Whites at Sundance Film Whatever Give Standing Ovation to White Hating Ideological Slander

JimBowie1958

Old Fogey
Sep 25, 2011
63,590
16,767
This stuff is so predictable, like the corruption of most of our art by closet Marxists turning our own entertainment into a weapon against us.

Nate Truner was a religious nut case, who thought that God was telling him to go around murdering whites, and he and his dozens of fellow slaves did exactly that, sparing very few and killing hundreds of white children and women who were caught by surprise with their men folk away at work.

But the libtards have never ceased to promote Turner as some kind of genius protoMarxist agitator and champion of freedom, and that stack of lies continues to this day with "Birth of a Nation".

Sundance: 'Birth of a Nation' Receives Rapturous Standing Ovation at Premiere

If white libtards want to see so many whites killed so badly, why dont they start with themselves and a shotgun stuck in their own damned mouths? Well, because they are too good for their own medicine and well who would tell the ignorant darkies how to do anything if our elites offed themselves too?

Of course the real story is much different. Nate Turner was a religious nut bag who did what he did despite admitting in court that his owner treated him kindly as did most of those in Southampton County VA. It had nothing to do with being mistreated, it was all about Turners mental problems.

Nat Turner's slave rebellion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But a man who slaughtered hundreds of innocent white people, most of whom never owned a slave in their lives, makes a person quite the hero among self-hating white lunatics that now dominate our society and its art.

Cant help but wonder how many whites will die this time after some marginally functional morons see this movie and act out the anger in provokes in them against all whites.

It will probably be more than Turner was able to murder himself.
 
An actual historians critique on the libtard version of Nate Turner and some real facts.

A Short Historiography of Nat Turner's Revolt: Fact, Fiction, and William Styron, Alpata: A Journal of History

Absolutely priceless.

I particularly loved this gem :

"did what he did despite admitting in court that his owner treated him kindly"


What an ungrateful fellow he must have been.

What would you consider to be an appropriate behaviour for someone trying to cast off the tyranny of slavery ?
 
Absolutely priceless.

I particularly loved this gem :

"did what he did despite admitting in court that his owner treated him kindly"


What an ungrateful fellow he must have been.

What would you consider to be an appropriate behaviour for someone trying to cast off the tyranny of slavery ?
Turner was not some genius ideologue trying to rid the world of slavery.

He was a nut case who thought God was telling him to kill every white person he could come across.

People who actually care for the real historical facts are trying to keep the record clean of the Marxist agit-prop from libtards like you.
 
So the slave rebellion had no links to slavery ?

Ok, if I am being honest it is you who is coming across as a "nut job".

Are you a slave owner yourself ?
 
This stuff is so predictable, like the corruption of most of our art by closet Marxists turning our own entertainment into a weapon against us.

Nate Truner was a religious nut case, who thought that God was telling him to go around murdering whites, and he and his dozens of fellow slaves did exactly that, sparing very few and killing hundreds of white children and women who were caught by surprise with their men folk away at work.

But the libtards have never ceased to promote Turner as some kind of genius protoMarxist agitator and champion of freedom, and that stack of lies continues to this day with "Birth of a Nation".

Sundance: 'Birth of a Nation' Receives Rapturous Standing Ovation at Premiere

If white libtards want to see so many whites killed so badly, why dont they start with themselves and a shotgun stuck in their own damned mouths? Well, because they are too good for their own medicine and well who would tell the ignorant darkies how to do anything if our elites offed themselves too?

Of course the real story is much different. Nate Turner was a religious nut bag who did what he did despite admitting in court that his owner treated him kindly as did most of those in Southampton County VA. It had nothing to do with being mistreated, it was all about Turners mental problems.

Nat Turner's slave rebellion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But a man who slaughtered hundreds of innocent white people, most of whom never owned a slave in their lives, makes a person quite the hero among self-hating white lunatics that now dominate our society and its art.

Cant help but wonder how many whites will die this time after some marginally functional morons see this movie and act out the anger in provokes in them against all whites.

It will probably be more than Turner was able to murder himself.
But I bet you think Spartacus is pretty great
 
You treat a people like property for long enough, they will come back at you in a vicious way.
 
So the slave rebellion had no links to slavery ?

Wow, you are stupid. I said that Turner was not motivated to destroy slavery as you libtards present him doing. He was a religious nutball.

How you get 'no links to slavery' out of that is prime evidence of your inability to read.

Ok, if I am being honest it is you who is coming across as a "nut job".

OF course you would never be honest, so lets just shelve that silly notion now, shall we?

Are you a slave owner yourself ?

Lol, you really are an idiot.
 
You treat a people like property for long enough, they will come back at you in a vicious way.
Lol, and it had nothing to do with what Turner did, or is expecting you to actually read and think too much of a request?
 
Yeah but he had kindly owners.
How is that quantified ?
Perhaps they fitted a Jacuzzi at the back of his condo ?
If you Marxists couldnt make shit up and reply to Straw Man arguments all day, you would have nothing to do other than lose every discussion you ever have and look like the morons you are.
 
You treat a people like property for long enough, they will come back at you in a vicious way.

Yes. Democrats should stop doing it.

What's the difference in slavery back then and Democrat policy today?

- Blacks depending on rich whites to provide their housing, education and food
- Blacks having to do shitty jobs to get the above things
- Whites trying to keep blacks dependent on the above things

Is that slavery or 2016 Democrat policy? Welfare. Section 8 housing. Food stamps. Obama phones. Requiring a minimal effort at a shitty job to keep the welfare. Rewarding them for extra offspring with more handouts.

Dems are keeping the plantations going.
 
Yeah but he had kindly owners.
How is that quantified ?
Perhaps they fitted a Jacuzzi at the back of his condo ?
If you Marxists couldnt make shit up and reply to Straw Man arguments all day, you would have nothing to do other than lose every discussion you ever have and look like the morons you are.
If I wasnt laid up at home I wouldnt bother with a herbert like yourself but.......................

You state as follows:
killing hundreds of white children and women who were caught by surprise with their men folk away at work.

Even the source that you quote states that between 55 and 65 people were killed.Its a bit of a difference. The thing is that if you lie about something that is so straightforward it tends to undermine the rest of your hysterical drivel.

You would probably be locked up in the Uk for spreading race hate propaganda. You are not well.
 

Forum List

Back
Top