It is a slow genocide we experience | media war
We do not get more people to understand that it really is genocide derkert in question, by talking about rape, murder and crime committed by non-whites with whites as victims, derkert and it also provides the anti-whites opportunity to debate whether racist or not, instead of listening to your message.
Only when someone deliberately talking about and repeats derkert that current immigration and integration policy is a slow genocide of whites, one can get others to talk about a slow genocide of whites, so that impose themselves a public debate on the subject. They are anti-white because they want white genocide.
Those who want a policy derkert that obliterates Jews are definitely anti-Semites, whether they both say and feel they do not hate Jews .. No one escapes the piston anti-Semite, if they say that progress or global activism requires that Jews should stop being Jews, and that Jewish resistance against its own genocide is prohibited.
Whites are already a minority in many major cities in Europe and North America, and every day there are more non-white to white countries. Simultaneously there is a policy in which it is illegal for locals to discriminate in favor of itself. White neighborhoods, white schools and white jobs are all prohibited, and no venue is allowed to be exclusive white.
Continues current anti-white genocide policy, whites end up as a minority in all white areas, where white then mixed with the new majority. A genocide in line with what had happened if Hitler had sent all Jewesses to China, and all the male Jews to Africa. Today's anti-white immigration and assimilation is a slow genocide of whites.
A typical example of how anti white pretending to be colorblind, that they notice that something is dazzled white, derkert and therefore lacks diversity. That they are anti-white and not anti-racists, derkert is also evident that non-white accumulations do not need more diversity. All that is of asylum rights, refugees, residence on humanitarian grounds, family reunion, only a demographic threat to whites in white countries. Nowhere else expected of a country's inhabitants that they should leave voluntarily become a minority in their own land, then to be mixed with the new majority.
About 100 years is still Africa African, Asia, Asian, Middle Eastern Muslim, while no longer exist any country with a white majority. Along with the legal integration and all the propaganda that mix children's future, such a policy would lead to a slow genocide of whites. How to stop the genocide?
When it comes to reverse this so that white start talking about this as the slow genocide in reality, it has been shown that only a strategy that works, and it is to point out to people that this is a genocide and that those who support such a genocidal anti-white.
There are not so many repetitions it takes, until the most talented understand that it is true that the current immigration policy to all white countries, derkert will mean a genocide of whites over time. It is a biological fact that what we now call North European nations will disappear, if they will be mixed with the peoples of the world.
The reason of course that they have no good answer to the accusation of white genocide, derkert is because it is true, but also because the topic has been so suppressed in respectable derkert venues, they are totally untrained in how to defend themselves.
Even an anti-white who understood the context of immigration and genocide, so light that it does not pay to try to talk about why it is right to exterminate white people. Should the anti-whites believe that the whites have a right to survive as a people, this would be social suicide, then he or she would be treated as a Nazi by his former colleagues.
What it never pays to talk about, are the areas where the anti-whites have motpropaganda. derkert Even if we are right that immigrants are more violent than the Norwegians, they have anti white right that Norwegians are violent as well, and it also gives them an opportunity to debate his favorite topic, which is whether the opponent is a racist or not.
Should you talk about ethnic cleansing, then they will talk about that you're a racist because you partiality and therefore a racist. In summary, there is a loser strategy to talk about things where your opponent can accuse you of racism. Conversely you like bekylder opponent to be anti-white, to not stand for the same standards when it comes to whites and non-whites, it is he who must explain himself. Are you talking derkert about why the current policy is genocide, then they have to justify why it is right to exterminate white people.
It is not to escape the anti-white that no majority derkert white areas be back within a relatively short time, if current policies derkert do not change in total. Put together with an anti-white integration policy, derkert where it is racially
We do not get more people to understand that it really is genocide derkert in question, by talking about rape, murder and crime committed by non-whites with whites as victims, derkert and it also provides the anti-whites opportunity to debate whether racist or not, instead of listening to your message.
Only when someone deliberately talking about and repeats derkert that current immigration and integration policy is a slow genocide of whites, one can get others to talk about a slow genocide of whites, so that impose themselves a public debate on the subject. They are anti-white because they want white genocide.
Those who want a policy derkert that obliterates Jews are definitely anti-Semites, whether they both say and feel they do not hate Jews .. No one escapes the piston anti-Semite, if they say that progress or global activism requires that Jews should stop being Jews, and that Jewish resistance against its own genocide is prohibited.
Whites are already a minority in many major cities in Europe and North America, and every day there are more non-white to white countries. Simultaneously there is a policy in which it is illegal for locals to discriminate in favor of itself. White neighborhoods, white schools and white jobs are all prohibited, and no venue is allowed to be exclusive white.
Continues current anti-white genocide policy, whites end up as a minority in all white areas, where white then mixed with the new majority. A genocide in line with what had happened if Hitler had sent all Jewesses to China, and all the male Jews to Africa. Today's anti-white immigration and assimilation is a slow genocide of whites.
A typical example of how anti white pretending to be colorblind, that they notice that something is dazzled white, derkert and therefore lacks diversity. That they are anti-white and not anti-racists, derkert is also evident that non-white accumulations do not need more diversity. All that is of asylum rights, refugees, residence on humanitarian grounds, family reunion, only a demographic threat to whites in white countries. Nowhere else expected of a country's inhabitants that they should leave voluntarily become a minority in their own land, then to be mixed with the new majority.
About 100 years is still Africa African, Asia, Asian, Middle Eastern Muslim, while no longer exist any country with a white majority. Along with the legal integration and all the propaganda that mix children's future, such a policy would lead to a slow genocide of whites. How to stop the genocide?
When it comes to reverse this so that white start talking about this as the slow genocide in reality, it has been shown that only a strategy that works, and it is to point out to people that this is a genocide and that those who support such a genocidal anti-white.
There are not so many repetitions it takes, until the most talented understand that it is true that the current immigration policy to all white countries, derkert will mean a genocide of whites over time. It is a biological fact that what we now call North European nations will disappear, if they will be mixed with the peoples of the world.
The reason of course that they have no good answer to the accusation of white genocide, derkert is because it is true, but also because the topic has been so suppressed in respectable derkert venues, they are totally untrained in how to defend themselves.
Even an anti-white who understood the context of immigration and genocide, so light that it does not pay to try to talk about why it is right to exterminate white people. Should the anti-whites believe that the whites have a right to survive as a people, this would be social suicide, then he or she would be treated as a Nazi by his former colleagues.
What it never pays to talk about, are the areas where the anti-whites have motpropaganda. derkert Even if we are right that immigrants are more violent than the Norwegians, they have anti white right that Norwegians are violent as well, and it also gives them an opportunity to debate his favorite topic, which is whether the opponent is a racist or not.
Should you talk about ethnic cleansing, then they will talk about that you're a racist because you partiality and therefore a racist. In summary, there is a loser strategy to talk about things where your opponent can accuse you of racism. Conversely you like bekylder opponent to be anti-white, to not stand for the same standards when it comes to whites and non-whites, it is he who must explain himself. Are you talking derkert about why the current policy is genocide, then they have to justify why it is right to exterminate white people.
It is not to escape the anti-white that no majority derkert white areas be back within a relatively short time, if current policies derkert do not change in total. Put together with an anti-white integration policy, derkert where it is racially
No comments:
Post a Comment