GOP contender for Paul Ryan's House seat posts racist meme. Twitter bans him

@Prime Rib @Sohei @KONG-D'SNT-TAP
Sorry, everyone seems to have missed the sarcasm. I guess it's a pretty commonly held belief around here, so it's easy for it to be taken seriously.

It's a common talking point for the right. You would think that the fact that the civil rights movement shifted parties would stop the talking point from being brought up. NOPE.

Right-winged posters eat that shit up. Just like they slerp on the cock of Donnie. Some even call him "Daddy". How fucking pathetic is that? How bout @BOWHUNTER 's Avatar? Very sad....

 
Race and gender is all the left cares about. They treat everyone differently based on their race... and it's not good for whites


I’m white also and my life hasn’t changed one iota. But I’d guess this is how you were raised so this shit is deeply imbedded in your psyche.
 
@Prime Rib @Sohei @KONG-D'SNT-TAP
Sorry, everyone seems to have missed the sarcasm. I guess it's a pretty commonly held belief around here, so it's easy for it to be taken seriously.


tenor.gif
 
I'd need to read the scientific article instead of the popular media but I really doubt that Cheddar Man was black. It's probably similar to the guy found in Spain, he also had blue eyes and "dark" skin, but his dark skin was probably closer to modern middle eastern people, not sub-saharan africans as depicted in the MSM.

Getting more technical, the fossil was homozygote in two regions SLC24A2 and SLC24A5.
https://www.nature.com/articles/nat...tracking_referrer=news.nationalgeographic.com


These two genes represent around 40% of the skin color difference between Europeans and West Africans. It's still found at around 20% presence in southern Spain. Andalusians are darker than other Europeans, however, they're not black.
They also claim that they didn't need light skin as they hunted food with Vitamin D and claim the Inuit have dark skin while living in a cold climate because they eat a lot of vitamin D.
Sure, except the Inuit are not black at all, they're just a little darker than modern europeans.



It's pretty obvious why they're representing him as black, it's for the same reason the BBC was representing roman centurions and achilles as black. They want to claim some immigrant from Mali is as British as some guy who can trace his ancestry 5 thousand years back.

MiddleEasterners have the fair skin mutation. And their skin color is considered fair skin. Fair skin was introduced into Europe by Neolithic MiddleEastern farmers.

Cheddar Man, like La Brana is a Western Hunter Gatherer (WHG), so he isn't racially East Asiatic like the Inuit. In West Eurasians, fair skin is associated with a specific mutation, which WHGs did not have.

I do not think the scientists are claiming dark skin absent evidence strongly pointing in that direction, because the earlier reconstruction of Cheddar Man portrayed him with fair skin, this was back when science did not know about the fair skin mutation in west Eurasians. The arguable point is just how dark his skin was. It could have been closer to the brown skin of a San bushmen than the black of a Western African.

Where did the BBC claim Romans were Black? I know they suggested there were Blacks within the ranks of Roman legions, but I do not recall they ever claiming the Romans as a whole were Black. This claim of dark or black skin for Cheddar Man isn't a claim made by media, it is coming from reputable institutions of higher learning. If there was any sort of politically motivated manipulation going on, the claim would be severely criticized by peers in the academic community.

There isn't a mass conspiracy by academic institutions to invent or cover-up results, but mass media, instead of presenting conclusions in a measured and cautious tone, often times goes overboard in how they present academic findings . That's not the fault of the Academics, it is the fault of popular media, who want sensationalist headlines and or have a social agenda to push. If there was just a conspiracy to lie about history to make people accept open borders and mass immigration into the West, you wouldn't have seen the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Co.) and Discovery Channel peddle the unsupported fringe hypothesis of Paleolithic European hunter-gatherers arriving in North America before the ancestors of the Amerindians.

-
The actual paper on Cheddar Man will be out soon.
The Natural History Museum in London has a write-up on Cheddar Man.
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/cheddar-man-mesolithic-britain-blue-eyed-boy.html

ScienceMag
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018...heddar-man-one-england-s-oldest-modern-humans

Phys.org . Chris Stringer comments on the dark skin of Cheddar Man. Stringer is respected and well known paleoanthropoligst. Not the sort of person to make bold claims unsupported by evidence, to further a social agenda. The only surprising thing about his statement in the below article is him mentioning it is "very surprising" Cheddar Man had dark skin and blue eyes. For folks following this field, it isn't all that surprising, since La Brana 1 was also shown to have dark skin and blue eyes. Maybe he was just speaking from the point of view of what a layman would know.
https://phys.org/news/2018-02-dna-modern-briton-dark-skin.html
 
Last edited:
MiddleEasterners have the fair skin mutation. And their skin color is considered fair skin. Fair skin was introduced into Europe by Neolithic MiddleEastern farmers.

Cheddar Man, like La Brana is a Western Hunter Gatherer (WHG), so he isn't racially East Asiatic like the Inuit. In West Eurasians, fair skin is associated with a specific mutation, which WHGs did not have.

I do not think the scientists are claiming dark skin absent evidence strongly pointing in that direction, because the earlier reconstruction of Cheddar Man portrayed him with fair skin, this was back when science did not know about the fair skin mutation in west Eurasians. The arguable point is just how dark his skin was. It could have been closer to the brown skin of a San bushmen than the black of a Western African.

Where did the BBC claim Romans were Black? I know they suggested there were Blacks within the ranks of Roman legions, but I do not recall they ever claiming the Romans as a whole were Black. This claim of dark or black skin for Cheddar Man isn't a claim made by media, it is coming from reputable institutions of higher learning. If there was any sort of politically motivated manipulation going on, the claim would be severely criticized by peers in the academic community.

There isn't a mass conspiracy by academic institutions to invent or cover-up results, but mass media, instead of presenting conclusions in a measured and cautious tone, often times goes overboard in how they present academic findings . That's not the fault of the Academics, it is the fault of popular media, who want sensationalist headlines and or have a social agenda to push. If there was just a conspiracy to lie about history to make people accept open borders and mass immigration into the West, you wouldn't have seen the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Co.) and Discovery Channel peddle the unsupported fringe hypothesis of Paleolithic European hunter-gatherers arriving in North America before the ancestors of the Amerindians.

-
The actual paper on Cheddar Man will be out soon.
The Natural History Museum in London has a write-up on Cheddar Man.
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/cheddar-man-mesolithic-britain-blue-eyed-boy.html

ScienceMag
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018...heddar-man-one-england-s-oldest-modern-humans

Phys.org . Chris Stringer comments on the dark skin of Cheddar Man. Stringer is respected and well known paleoanthropoligst. Not the sort of person to make bold claims unsupported by evidence, to further a social agenda. The only surprising thing about his statement in the below article is him mentioning it is "very surprising" Cheddar Man had dark skin and blue eyes. For folks following this field, it isn't all that surprising, since La Brana 1 was also shown to have dark skin and blue eyes. Maybe he was just speaking from the point of view of what a layman would know.
https://phys.org/news/2018-02-dna-modern-briton-dark-skin.html
It's not just one mutation, it's the ones I mentioned in the La Brana 1. They represent up to 40% skin color difference between western africans and europeans, but there is still more mutations we don't know about.
I didn't mean the early europeans would have the same mutation as the inuits, just that some articles mentioned the inuits can have dark skin because they eat vitamin D but they don't have really dark skin and that fair skin wasn't needed in the early euros because they also eat lots of fatty fish and the like.
At least in the La Brana 1 they reconstructed him with european features while they made a negroid Cheddar man.

About BBC black romans, I didn't mean they represent all romans as black, but they put a Centurion as black, a black viking and their new series about Troy has a black achilles.
There is one possible african skeleton found in roman britain of a female. That female could be a slave, a merchant, the wife of some guy, but not a centurion.
 
Remember when Netanyahu son was attacked for dating a non-Jew?

How about Bar Refaeli and Leonardo Dicaprio? they even sent her letters apparently telling her not to date a goyim!


Genetic purity is important to the Jewish people. For Whites this is considering Nazism. Oh how dreadful that the Nazi's wished Germans to remain German. No Jews are not White, they do not identify themselves as White so are not White. Simple as that. Perhaps the reason they are not listed in census as Jews is because only the Jews can know their real population (hmm that is odd isn't it?) Most census of European countries I've seen has no mention of Jews as an ethnic or racial group but only religious.


If you haven't realised this many of the people who push desegregation and mass immigration tend to be Jews. This is clearly because they wish Whites to intermix and brown. Meanwhile they live in their ethnic enclaves and have a Jewish state.



The people on this place are in denial and quick to call anyone a neo-Nazi for pointing out truth.
War Room mods right now:

whack%252520a%252520mole.gif
 
Remember when Netanyahu son was attacked for dating a non-Jew?

How about Bar Refaeli and Leonardo Dicaprio? they even sent her letters apparently telling her not to date a goyim!


Genetic purity is important to the Jewish people. For Whites this is considering Nazism. Oh how dreadful that the Nazi's wished Germans to remain German. No Jews are not White, they do not identify themselves as White so are not White. Simple as that. Perhaps the reason they are not listed in census as Jews is because only the Jews can know their real population (hmm that is odd isn't it?) Most census of European countries I've seen has no mention of Jews as an ethnic or racial group but only religious.


If you haven't realised this many of the people who push desegregation and mass immigration tend to be Jews. This is clearly because they wish Whites to intermix and brown. Meanwhile they live in their ethnic enclaves and have a Jewish state.



The people on this place are in denial and quick to call anyone a neo-Nazi for pointing out truth.

What white people really need to worry about is all the Jew Asian marriages. Super smart children but without tons of body hair. They will be unstoppable
 
Wow, it's not often the accused is actually racist these days. That wss a pretty shitty tweet what an asshole.
 
I'm not necessarily arguing for open borders but I think this argument is a bit weak. I don't think Western countries, if they truly believe that their values are universal, should hold themselves to the standards set by Saudi Arabia or China.

That said, I'm not saying there aren't good reasons to oppose large scale immigration from the third. I'm just saying "w-well they do it too!" isn't one of those good reasons.

Not just that but expecting Western liberals to have the same opinions about the immigration policies of non-Western countries is kinda of imperialistic. "Why don't they say the same thing about China??" Um, because they don't live in China maybe?

And of course, this doesn't even touch on the fact that no one is actually proposing "open borders." I can't recall a single proposal from any American lawmaker to get rid of the Immigration Service Department, or create a EU-style system for the entire world.

Seems like when right-wing hysterics repeat something often enough, it'll stick.
 
Everyone here in the States is so damn race obsessed. So damn tiresome. Nasty thing to post , and does no good whatsoever, regardless of if he is actually racist or not. What's his endgame? To have more reasons for people to attack whites? Seems that POS needs to think a bit more before spouting his nonsense. At least we can see him for what he is. That's something at least.
 
Not just that but expecting Western liberals to have the same opinions about the immigration policies of non-Western countries is kinda of imperialistic. "Why don't they say the same thing about China??" Um, because they don't live in China maybe?

And of course, this doesn't even touch on the fact that no one is actually proposing "open borders." I can't recall a single proposal from any American lawmaker to get rid of the Immigration Service Department, or create a EU-style system for the entire world.

Seems like when right-wing hysterics repeat something often enough, it'll stick.

It's an ever shifting goal post when it comes to immigration.

First it's just illegal immigration until you point out that numbers peeked a almost a decade ago and have been going down.

Than it's mass migration until you point out that doesn't exist in the US.

Next it's just "I want more vetting, why shouldn't we vet?" And you point out how strenuous the vetting process is and ask how it's flawed to which you never get a response or they point to one individual actor while ignoring the stats of legal immigrants to the native population.
 
Last edited:
It's an ever shifting goal post when it comes to immigration.

First it's just illegal immigration until you point out that numbers peeked a almost a decade ago and have been going down.

Than it's mass migration until you point out that doesn't exist in the US.

Next it's just "I want more vetting, why shouldn't we vet?" And you point out how strenuous the vetting process is and ask how it's flawed to which you never get a response or they point to one individual actor while ignoring the stats of legal immigrants to the native population.

This is why I respect the few that straight up say their main concern is the ethnic and cultural makeup of the country. They're nervous about seeing so many brown, black and yellow faces and that's all there is to it.

They can't propose that all or most nonwhites just get expelled from the country, so they propose the next best thing: end birthright citizenship and deport all 11 million undocumented immigrants. That'll stem the tide a bit.
 
This is why I respect the few that straight up say their main concern is the ethnic and cultural makeup of the country. They're nervous about seeing so many brown, black and yellow faces and that's all there is to it.

They can't propose that all or most nonwhites just get expelled from the country, so they propose the next best thing: end birthright citizenship and deport all 11 million undocumented immigrants. That'll stem the tide a bit.
I support ending birthright citizenship, because lots of nationalities are abusing it. It was never meant to allow Koreans, Chinese, Arabs, Indians etc..come here on visit visas and confer citizenship for their kids. The 14th amendment was designed to free the children of slaves.

These folks have no paid into the system, and neither have their kids, but when their kids apply for college, they get all the financial and placement perks that Americans kids get. It is just abuse and exploitation of America.

I do however oppose strict immigration laws and deportation for Amerindians here illegally. So in this sense I am certainly different from those on the right who are concerned about the browning of America. I have no problem with deporting illegals from other regions of the world, as long as they are not genuine refugees.
 
Tapped the fuck out.
Nah, posted, then realised I hadn't tagged anyone in that I was responding to, and I remember being told that it didn't work if you tagged in an edit, so just reposted in a new message below it with the tags.
 
Back
Top