Susan Boyle assaulted, harassed by gang of 15 youths

not really, since I can read what you post.

no it hasn't.

 

no

which would be interesting, if I said that list was the only examples of racism.

 

No, I said your list was racist. I called bullshit on your correlation = causation argument and why the statistics you are trying to peddle are meaningless.

actually I am correctly pointing out the logical fallacy you are using.

 

Black Irish refers to a flotilla of Spaniards that crashed in Ireland, and never left, and eventually intermingled and inter bred. My family has many representations of this phenomenon. Most of us are pale white, but all of my fathers side has black hair, all 5 of them. one of my cousins is dark olive skin, in the summer he becomes "black" On my moms side we all have light brown hair and pale.

"Black Irish" can be pale with dark hair, or dark with dark hair, or pale with pale hair, it depends on how the genes manifest.

 

My mother was black Irish. I actually did know all this. My comment was actually facetious (about them having Shaquille O'Neal in mind).

 

People who lived in tribes didn't only interact with members of their own tribe. They traded and associated with others as well.

What you read and interpret for yourself has no bearing on what I believe.

People can see for themselves that your argument in post # 323 is not the same as your argument in post # 443.

 

Great, so you were incorrect when you said being a racist was the same thing as being a supremacist. If you can be a racist without being a supremacist, there's obviously a difference between them.

If racism does not require supremacism than obviously the two things are different from each other.

 

I think that's a legend, they're older than that.

One theory I've heard, probably equally legendary, is that they're the remnants of the Picts, who may have been the original Caledonians.

The women are said to be among the Great Beauties of the world.

 

of course the things I read about what you believe, has bearing on what you believe. lol

that's a rather silly comment, since my argument has not changed in any way. I simply don't feel like typing "you think white/Europeans are superior to black/brown people" and instead shorten it to "you are racist".

 

Uh, no.

not really, no.

supremacy is a component to racism.

 

How so?

We've already determined that "racist" can mean other things besides a belief in supremacy, so the two are not interchangeable like you seem to believe.

 

Feel free to explain why.

Now you're directly contradicting yourself. You just said that supremacy was not a required part of racism.

 

your posts show you to be racist.

nonsense.

 

Your interpretations of my posts don't affect what I believe.

Then explain how they are interchangeable.

 

I'm not attempting to give interpretations. I'm pointing out that you are a racist, and this is easily demonstrated by your posts.

being a racial supremacist, is racist. I don't feel like typing out the long version, so I use the short version. "racist".

where did you get lost?

 

No, its not.

Its called factual, and lefties and white cucks can't handle facts.

 

But that wasn't your original argument. Your original argument was that I supposedly thought whites were superior to black and brown. You later admitted that being a racist doesn't require supremacy. You changed your argument.

At your false premise. I do not believe whites are superior to black and brown people.

 

anybody that displays such fears of racial and cultural identity is the definition of weakness

 

How does caring about your racial group being extinguished equate to a sign of weakness, let alone "the definition of weakness"? It's a simple choice, you can either care or not care.

 

Actually this is documented researched fact.

I know because my family is as I posted and we have done the genealogy and research.

 

It's not of course, it's a valid concern. For anybody but the White Man, they call it "pride"...somehow when a Caucasian feels the same way though it's sheets and hoods.

 

What you're doing is the same thing everyone with no argument does. You search for a "logical fallacy", you attempt to put it on display, and then you declare yourself a winner without ever having to actually engage in a conversation.

I don't care what you call. I don't care whether you think it's bullshit. If you feel that way, you can make the argument for it. Otherwise, you're just going to be someone that got a C in Rhetoric 101. Refute the argument or go back to the kids table.

 

They were Catholics, and seldom married the slaves, but using captured slaves to expand the population was strategic. The Spanish and Portuguese used the The Chachnama (Arab conquest of Sind) "A Pleasant Tale of Conquest" as a model.

 

People of good will can get along quite well despite various genetic differences. The problem begins with people lacking this or those too unintelligent to muster it. Unfortunately, all cultures seem to produce too many of those; hence the problem tends to be perpetual except in controlled settings where those types can be excluded.

Babies more have an aversion to strangers, and it is quite understandable that a baby that has never seen a white or black person before, or even habitually, will react. That said, when I had a flock of rabbits by the same parents, the like-colored ones would tend to nibble grass closer to the siblings of similarly colored fur than the others.