaa... No wait stop aaaah" Where did they put the rock so nobody is offended?"

"The thing I don't get is the vast majority of people don't play this game but the deranged minority keep winning?"

If anyone wants to know what was on the plaque that was obviously removed:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Di00bwv...

<42 tonne 'racist rock' removed from university campus>>

1) Where did they move it?
(My money is on Robert KKK Byrd's estate)

2) Did it receive any CRT training?
(Critical Rock Theory)

So let me get this straight.

You deleted a post. Then responded to selected parts of that post, a post that no longer exists.

How can a person make a reasoned evaluation with such restricted information?

How can a person make a reasoned evaluation with such restricted information?>

GSM made the asinine suggestion that maybe earlier pictures of the white murder victim were made to look white. That's what I deleted. Liberals often spam discussions with ridiculous arguments.

Liberals are not capable of making reasoned evaluations. They respond according to their dogmatic beliefs or what they consider to be a politically correct response or just to act like jerks.

For example, the photo of Cannon Hinnant was obviously doctored. Liberals will never admit it. It doesn't fit into their delusional belief that the liberal media is fair and honest.

Why? I copied the relevant parts of the post and responded to them.

Why should I let liberals make ludicrous arguments to spam my forum or just to be jerks?"

<He can delete it. Just don't respond to it after you delete it.>>

Here's an example of how liberals deal in half-truths.

Everything that was in the original post that wasn't spam was reproduced in my reply.

How much coverage did the liberal media give to this horrible crime?

If a lib makes an extraordinarily stupid argument, it's always best to leave it and let it embarrass him forever. When you delete it, you deny everyone the chance to comment on it and tear it apart. You deny the people with common sense a good laugh. And you allow the lib to escape his stupidity instead of being forced to defend it.

Did you ever imagine what an awful, unpleasant task it must be to defend something that you know is idiotic bs? That's not a pleasant experience at all, so why not punish the libs by forcing them to do just that?

All anyone needs to do is look at earlier pictures of Cannon Hinnant to see he is white and that some later versions of the same photos were doctored to make him look non-white.>

So I will probably not do this anymore. If a liberal posts a thread with abuse and/or spam mixed with points that can be responded to I'll just delete the the whole thread, the abuse, spam and possibly valid points as well.

Shortly after the murder of Cannon Hinnant the story and his picture appeared on alternate sites. Later pictures that appeared in the liberal mainstream media were darker. I believe them to be doctored.

The MSM has a history of doctoring photos. The MSM showed photos of George Zimmerman that were doctored to make him look more white. Zimmerman was the man who killed Trayvon Martin in self defense and was maliciously prosecuted for it. You can see why people like me are distrustful of the MSM.

I deleted GSM's suggestion that early photos of Hinnant were doctored to make him look white. I regarded this as ridiculous spam. There are so many white children being murdered by non-whites, particularly blacks, that white civil rights activist don't have to doctor anything.

Here's a partial list of white children recently murdered by blacks: Reese Bowman, Mikel Fetterman, Levi Ellerbe, Garrett Phillips, Logan Tipton, Rowan Sweeney, Victoria Rose Smith, Adah Lesslie and Noah Lesslie. None of these were given major coverage by the MSM.

Non-white supremacists and white liberals claim that white on black crime is covered up by the MSM. This is exactly the opposite of reality. Black on white crime is covered up.

In retrospect maybe GSM actually believed this was a possibility and it wasn't spam. Liberals believe a lot of ridiculous things. They also make a lot of bogus arguments so it's hard to tell when they're serious. Next time I'll leave such comments in, so they can't claim I'm engaging in some sort of fraud.

Photos ain't all they do:

<NBC: We're Sorry We Edited The Trayvon Tape To Make George Zimmerman Sound Racist>

<Here's the transcript of the audio NBC played:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.

Here's the actual transcript:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.

Dispatcher: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?