FancyMancy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2017
- Messages
- 7,032
This post is split into 3 posts. Firstly because it is long - it exceeded the 100 000 character limit, then because it exceeded the 35 picture limit. The pictures will have loaded by the time you get to them in the thread. I quote a lot from the video. I colour-code the quotes, not one colour for each and every person speaking, but to make it easier to read and notice what is a quote and what I am commenting.
With strong language from the start, some racist images and discussion of race matters.
Ashley Banjo explores British history & the negative reaction to his Britain's Got Talent dance. He meets supporters like actor David Harewood & critics like comedian Jim Davidson.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/AHDu99ebqBQj
In all of that episode of Celebrity Gogglebox, not just this clip, regarding the goggleboxers, not the programmes/films that were being watched, were only Black or Asian or mixed families or friends. There were no Whites. Those two at the end, who were saying about Blacks multiplying and that we having to accept it because she reckons we can't do anything about it, are not celebrities; they are on the regular Gogglebox programme, as are two Asians who were saying about people complaining to Ofcom about being uncomfortable.
My comments are below. My comments may or may not reflect that of Joy of Satan Ministries, its materials, or its users. These are my own. This is quite long, and I didn't think it would be this long, so it might be a good idea to go through it more than once. Itmight be surely is controversial and difficult. Undoubtedly, I say things below which are offensive. You have been warned. You are also welcome to watch, read and reply.
Dear Black readers. I reply honestly in this post. I think that you will be offended by what I say here, but please try to understand what I am trying to say. You have been warned. You are also welcome to watch, read and reply.
Dear Asian readers. This video is about Blacks versus (and yes, I do mean versus) Whites, and hardly anything is mentioned about Asians. I do refer to non-Whites, which of course includes Asians. What I say might also offend you. You are also welcome to watch, read and reply.
I would like to open this with this picture -
"He was around at a time when it was like no Blacks, no dogs, no Irish on the doors."
So it's not racism, then. It's foreigners. We're not xenophobes exactly (although, some probably are), but we want to keep ours ours, we want - and need - to preserve our Whitehood, our Whiteness. What's wrong with that? Why is that so bad, wrong, offensive? With your dad coming over here in the '60s with his brother, undoubtedly their Children would be here... and then more Children... and then more Children... and then more... and more and more and more... and now we're not "allowed" to defend our own and keep our own because defending our own and keeping our own is racist.
"No wonder he was worried."
When one moves into another's home, they must respect that person's home and abide by their rules. The same applies on larger scales to foreigners going into others' countries - but since this is a racial matter, non-Whites - coming in to White areas. I will say something which might be offensive now - the person being welcomed into another's home surely would not try to take over, at the homeowner's expense, and try squatting there. Squatting in that person's home is non-Whites coming into White areas and it is a deliberate or unintentional attempt to take over and replace Whites.
It may be very worrying for your dad, his brother, etc., about whichever country he/they came from, so much so that it must have been bad enough for them to decide that they had to come over here instead, but once you are up and running, having been fed and given a comfortable bed by the homeowner, you should stand on your own two feet and fix your own country, instead of squatting, no?
Regarding them praying - your "god" didn't fix your country, so now you (as an individual, and also yous as non-Whites) are here and taking over Whites' countries. Why bother "praying" to that false-god? It didn't care about you nor your country to fix your country, and you didn't care to fix your country; instead, you're here and wanting to fit-in, expand, replace, instead of actually fitting-in in your and your ancestors' homes/countries. It sounds like replacement, squatting, invasion, takeover. That's illegal under both 1) international law, which is being ignored by all but some of those who are trying to keep ours ours, and 2) Brexit, which also is being ignored... It is, however, what I do in certain computer games when I want or need to defeat my enemy. I work closer to them, then I (depending on the game) build a colony or an area near or in their area, and take over. Deny that, please. Fixing one's own home/country brings immense pride and joy and happiness and self-worth and self-esteem; instead, allowing onself to be put through difficulty and strife and hatred and opposition by those wanting and needing to keep their own their own... is somehow preferred...
"[song in Britain's Got Talent performance] Black. Lives. Matter."
Yes. They do. I won't deny that, nor say that they don't. Asian lives also matter. White lives also matter. Those who say "all lives matter" more likely than not in response to "Black Llves Matter" doesn't negate Blacks' lives mattering. What I think people have a problem with is the BLM movement, and obviously the massive problems of the attempted conquering of Whites' areas.
I didn't archive the pages in this picture.
It's fine to say Black lives matter and Asian lives matter, but not Wwhite lives matter.
"When you see all of that negative press and energy... it is personal. We're called 'Diversity'. How are we gunna not stand up for something like that that we believe in so passionately?"
It is also personal that Whites want and need to keep Whites' things White. With the flooding-in of non-Whites (and also foreign Whites, but this is more about Race than subrace), that means our Whiteness is decreasing. Yes. It is very personal. It's OK for you to stand-up on a non-political stage which you know millions of people will see and make a statement about replacing Whites - which is what it is, even if you don't say that directly nor in those words - for your own, but it's very much not OK for Whites to defend Whites and White things in our White country. It is very personal.
"We're called 'Diversity'. How are we gunna not stand up for something like that that we believe in so passionately?"
A dance group wanting to make a political statement. Why can't dancing be dancing? Why does everything have to be 'a message'? Entertainment is supposed to be entertaining, not politics-debating-and-arguing. The forum or arena for things are there. They exist. "We can use this 'light entertainment programme' as a political stage and 'spread our message'." I understand the opportunity for doing it on there, but it is not for that. Besides, the name "Britain's Got Talent" is wrong. As I say, it is The World's Got Talent in Britain, so...
Notice also all of the 'urban' influence in music and dancing and communicating. "Urban" means "Black", and "street" means "Black" in these cases, but we're not "allowed" to say "Black" in some cases; "urban" or "street" has to be used instead - yet when we say "non-White" we are asked why we're so afraid of saying "Black". We can't win. We're being attacked from all sides. White music can be White without Black influence, rap, reggae mixed-in. I may sound like I am contradicting myself because I said before that I like a small amount of rap/hip-hop and reggae, including in some songs which appear to be White music, and I do like some of it. These are when I was younger and didn't really have my own opinions, with being bombarded by media and things. This was the earlier parts in diversity and Race-mixing AKA the replacement of Whites, burying it in the memory and psyche, normalising it; but at that time I didn't know that it was and the attempt of the repetition of die-versity and "equality" and tolerance made me like at least a small percentage of it.
How can you not stand up for what you believe so passionately in? You can't not stand up for it. We, on the other hand, can't. When we oppose, we're called muh waysist. (For anyone who is translating, "muh" is a crybaby way of saying "my" and "waysist" is "racist". I am being sarcastic and mocking.) When we go on "extreme/Far-Right websites/groups", we're called muh waysist. What about extreme/Far-Left? I never hear anything about that. When we question, we're called muh waysist. When we dislike, we're called muh waysist. When we defend our own, we're called muh waysist. When we try to defend our own, we're called muh waysist. We can't do anything. You, on the other hand, can't not. It just appears that you can't, to give you some resistance so as to help and encourage you to increase your zeal, to drive you forward stronger. In reality, you can. You need friction to be able to have direction. It's much easier to drive along a full-of-friction road to your destination than it is on ice. On ice, you'll crash and burn without being in control; on friction, you can control the speed and where you go. We can't; you can't not.
In London and elsewhere, there are police no-go zones, which have been overrun by non-Whites - I forgot if it is Blacks or muslim Asians, or possibly both. Once upon a time, London was White. Now even the police can't go there... I consider something that a sort-of gangster in GTA:SA says while fighting - "Comin' into mah 'hood 'n' startin' shit!". In real-life, going to someone else's ''hood' and trying to make it their own, instead of leaving it be as it was, is taking over and replacing and is OK and is to make even the police not be permitted to enter; but Whites trying to say, "Coming to my country and doing shit against us" is muh waysist, and Whites trying to defend their own is muh waysist.
"It affected all of us, including my brother and Diversity member Jordan. When I saw him on his radio show talking about it and I saw him break - that was really hard for me because he doesn't break. He's strong."
"It's sad. It's sad, genuinely. I feel anxious and worried saying something like 'Black lives matter', when that's all we want, man. It's just love and positivity."
We have different love and positivity. You're trying to find love and positivity in all the wrong places. Our mentalities and psychologies and ideals and cultures and customs, etc., are all different. We can't accommodate you, we can't accommodate what you need. We're ill-equipped for that. Only your own are well-equipped to help you; only they can.
"No-one's saying 'Only Black lives matter'."
When people reply "all lives matter", you - personally perhaps, but seemingly as a Race definitely, based on what I have seen, and realising how this indoctrination has been going - seem to think that "all lives matter" means "Black lives don't matter". We can't say anything. You say "no-one's saying 'only Black lives matter'"; when people say "all lives matter", they're not saying "Black lives don't matter". In this video, that has been accepted to mean "Black lives don't matter", though. So you saying "'Black lives matter' doesn't mean 'only Black lives matter'" permits non-Blacks to say "all lives matter" which doesn't mean "Black lives don't matter". If someone said, "Asian lives matter" and someone else replied "all lives matter", it doesn't mean "Asian lives don't matter". The same with Whites.
"We've said this now, and I don't wanna take it back but even if I wanted to, we can't - so what does that mean?
"I feel like the routine was just the beginning of this new chapter. I think now that lid has been lifted, you cannot avoid it; the conversations have to happen."
"I wanna go out there, I wanna speak to people who have been active already. I wanna speak to people that disagree with me."
Ashley wants to meet people who disagree with him, yet we can't say "all lives matter" because of either his bias, or him being indoctrinated with bias, has caused him to take offense at us saying "all lives matter" and take it personally and decide that it means "Black lives don't matter", decide that it is "racist". You want opposite, or opposing, opinions, thoughts, ideas... yet you won't accept "all lives matter". You want opposite, or opposing, opinions, thoughts, ideas... yet you want to have equality and diversity. How can one have diversity and equality? They're incompatible. Diverse means many different things. Equal means... being the same... You can't be different and the same. There need to be proper words, such as instead of "racism", have "xenophile" and "xenophobe" (see below). Instead of "diverse" and "equal" have...?
I just said, "How can one have diversity and equality? They're incompatible. Diverse means many different things. Equal means... being the same... You can't be different and the same." It is very important to make a big note of something, bring it to light. When we say things, are we speaking poetically or are we speaking literally and directly? Asians, Blacks and Whites are Humans; Humans are the same, but Asians, Blacks and Whites are different. Males and Females are Humans, so they are the same, but Males and Females are different. In this sense, we are diverse and equal; but in literal terms, different things are not the same. We can't be diverse and equal. Notice I said "in this sense". Literality is literality. If we speak poetically, then it is not literal, so how do we speak? How do we mean things? We can say 1+1=2. Pi=3.14159... We can say "Pi=3" but it is... not literal. It is incorrect. We may be Humans so we are the same, but we are different - you have your People, we have our People, Asians have their People.
When we buy something for £2.99, we say it is £3, but that is not literal. "Definition" doesn't always work; "law" is nonsense. Whatever (((they))) define things as is obviously not working - and I suspect that is deliberately so. We need to be very careful in what we say, how we say it, and what we mean by it. "I want to be myself in your foreign country." "I want to do my own different things in the country that you have established over many, many, many years." "I want to be different, but I want to be equal, and I want your different country to be diverse with me and my people." You're no good for us.
Don't be offended. I said already "we can't accommodate you, we can't accommodate what you need" and "we're ill-equipped for that", so instead of saying "we're no good for you; you're no good for us" I decided to put "you're no good for us" first, before saying this - we're also no good for you. I did it that way on purpose. We can't be what you want - diverse and equal with you, and you can't with us. We're White. Do Black things where Black things have existed already for many, many, many years.
"I didn't set-out to be the brunt of people's anger..."
When people are angry, there is something wrong. You could realise this and ask what's wrong and if you can help, but instead you go on and continue to promote your diversity in our White areas - as you were told to keep doing it, and upsetting people, and fighting "the good fight". You want, you want, you want. What about what we want? To defend and protect and keep our Whitehood, our Whiteness, our White things, but nooooo. You want diversity in our White areas, and that's all that matters. You/your predecessors come to White areas, and stay here, and say "Black lives matter", and you here the response "yeah, so do White lives matter" or "Yeah, so do all lives matter", and you get offended and have a tantrum, then go home and cry, and be told "continue to promote diversity, keep doing it, upset people, fight 'the good fight'". See the 51st State film, where Robert Carlysle goes into an opposing football team's pub and taunts them, and they react...
Some people assault when angry, others walk away and leave the situation. In the documentary when Jim walked out, that was "wrong", apparently. He's upset about things, but he's wrong, and you're right.
"Historian David Olusoga is at the forefront of British conversations about Race."
I didn't know that. I've never heard of him... I don't recognise him. I don't know anything, other than what is in this video, about him.
"It's difficult to navigate because it exists in this sort of toxic reality underneath our society. To be Black is to be told every day 'you are not who you are; you are this stereotype'."
It is difficult to argue. Is that literally it being said every day and being told every day that they are a stereotype, or is that an emotional exaggeration? Jim Davidson said there are no White people on TV; David Olusoga said you're told that you, as a Black person, are the stereotype every day. Ashley responds to Jim's, but not to David's. If one doesn't want to be offended by stupid people, then don't go near stupid people... Again - go to Black countries where you fit-in and where you will be happy. Build-up your Black communities and societies, and let us alone.
Bullshit charities can't make Black countries better, and there are billions of charities (oh, no, I exaggerated) but Akon was able to help with solar power to get electricity to 600 million in Africa. Many charities Worldwide who have many, many, many £millions or £billions - and that false-god you prayed to with at least "unlimited power" and the Worldwide church with at least £1tn 144bn/year - also can't fix your Black country... but Akon did something good to help. The innumerous charities and your false-god don't know how to help, but Akon did. Akon is Black. He ignored the stereotypes. Boo-fucking-hoo for you.
"So it is gunna be difficult to make sense of because it doesn't make any sense."
"It doesn't. For something that feels like it affects you so much, it's almost hard to grab hold of proof - you know, we're not in the '70s anymore, we're not in the '80s. You know, it isn't as obvious."
"The difference between the '70s and the '80s - a lot of the racism was overt, a lot of it was racial violence; there were swastikas and there were NF symbols on walls and it was really in your face. Things have got better, but racism still exists. It exists in new ways because we have new technologies, we have new platforms and I think people feel emboldened, in the last few years, to say things on those platforms that they wouldn't have said a few years ago."
Is it racist (discriminatory, offensive, of course) to go into an opposing football team's pub and be a dick against them? Is it "racist", when someone from an opposing football team comes to your pub to be a dick, for you to be offended and react? I don't mean "racism" in football. That's only a film but is realistic. Whites fight Whites over football. Whites hated the Irish, who are also White. I am using Robert Carlyle's bit in that film metaphorically, symbolically. It's about defending one's own. People have their own thoughts and understandings and free speech..., and (((authourities))) shut them down when they react to others, but now with the WWW/666, we can speak again - hence Jim Davidson's videos, hence the Joy of Satan Ministries and Her Materials, hence the jew paying the jew to defend the jew online...
Notice the opposition of, dislike of, hatred of Irish there, in the documentary. Ireland is White, yet they were still unwanted. It surely is not about racial matters. I interpret it as wanting and needing to defend our own. Yes, Irish are White, but they are their own. Again - and here is a poetic/literal contradiction - Irish are the same but different. It is, as David said, confusing. It is complicated. It is muddy. It is dirty. That, I suspect, is deliberate. While we can't put things into words, we have poetry and emotions/feelings and actions to try to compensate - and usually, we do compensate with these things, but in argumentation, it is too important to be direct and clear and real (as Ashley said to Jim). It's not racial against Blacks. It's preserving our own against even the Irish who are also White. Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland hate each other because one's catholic christian god must be preserved, and the other's protestant christian god must be preserved. The matter around Race is not the actual, true, real reason, but that has been made to be the focus - the repeated, relentless, biased and ignorant focus. With it being the focus, that also redirects the thoughts of those who are reacting, towards it being a Race matter, and if they do have their thoughts redirected, then they forget and/or don't realise it is about defending and keeping one's own. With it being a Race matter, that is a proxy for the real reasons, the real matters of keeping White things White, and - in regards to the Irish here - one's own local White things locally-White.
"It exists in new ways because we have new technologies, we have new platforms and I think people feel emboldened, in the last few years, to say things on those platforms that they wouldn't have said a few years ago."
I think people would have said things a few years ago. They just couldn't. They don't want to have to go through having to be cancelled, shutdown, arrested, etc. The WWW is dangerous for the jew and its plans - in jewish numerology, W = 6, and 666 is Nature. It is Natural and it is Nature, and the jew is afraid. (That surely also means the jew has 666 coursing through its veins... and in its other biological bits and pieces. The jew is so uncomfortable and eurgh.)
"There were people that voted for us, and they still then complained."
Ashley said there was nearly 7 million people watching. Not all of those viewers would have rang-in and voted. Presume half of those who watched did vote, then half or more of those voters might have - and yes, only might have - voted for Diversity. Maybe Diversity won with 30% of the vote, and the remaining 70% was split-up too much to be a majority. Ignoring that, as I said "only might have voted" - we don't know if the vote and results were genuine or if they were fake. When playing the lottery, other peoples' purchases of lottery tickets goes towards the winner or winners. With "israel" making a political song in Eurovision, which is against the rules, it still won. With Honey G on X Factor, who got booed left, right and centre, it still got to the final 5 and said it couldn't hear the booes, yet the booes were obvious.
You don't know who voted for Diversity, and you don't know who watched Britain's Got Talent - some people watch only the auditions and not the rest of the series - and you have no idea if the same people who, firstly, watched BGT were those who complained, and secondly who watched and voted for Diversity (if the vote was genuine) were the same people who complained. With the 7 million watchers, unknown number of voters, and the 24000 complaints, saying "there were people that voted for us, and they still then complained" seems to be inaccurate and unfair.
Ashley said that the British public voted for us who then complained; does Ashley not consider himself British?
How many Blacks voted for Diversity? Presumably all? (You can presume, so so can I.) Anyway - how many Blacks voted for Diversity and how many Whites didn't? How many Blacks complained and how many Whites didn't? You have no idea, so claiming the same voted for you and then complained about you is not an argument.
"So I think that's because it's alright when we were entertaining people and dancing around, but it's not alright if we speak our mind"
BGT is not (supposed to be) a political stage. It's an entertainment programme for the family. There are political arenas/forums - both online and off. An evening, family entertainment programme is not the place for it. I do understand taking the opportunity for doing so - and to be very honest, I actually don't blame you for doing so. In a way, you should have taken that opportunity, but you should have used discernment to realise the fallout. Others have done similar things - such as to thank frontline workers and things (and these were White and didn't win, so that's diverse, equal and far - NOT), and any other acts, but behind the programme, no doubt (((Simon Cowell))) and (((TPTB))) saw this opportunity of Diversity to promote non-White things in White areas. I know someone way back when when Pop Idol was on was trying to vote for Gareth Gates versus Will Young, and they couldn't get through on the phone, so they voted for Will Young. It was the only time they ever did such voting. Will Young won it. I doubt the phone-in vote made the blindest bit of difference for Diversity winning. We just have to trust and believe it is all genuine and honest. We can't exactly know, can we?
"and I actually had a post to that effect. It was to me, Lewis Hamilton, and Anthony Joshua, and esentially it was, 'Shut up and do what you do, because that's how you'll be accepted. You're not here to talk politics, you're not here to talk about what matters; your here to dance, drive and box'."
Who sent you that message? A White person? An Asian person? A Black person?I could also say - never send a Boy to do a Man's job. You're not as politician or a spokesperson for racial matters. I am guessing that you think that because you became famous and you got real or fake votes and won a talent competition that you can politicise things to suit yourself and your group. That's the wrong avenue - and the wrong venue, the wrong stage, the wrong arena, the wrong forum, the wrong platform. You don't play football in a wrestling ring - and you can cry and whinge and bitch all you want. Wrestling rings are for wrestling. You can cry and whinge and bitch that your car won't fly you to your favourite holiday destination, or fly you to the Moon and try to undercut Richard Branson or Elon Musk all you want.
"That's the type of post that makes you feel like less of a person."
Why do you need to get your self-worth from other people accepting your political message on a family entertainment programme in the evening? If you want to feel like less a person, then go see Roy "Chubby" Brown and he might let you know. (I am not 100% certain if Chubbs touches on racial matters, though, but he is a blue-humour comedian.) Go somewhere that makes you feel bad where you don't fit-in, or go somewhere that makes you feel good and where you fit-in. You want to win in White areas instead of winning in Black areas.
"Is that how people see you? Dancing object, a dancing monkey. Is that it?"
You came on to BGT as a dancer, in a dance group. Obviously that's what people expect of you. (((Friends))) made a joke of something along the lines of "that's what I'm expecting from these people". You're trying to mix family entertainment in the evening with important political matters. That's the wrong place and the wrong time. You got the venue wrong. People expect from X what that X thing offers. They don't expect other things. Did you ever work? Did you go into e.g. a farm job while trying to be a dancer, or a shop job while trying to be a farmer? From BGT, people want entertainment, not to be told "You need diversity in your country by letting me and mine in and letting me and mine be important".
"I think it gets to the heart of the forms of racism..."
This David Olusoga "is at the forefront of British conversations about Race". He is saying here it's about racism, not telling Ashley the truth. If he doesn't realise, then he may be forgiven, but this is pandering. It is brainwashing. It is evangelising. It is indoctrination. This applies to any audience member who is watching and sympathetic to it, as well - e.g. those real or fake reactions on Gogglebox, and anyone watching the documentary.
I know those persons on Gogglebox are at least partly fake. They do things for the camera - as they just would, wouldn't they? - and this has been proven. e.g. 1) one was being silly and took their glasses off and put them in front of their face, and angled them perfectly for us, the home audience, to be able to see directly through the camera so when we look at his eyes, they appear silly due to the correct angle of his glasses from his eyes to the camera; 2) any drawings presented by those in the programme, e.g. that they drew or that their Child drew, they don't just hand to their friend or family member; they have it angled so that we, the home audience, can see it through the camera.
So I think this David Olusoga is doing the same for Ashley there and anyone sympathetic to this cause who watches this documentary, hoping to catch as many fish in the net as possible. Again, maybe he really believes it, but it is repetition of things, it is an echo chamber, in different ways. Maybe not a church or a mosque, or a political arena/forum, or an online forum or website or video channel, or any other platform, but it is still presented in a biased way as an echo chamber. I know that people are very biased in arguments. I don't know how many people try to be fair. Yes, I have strong views, that is very obvious, but I have also tried being fair in this post. I have said where thre have been contradictions I have shared, and I have also sort of supported Diversity's (and whomever-else-who-is-connected's) opportunity-taking for using BGT for this. I don't agree with it, but I understand it is a chance to reach millions of people. People are biased - and this David Olusoga is, whether maliciously or not. He doesn't admit that the BGT stage was the incorrect place to do this (the closest he said was that he thought they were going to come for Ashley); instead, he speaks against Whites (and Asians?) here, saying it's muh waysism.
I notice that on-camera, Alesha Dixon didn't say that it is racist. She said that Pandora's Box, or a can of worms, has been opened, and now people have to talk about it. This "forefront historian of British conversations about Race", David Olusoga, who I expect is not very well-known, can say biased things, whereas well-known Alesha Dixon can't.
"...we inherited from the 18th and 19th centuries. Those forms of racism said Black people did have some qualities. Black people can be Physical, they can be strong, they can be athletic."
Is that racism, or is that working to your strengths? If Whites don't want non-Whites to be their leaders - simply because of preserving Whiteness, Whitehood and White things, and also because Blacks don't represent Whites - then why is that racist to prevent Blacks from being Whites' leaders? Blacks obviously are healthier Physically and stronger Physically, more durable, have more stamina, etc., Physically. I presume and expect that the conditions back then were not as good as they could have been, but if (((media))) tells us anything, those holier-than-thou aristocrats back then, the toffs, the arrogant higher-ups back then were all full of themselves. See how conditions were for White people under "White" i.e. (((certain))) monarchs. Quick Victoria didn't care about workers' conditions. See how society was - for Whites. This might be very offensive but perhaps you should be happy that you were treated the same way along with us, whether at the same time or at different times. It seems like you were put to good use for your strengths - that being Physicality. The working and living conditions left much to be desired, I expect, but it sounds like you were still used according to your abilities.
"What you couldn't do was have analytical, cognitive intelligence."
How much 'class' or 'caste' was there? The aristocrats were supposed to be the wise ones. oNlY tHeY kNeW wHaT wAs GoOd FoR tHe CoMmOnErS; tHe CoMmOnErS dIdN't KnOw WhAt WaS gOoD fOr ThEmSeLvEs. This includes White commoners who were to remain "in their station in life". Me saying above that Blacks were put to good use for their Physical abilites does not mean that I think their Mental abilities were not good.
"When people say 'Stick to what you know, just be a dancer', what they're saying is 'I'm comfortable with the structural racism of the society I live in, I'm comfortable with you in this box, I'll celebrate you in this box, but that's the limits of who you are because of your skin colour'."
Have you asked them that? Do you know what people mean when they watch BGT and expect BGT, not Britain's Got Political Messages? How is being advised to stick to what you know, what you're good at, instead of trying to fake your way into a pretend political place, a bad thing and something to be upset about? Not everything against a Black person is a racial matter. It seems to be getting about as bad as the jew's muh holocaust. Everything is about muh holyco$t, muh troloco$t. Waaah-waaaaaah.
There is so much bias in what David Olusoga said. Fair enough to the extent that he is defending Blacks and Black things, but that is very much incorrect for the entertainment stage of Britain's Got Talent in the evening for family entertainment. Was there any warning "The following programme/section contains Pro-Black, political messages in White Britain. Viewer discretion is advised", or was it just shown without any prior warning or notice or information, without any possibility of knowing what to expect?
"A lot of the criticism I received was framed in this way."
"Comedian Jim Davidson, once the king of Saturday night entertainment, took to his online channel to express his opinions about our performance."
You took to Britain's Got Talent, a programme for entertainment that millions of people watch, to express yours. On Jim's online channel, we see how many people view videos (but these are not always true, because fake views can be bought so I have been led to believe), and being one with controversial, strong opinions, anyone can choose to watch his videos and choose to not watch his videos; on BGT, with multiple different types of act - a variety act programme - there are many different types of things on there; political messages not one to be expected. So people watching BGT for funny dog acts and scarily-dangerous mentalist acts are the demographic for that who wouldn't expect political messages and who didn't watch BGT for political messages... So... Jim's online channel, where people would go there deliberately and watch deliberately for him to express his opinions, is not OK, but your millions-of-entertainment-expecting-viewers-seeing-unexpected-political-messages TV place is OK? Why?
Ashley was told that he was unaware of some of the things that BLM stood for, and he said he was aware. So he knew, and went on BGT anyway? To... shit all over Whiteness on TV for millions to see... and not expect a reaction?! blank blinking
"...and I saw it on the day that a Black Man was charged with murdering someone in Birmingham and injuring, quite badly, 7 other people."
"What's that got to do-- I'm sure on that day there were millions of people around the World who did wrong things, and I hope that Man who attacked people with a knife was sent to prison, but... what's that got to do with racial inequality?"
I'm sure millions of people around the World were doing bad things against Whites - but what does that have to do with racial inequality? A White copper kneeling on the neck of George Floyd - a Black Man - versus a Black Man killing 1 and injuring seriously 7. One is OK, the other is not. Why?
So if 1 White versus 1 Black has to do with racial inequality, why does 1 Black v 8 presumably Whites not? "What's that got to do--" Probably a lot.
"Like... it baff-- it actually baffles me."
I don't want to be mean or nasty or anything, but above, David Olusoga said, "What you couldn't do is have analytical, cognitive intelligence". Apparently, you proved him right. As I said, "8 presumably Whites" - I don't know how many, if any, of those 8 were White or Asian, or if any were Black. If none of those 8 were Black, or all 8 were White, then my comments here stand. If any were Black, then Black-on-Black violence is a point, and would that, then, be related to racial inequality, or do any of the stereotypes, that David said and any others, actually fit? The statistics seem to be that more Blacks are in jail for offences. There is so much Black gang violence and murder by rival Black gangs... It does seem as if they don't user their Brains to think. It seems like they think with their Emotions instead.
"...and there's loads of White people sticking-up for you. Young White Girls..."
":O
"
"walking around with banners, 'de-fund the police', 'support Black people'. 5600 illigal immigrants in this country - that's this month."
"It's irrelevant. The only difference is the racism. Lol. It's the only common denominator - the fact that we're talking about people who maybe look different coming from overseas. The hatred and the venon he's got, and the language he uses is the real ugly, the real ugly side of it for me."
It's irrelevant but the only common denominator is the racism, people who look different coming from overseas? So are you saying racism but not "rEvErSe-RaCiSm"? If there are 2 or more Races, then racism can exist. The mere existence of multiple, different groups can mean, but does not necessarily mean, that prejudice, discrimination, racism, whatever, can exist. Because Blacks look different than Whites and come from overseas from Black areas, it's racism, but because Whites look different from Blacks who are going overseas to White areas... it's not racism?
Jim Davidson is a comedian. You know that he is. For part of his bit, when Ashley met Jim, with some of Jim's reactions, I don't think anything else needs to be said. Also - it's irrelevant because you say so, Ashley, but when it's against you, then it's very much relevant, of course, yes?
"I know that sentiment lives out there. I know it's more alive than I ever thought it was."
With the so-called legislation and regulation of things, moderating online platforms, etc., I think the regulating and moderating is kept to a certain amount on purpose so as to employ big data and data mining. People share their comments online and analytics are used for reasons we're not supposed or "allowed" to know about. AI, for example, can be used to analyse people's thoughts, the general opinion of the people, the 'chatter', see how things are with demographics, etc., all of which is fed to ((TPTB))) so they can then use (((their agenda))) nefariously further.
"That video probably upset my mum the most. Hearing a guy speak so violently about your kids - I just think as a mum, more than anything else, it just broke her a little bit."
Your mum is not the only one who is upset, broke. Our Whiteness, our Whitehood, our White things are being broke, more and more, because we're not "allowed" to keep them White.
"It's not directly about me. It's about the people I love - ironically, most of which are White."
How is it about them? How is Jim Davidson saying things about a Black Man killing 1 and attacking and injuring seriously 7 others, about your mostly-White loved ones? That just seems like an emotional ploy used to get people upset and agree with you, instead of having them think critically with their Brains.
"Last year, my Britain's Got Talent dance routine exposed the vibes in the way our nation thinks about Race."
24000 people is not 60-70 million people. A lot may share similar opinions, and it's not exactly possible to find out exactly, but based on the numbers that we have here 24000 is a lot different than 60-70 million. 24000 is also a lot different than the 7 million people who watched it. There are unknown numbers in Britain who support the BLM movement, as well as agree that Black lives, indeed, do matter. There surely are some who are indifferent. You also seem to have split priorities, and you seem to be confused or 'chatting shit', as it were. You say "my group" but you also say "our nation", and you admit being mixed-Race but you're defending Blacks and seem to be agreeing that saying "all lives matter" means "Black lives don't matter"... and you're saying Jim's reaction is not about mixed-Race you, or about Blacks, but is about Whites - most of your loved ones...
"I'm on a journey to find out why it outraged so many people, including many who are far from racist."
Define "racist". Those who don't like a Black political message on a family entertainment, variety act evening programme are racist? How does one oppose that without being racist?
Black: Black lives matter.
White: OK, yeah. That's true, but all lives matter.
Black: Racist.
That's not just a meme or a joke. It has been admitted, proven, in this documentary!
Can you remember the days when conspiracy theories were just conspiracy theories? Pepperidge Farm remembers.
"Dominique highlighted frequent criticisms of the Black Lives Matter movement, that they're just a front for more-radical groups and policies like de-funding the police - but that's not my position. I want to find out if one of the most-prominent BLM protestors agrees. Imarn Ayton began attending marches last year and is now a leading voice in the movement.
How did you get into activism?"
"Eugh, you know what? The real moment was right here when I organised my first protest on the 6th of June, Saturday, with 20 000 people, including Madonna, and I stood on this plinth right here, talking about institutionalised racism."
We have thousands and thousands of years of Whitehood behind us, now non-Whites come here and we have to put our Whiteness down for non-Whites here, and we have to put-up with with non-Whites here - and yes, I do mean put-up with. We have to tolerate, especially with this new definition by the "govern"ment. If we are not tolerating, then we're extremist, and the "govern"ment will cancel us, meaning that the "govern"ment favours, in "our" society, the toleration of things that we, the people who reckon democracy exists, oppose, things which are against us, and the "govern"ment shuts us down because we oppose them. The "govern"ment will effectively cancel anything it doesn't like. What was the point of Brexit? That has been ignored, and look at this -
It was never meant to be used... So we had no chance, no choice, no option, but to be forced to accept non-Whites flooding in. Raping us. Being violent against us. Destroying us. Destroying our Lands. We must accept it, no matter what. It we don't tolerate this, then we're extremist and will be cancelled by "our" "govern"ment. What, or who, exactly, does the "govern" in "government" mean and stand for?
More and more and more and more non-Whites have been coming-in,
and I doubt it's from only Turkey, and based on this international law, that is illegal; likewise, based on Brexit, that is illegal, yet it is still happening regardless - and the "govern"ment's new definition, while not law, is still to be used so as to de-fund and cancel any groups it dislikes. It says it won't stop free speech, but it will still cancel you. That sounds awfully like "god" - you have free will but if you don't do as "god" demands, nope. You're cancelled, you're discarded, you're thrown into an eternal lake of fire for using your own choice. That's great democracy, that is. It's democrazy -
It is ignoring international law and it is ignoring Brexit, and we, Whites, apparently are not "allowed" to defend ourselves and our things in any of this. We have to share, just like in commjewnism, so instead of it remaining Whites', it has to become "ours".
"You also have those that believe in reform, like myself. So those that advocate for changing the education system, or making sure that reviews, in regards to racism or tackling equality, are implemented."
We must change our curriculum to suit those for whom the already-established curriculum was not designed, because it didn't need to include them because they were not here? Now they are here, despite our protestations, our dissension, you want to change the way we run our own things. You want to have equality in our own White areas with, or replacing, our own White things, instead of being in your own Black areas with your own Black things. You may not have chosen to be born here, and that's not your fault nor your doing, but we don't want our things lessened and deleted and replaced for others' things to be here instead. Why is that so wrong to keep ours ours? Why is it so wrong for you to not go to yours and have, be and keep yours yours? Black lives matter - they do, of course, and Black countries exist for Black lives. Asian countries exist for Asian lives. White countries exist for White lives.
It -
"Our frame of reference for racism in this country is overt, and that is, obviously, as we know when someone has racial prejudice and it is obvious, deliberate and direct; and in actual fact, covert racism is what is most-prevalent in England, and that is when someone has hidden racial prejudice and they disguise it and rationalise it with an explanation that society would deem acceptable."
You say "racial prejudice". Are you sure it's prejudice and not post-judice? I can't speak for everyone, nor anyone other than myself, for that matter, but pre-judice and post-judice don't matter. What matters is the replacing of Whites and White things in White areas.
"I'll give you an example - the statement 'all lives matter'..."
"Which is true, by definition...!"
"...and that's my point, actually! Thank you very much.
"Of course it's true."
"That's my point."
"Yeah."
"So 'all lives matter' is obviously in response to 'Black lives matter', so it is shrouded with racial prejudice..."
It does not follow that saying "all lives matter" means the person saying it is being prejudiced racially against... Blacks or Asians, regardless of whether or not "all lives matter" is said in response to "Black lives matter". The person on the receiving end hearing you say "Black lives matter" might consider you to be racist against non-Blacks, and presumably would try to be unbiased and say, "all lives matter", or "Yes, of course Black lives matter. All lives matter.", or similar ways of saying it, but you're saying because they're saying "all lives matter", the mere mention of it, means that they are being prejudiced racially - presumably against Blacks and not Asians. That is not the case, necessarily. Unless you actually know if they - Whites, by the sounds of it - are being prejudiced against Blacks (but obviously not Asians), then you don't know. Unless you actually know, then you don't know.
"...however, it is a factual statement; therefore, it is justified."
You say that "Black lives matter" is a factual statement; therefore, it is justified. "Make America Great Again" - this has other iterations. "All lives matter" is a response to "Black lives matter", but it is not discriminatory necessarily; it is inclusive of Blacks - which is what you want, it is diverse, it is equality to say "all lives matter". The evolution of/from "Black lives matter" to "all lives matter", and from "Make America Great Again" to its other iterations, is memetic. That's the way things work, that's how people are.
How many Blacks or Whites or Asians say, "Black lives matter", and then Whites say, "All lives matter"?
How many Blacks or Whites or Asians say, "Black lives matter", and then Asians say, "All lives matter"?
How many Blacks or Whites or Asians say, "Black lives matter", and then Blacks say, "All lives matter"?
Is this alleged racial discrimination aimed at "people", unspecified, or is it aimed only at Whites? Are you being racially-prejudiced now? It is undeniable that England, since you mentioned England, is a White country, which has been forged by Whites and has been White, with White values, White culture, White customs, White thoughts, White feelings, White mentalities, White things... and now "people" are racially-prejudiced for saying "all lives matter" when Blacks, Asians or Whites can and surely do say "Black lives matter". (Now being told "saying "all lives matter" is a racial reaction to "Black lives matter", some stupid people will refrain from saying "all lives matter" because they think they will be - or at least will be accused of being - racist even when they know they're not being.) To whom are you referring when you say they are racially-prejudiced? "In this country...". In this country there are non-Whites, so why not be specific and say "Whites", instead of "this country" or "someone"? You claim "all lives matter" is factually-correct but also is covert racism (presumably against Blacks only), yet you don't specify which "people" you are referring to, which "someones" you are referring to. Talk about covert racial prejudice - and wanting to change the curriculum so that "people" "in this country" - which surely means Whites as well as Asians and Blacks - think like you, on your terms.
According to you, that's wrong. You don't like it. It's wrong to not only be White with White things in White areas, but also to be oneself as one is, and instead one has to change, not say certain words or phrases. So much for free speech. It's OK for you to say that we're being racially-prejudiced by replying "all lives matter" even when we're not, but it's not OK for us to actually say "all lives matter". You have free speech and we don't, and you want diversity and equality? You don't like the way things are as they have been, which are trying to remain. You don't like it, so you say we're racially-prejudiced, and wish to change the curriculum so that Children think your way, instead of their own diverse ways, and altering "reviews in regards to racism or tackling equality" so that they "are implemented". What about those who have their own speech and thoughts and things already? Why change those just to suit you? Why say that they must change because you are offended? Stop being offended. Offence is taken, not received nor given. "No offence"; "None taken". Why should we change for you? I come to your home and force you to live and be on my terms? You come to my country and you force me to live and be on your terms? Where's the diversity? Where's the equality? Force is not equal; it is overpowering. You want, you want, you want, but what about what we want - which we have already and are trying to maintain?
"That is what we deal with. This is the type of racism we deal with in this country."
This is going to be offensive and taken out of context, blown out of proportion, misunderstood. It's just an analogy. It is not literal nor an attack. The Body is xenophobic [still, see below regarding "-ism" and "-phobe" and "-phile"] against foreign invaders - germs, diseases... The Body fights them off, and the Body attempts to remain, keeping itself as it is, as it should be, as it was. I am referring to Whites living in Asian countries and Black countries. I am referring to Asians living in Black countries and White countries. Yes, of course, I am, of course, referring, of course eyeroll to Blacks living in Asian countries and in White countries. Dogs don't like 'foreigners' entering their grounds - perhaps most-humourously the postman. Dogs don't like cats or other dogs entering their garden, but bringing-up puppy with kitten goes against both Animals' Natural inclinations. Indeed, it is unnatural to be replaced by others and it has become illegal only recently in the historical timeline. It is supposed to be illegal, but that is being ignored because of muh reaz0ns.
"Both Imarn and Dominique have shown me that Britain is still divided about what racism is, let-alone how to tackle it. There are so many opinions, but the hurt and damage remain, but why does racism matter so much? For many, the consequences are all too real.
...
Actor David Harewood is launching a book about his experiences, and I want to find out more.
Just the small clips and the small bits I've seen of you talk about your story, there was pivotal moments for you where you felt like you changed."
"When I came out of drama school, the World said to me, 'You're Black. You're Black. You play Black parts. You go for Black auditions. You don't go there... you don't play this, you play that'."
So? Type-casting is something that actually happens - a lot - in the entertainment industries. You have the skills to drive the tractor but you complain that you are not employed to muck-out the farm Animals. It is fair enough that Hermione Granger was played by a Black Girl in the play, as opposed to a White Girl - which some were upset about. The reason it is OK is, according to the person who told me, because nowhere in the Harry Potter books does it say that Hermione Granger is White. What's not OK is James Bond being played by an Australian or an American or a Woman; or in the Powerpuff Girls, there being a magicked Black 4th "sister" after how the 3 White actual sisters were established already and it being shown how they came to be already; or Cleopatra being played by a Black actress; or Eminem doing Black hip-hop/rap, even though I enjoyed some of his music - and as I have said before, in a video clip I saw of Black artists praising Eminem, I think they would have had to praise a White Man doing Black music - and doing Black music better than some Blacks, some would argue - because if they didn't praise him, then I suspect that they'd be in trouble and would not be as famous or continue being. I have no source for this; it is just my own cynicism regarding the matter.
"I suddenly realised, 'Oh. I'm not gunna be James Bond. I'm not gunna be the hero saving the Girl, getting the money, driving the car. I'm not gunna be the hero."
I have not read the James Bond books, so I don't know if he is described as a White Male, and given the time when the books were written it might be reasonable to assume Bond is White and not Black and not Asian, so depending on that it might be fine that you're not going to be James Bond - even though I expect Bond to be played by a non-White and a Woman or a robot or a banana one day. As for being the hero saving the Girl - why not? Why can't you be? Not all heroes are White,
but if you want to be the hero saving the Girl, then I refer back to what I have said - you have so much more freedom in Black areas, instead of trying to be the hero in White areas, but since you mentioned James Bond, driving the car, having the money, saving the Girl, it sounds like you want fame, not to actually help anyone. Diversity with you as a famous actor? Equality with you as a famous actor? Davyon isa real, actual hero. Why make life difficult for yourself - and for us? We have our own things here which others are attempting to change and replace. You have your own things there already. They have been forged and built-up for you.
Besides, why care and be upset about being or not being a fake hero in a film? Why is that important? Why not be a real, actual hero, like Akon? Like Davyon? Why is that not important? Don't you have actual priorities?
"The weight of that really hit me - knocked me for six."
"How did that racism impact you and change you?"
"Dude, it put me in a mental institution. A complete and utter psychotic breakdown."
You're putting the wrong weight on your shoulders, then. Having such strong convictions and expectations and - no offence but - delusions about reality, you're right in saying it knocked you for six. It brought you back to reality somewhat. That's not how things are - but now you are sort of like a hero, for Blacks to look-up to and possibly emulate, and definitely support. Your resolve has been strengthened, and now you are like a pioneer, perhaps. A hero in a way. Surely you don't know or realise these things. You don't realise that things are not supposed to be mixed, Races are not supposed to be miscegenised, we're not supposed to be bubbling away in a melting-pot crucible. You've been a victim in more ways than one, and while you fight to not be a victim, and Whites fight to not be victims, "law", media, "education", etc. is on your side against Whites in White areas.
There is, apparently, no evidence she said this; however, she's been suspended because the jew hasn't experienced racial discrimination, so she claimed. One thought being a jew was a religion, not a race, but whatever. There might not be any evidence that she said White people are the problem in Britain, but Diane Abbott made 'terrible mistake' by saying Irish people did not suffer racism, says Labour grandee. There might not be any evidence that she said Whites are the problem in Britain, but it seems to fit, it seems as if she did say so, if we can extrapolate from other things she has said and done...
"Race is a very difficult... issue to talk about in this country."
"You've noticed!"
"Lol."
Yeah, comedic response. Lolling helps brainwashing. Lolling at things can help in accepting it. It buries deeply within the mentality and the psychology of a person, and it works away unconsciously. Then they believe it and accept it and behave it and become it. It is Cognitive Behavioural Therapy - it starts in the mind, it influences and guides the emotions and then encourages and enacts the behaviours. If one is opposed to something, they block it out; if one lols, they have happy hormones released which helps to influence them. That's no doubt why "comedy" programmes have canned laughter, to try and influence the audience to accept and agree and go along with "the (((moral))) of the story".
"Just the fact that we're not supposed to talk about Race plays into why so many Black people struggle with their mental health."
"I think there's a lot of people that are probably more impacted by it than we know."
"We internalise it. 4-times more Black people than White people end-up in mental institutions. 10-times more Black people than White people have schizophrenia and other mental health conditions."
There are places that are Black-friendly, which have Blacks and support Blacks and be Black. Can you guess any? You're in a non-Black area and trying to remain yourself. We're trying to remain ourselves and having to move around for non-Whites. Make a cup of tea without milk. Then add milk. You expect the milk and the tea to remain unchanged. Then you have sever mental ill health problems.
Patient: Doctor FancyMancy, It hurts when I do this.
FancyMancy: OK. Keep doing that, then.
What about Asians, though? Is this racism thing about only Blacks v Whites? There are Asians, as well, you know? They seem to be ignored - unless it is a subtle, or unconscious, realisation that Blacks are coming in to White areas, and that White areas are White areas and not Asian areas or Black areas...
I'm also going to suggest that - based on the theme of this documentary - the 4-times and 10-times figures of Blacks more than Whites might also be included in the anti-Black racism. Perhaps a large portion of the Blacks in those figures are actually not as bad as the figures say, but because they're Black they're more in the statistics.
"The pressure... just for having this tone of skin is massive."
"You feel it every day."
"I feel it every day."
Then go to where the pressure is tiny or doesn't exist, then! Fuck sake, man. This is exasperating... It won't be easy work - it'll be very hard work, but you can do it. They're your people, and you love them more than I do - more than I can. How many Black-made charities are there? Blacks have so many agencies for them, and White have merely "privilege", and Blacks complain and leave their Black areas in shit. You have more stamina than Whites, so you can work harder for longer and get the job done quicker than we can. Try and change ours all you want; yours needs heroes - real, actual heroes, not fake James Bond zeroes - real heroes, like yourselves.
"It's the first time ever I was scared of being in the public eye. There was a fear, and I would go, 'What does that person think of me? What does that person think of me?' and it was something I'd never experienced."
"I watched that performance - it's fantastic"
"Thank you."
"and it's really, really powerful. The fact that you upset people, I think is a great thing, because they were like, 'We're not having that'."
"Yeah, of course, yeah."
"You must continue with-- you must continue pushing that, because if you don't, I don't think it would ever change. It gives hope to a lot of other people. You're discovering your political power, so I'd have to say to you, brother - welcome to the struggle!"
Oh, thanks. Put this direct and blatantly-obvious anti-White attack in a programme on for Whites to see, on TV. Thanks. Tell us Whites that you're going to offend us, try to change the curriculum, keep forcing your non-White views on us. That sound like rape. It might not be sexual, per se, but it is still what we don't want, it it is still against us, it is still forced upon us, in our own White areas. Thanks. I thought that was illegal, as per the international law and as per Brexit. Great. Thanks.
"10 years ago, I can't imagine this auditorium right now maybe being so mixed and being so diverse. I think it shows you that like the conversation really has widened out, and Dave is a prime example how that can be difficult, life-changing sometimes, but he's harnessed that and what he's doing now is bringing all of these people together."
Yeah, 100 years ago, as well. 200 years ago. 500 years ago. 1000 years ago. 10000 years ago. We want to remain what we are, and we want our history to remain, intact, and our future history to remain, intact, not be replaced.
I have said previously that what we are increases, for good or for bad. Whatever it is that we are and do is what we are and do. It become more and more, Karma-wise. The jew is attempting to put things in "our" Karma so that non-Whiteness grows, increases, becomes more. The jew is trying to create and enforce "our" Karma in a guided and directed way.
"Since my Britain's Got Talent dance routine received tens of thousands of complaints, I've been trying to understand the nature of racism and why it continues to exist."
I suppose that's fair enough, but it seems very much like you're being biased to one side of the matter. You're saying it is against you, against Blacks, but I am saying it is us being against against-Whites; it is for Whites; and when we are against against-Whites, you/your People are, and the anti-White "govern"ment is, against against against-Whites, i.e. it is for against-Whites - and based on what the intended outcome would be - the enslavement of a mongoloid mixed non-race of Asians and Blacks - it is not exactly for non-Whites, but it certainly is for against-Whites. A lot of people surely agree that it is not a matter of against-Blacks or against-Asians; rather that it is against against-Whites, i.e. those who are "racist", but I think a lot of them don't realise, or perhaps don't know, quite what they mean to mean.
"David Harewood told me to fight the good fight, but what does that look like?"
It looks like trying to change and replace Whites, Whitehood, Whiteness and White things in White areas - and you/David/Blacks call that good? I don't think all Blacks agree. I hope not. I once, actually, saw some muslim Asian young Boys playing near someone's car. I don't know exactly what happened but the owner of the car, a Black Man, checked his car and was angry with those Asian Boys, and he said something to the effect of that they should go back to where they came from... A Black Man said about Asian Boys to himself, that they should go back to where they came from, in a White country. I actually found it funny - laughable, not funny-humourous. It's more eyerolly now. "Fight the good fight, brother" eyeroll. Alternatively, go to Black areas and fix them. There are so many charities for helping Blacks, and these charities... "have been" "helping" for many years, yet Blacks still need help. At the end of the day, only one can help themselves - and we're trying to help ourselves, help ourselves remain and stay existent. They're still drinking dirty, insanitary water, still have bad education if any, still are being born with cleft lips, etc., etc., etc. Couldn't they at least clean the water? It's the same with all charities. The charity 'Children in Need' made £1bn in 40 years. For Blacks, Akon helped with toilets. I say to you - fIgHt ThE goOd FiGhT, or actually help where help is needed. You'll be proud and it will be a different type of difficulty, instead of claiming that White-history-made White areas are "ours".
"As one of the UK's most-respected activists, Leila Hassan Howe..."
You must mean being the most-respected in the Black portion of the UK...
"The decision was taken that we ought to have a demonstration to say enough is enough."
Yet enough is not enough. Things continue to happen anyway. It's terrible that people died because a building was torched, but actions have reactions. If Whites stay and "fight the good fight" to keep and remain and be, then that's wrong and racist. Look at how many White places have been replaced by non-Whites; Whites have had to move - and some by authouritarian force. One Swedish family removed a White Swedish family out of their own home so that "refugees" could replace them. So much for that being illegal.
"Fight the good fight" is a euphemism for "continue to infiltrate, change and replace", including with upsetting those who are here already. Why do you suppose there is so much racism, as you call it, or prejudice and backlash? You're damaging us, hurting us, replacing us, displacing us, killing us... in our own White countries - and you're the offended ones?! You are the fucking offended ones?! I wanted to be direct and offensive in retaliation, saying about being fucking retarded and not having the cognitive abilities to understand (referencing what David said)..., but you've been victimised, as well. (((TPTB))), in its 6000-year plan, decided to have White areas be built-up with few births, and Asian and Black areas quite the opposite in some ways, so as to have multiculturalism with the flooding-in of non-Whites into White areas, instead of us all - Asians, Blacks a Whites - remaining and being where we were decades, centuries and millennia ago.
Let me come into your home and "fight the good fight", infiltrate, change and replace against you. You will bend over and let me win. No. You won't. You'd defend yourself, your own, your things, and get rid of me. If "enough is enough", then do one.
"You are being carried by the momentum, by the passion, by the feeling and by the fact that you know it's a just cause."
It's a just cause to infiltrate, change and replace others? That's illegal under international law, which existed in 1981, and it's also illegal now under Brexit.
"Sitting here now after everything you've seen, been through, been a part of, are you optimistic?"
I realised earlier that Ashley, in particular, is an agent for this. I realised, while I know already that this is indoctrination, now that Ashley is similar to "islamists", or terrorists, you might say. It's just a slower, subtle, less-direct and more gentle action and attempt.
"I'm optimistic because I can see a great number of people - Black and White people - who want to make things better."
Define "better". Different people have different mentalities and different ideas and different intentions. Whites have to kowtow to Blacks' ideas and intentions, and pretend to have Blacks' mentalities (e.g. "urban" or "street" culture things), but Blacks don't seem to be kowtowing to Whites' things...
"One thing I'm starting to realise - this is not just Black history; this is British history."
So our history is being replaced already, then?
"It's a part of history that I've never been taught, I didn't know about."
It shouldn't be. In the future, we can look back at these things and repeat those words "never again" with actual meaning, intention and effort and actions and behaviour.
"Keep on keeping on."
"Yeah."
"Always."
Onward, christian soldiers, marching as to war.
"This is about people, this is about the way that we... operate, the way we- we- we come together; our Humanity, essentially."
Really? Seriously?!
"Surely learning a history and having a deeper understanding of what has been is gunna help us massively in terms of where we need to go."
Your history, your ancestors, are not White, and they are not in White areas. You might know unconsciously and racially where you need to go, but your conscious knowledge and understanding have been polluted.
"Accusations of institutional racism continue to be directed at the Metropolitan Police."
I don't know but I presume that the murder of Stephen Lawrence was unjustified, but now police are not sorting out racial matters for fear of being labelled racist. Again - there are police no-go zones in certain areas, and they don't deal with matters for racism reasons.
I can only surmise that, with Stephen being only one example, that was allowed to happen or it was orchestrated, so that nowadays, police are too afraid of entering no-go zones and too afraid to deal with matters for fear of being labelled racist. One thing led onto another, onto another, onto another... and all the while, Whites are not "allowed" to have, keep and be White in White areas. It's a thread, and at points along that thread appear knots - Whites are restricted.
"Institutional racism - is it imagined or is it real?"
"You should ask those lads there, if I was honest - how they've been stopped, how they felt, how they were spoken to, did they think they got a fair crack at the whip. They'd probably say that institutional racism definitely sort of exists."
Previously, Blacks had been discriminated against. Now, there are agencies and groups and things for them, to help them. Older persons, from decades ago, had their mentalities; today, younger ones have different education and media, etc. One wonders what, and how, the older generations were taught so as to give them the mentalities that they had - and why they were taught such things and in those ways, to just have today's people be taught differently than their grandparents were. These days, White people have "privilege"
and that may be American, but it explains the point. Besides, shouldn't Whites have privilege in White areas, just like Blacks should in Black areas and Asians should in Asian areas? We supposedly have the so-called "privilege" of believing that, but you actually do have so many agencies and things to help you...
"I tell young coppers that when I train them - 'if you've made a mistake, tell everyone'."
It's not wrong to admit things, and it's not wrong, in arguments, to say, "I don't know", instead of being biased and trying to argue, probably in ignorance, and definitely in stupidity. That is at least part of the reason of racial matters, such as this.
"It's also easy to not want to listen if it doesn't affect you directly."
Listen to Whites who want to preseve Whiteness, Whitehood, White things in White areas, then. Except that does affect you... yet how much do you listen?
"Detective Sergeant Ray Sekalongo..."
Ray... Sekalongo. RaySekalongo. Race-ekalongo. We love coincidences...
"Well, why should I wait 'til someone's going in custody, having been arrested for an offense, to interview them, to talk about changing their life, when I can do it here and prevent it from going any further?"
It certainly does sound like the police are trained to behave in certain ways. It seems to be that a lot of police officers fit the profile. The training brainwashes them into a way of thinking - a mentality - or it brings that out of them, and that steers things in a direction which may or may not be actually helpful and down to Earth with civilians. It's not a secret that police have lost the respect of civilians over the decades... and if someone, like Ray, can ask this question why he can't help them openly and publicly/privately, instead of institutionally in custody, then it is obvious that he is capable of thinking for himself, but also with me being cynical he might have been taught and trained differently - maybe deliberately - than how White police officers are and were taught and trained.
"Some people said to me that 'taking the knee' pre-game is posturing, it's more sort of... you know... a gesture."
Just like Diversity shouldn't have (although, I can't blame them for doing so) used BGT as an opportunity to reach millions of people, I reckon football, likewise, also shouldn't. Will it go into rugby, tennis, snooker, darts, etc., as well - or does it already?
"I think the thing we have to remember is every form of Black protest has been described as illegitimate"
I don't know if that is true or false, but people watching the documentary will accept it without question and without a second thought.
"I think that the moment that accountability comes into play, and people can't just say what they want without any repercussions - I think that will be a huge game-changer."
No free speech because muh feewings? Grow-up. What about saying what you want, about changing the curriculum? Saying what you want, about using BGT as a political stage? Saying what you want, about wanting to have equality which means changing our White things to suit your Black things? If you want equality and accountability, then try to be White. "Oooooohhhh! You can't say that!" I can, but I don't mean it. It's not a problem for you - with this BLM movement - once you die, all of the effects that happen will no longer be your responsibility, so you'll have escaped accountability (at least in the World's current thinking).
"'We proactively find 65% of the abusive content that we remove.' From being on the opposite end of it, 65% doesn't always feel like enough. It's a real, serious problem."
It means that of all of the content that is removed, Twitter's moderators find 65% of it themselves; the other 35% is reported by users. It doesn't mean that Twitter removes only 65% of all of the content that they deem breaks their rules.
"We've seen that with CoVID and the public health crisis we've had. If social media platforms really wanna stop misinformation, and stamp-down on things, they can. They can really identify this stuff. I'd love to see that energy being put behind racism online."
You misunderstood Twitter's statement, and you're using one misunderstood statement by one website to say that all of online should be better. Regardless of all of that, that's more difficult. A lot of websites are echo chambers. Groups on those websites are echo chambers. If you are not into... e.g. My Little Pony, then you wouldn't be a brony; you wouldn't go to that website or that group, so if in there everyone agreed that non-bronies are fools, then you wouldn't know about that, and if it was classed as "bronism" or "bronist" abuse, then... well... whatever, whether it is moderated or not, or those who ae against that might be the ones who would be "bronist" engaging in "bronism"; if you are not an incel, then you wouldn't think all Females are shit and should be sex slaves; incels who do might be classed as "incelist" who engage in "incelism" or those who oppose that might be "incelist" who engage in "incelism"... you wouldn't see that content nor see it remain or be removed. Regarding so-called and alleged racism - because defending one's own Race doesn't mean hatred of/for other Races - people not of that Race, not of that website, not of that group, wouldn't be a part of it (except to troll and harass, of course, which might be classed as racial abuse even if it is just to mess about).
"What the fuck do you want? Diversity, what the fuck do you want?"
"Equality. A decent conversation."
There is no such thing as equality anywhere. You need to realise this - and I don't mean just racially. I mean "equality" doesn't exist. There is, has been, and always will be hierarchy, no matter what, forever. You have been indoctrinated with nonsense, and you are now further a victim, maybe with heavier weight on your shoulders. I think-- no, I wonder, and I hope, that once people realise eQuAlItY doesn't exist, then things should be easier, maybe, or at least simpler, but if you want "equality"; rather, if you want fairness which aligns with your Blackness, then go to countries that have forged and built-up Blackhood for many, many, many years, instead of trying to change many, many, many years' worth of building-up and forging work of White countries... You say "for my people" (or "my group") - what about those in Black countries who are not living a decent life like you are over here? What about your people, your group? What are you doing for your group there?
I don't doubt that you'd reply, "that's not what I meant". You should choose your words more carefully, then.
I also notice that when talking about Whites (but not specifying Whites, with Blacks and Asians also living here), it is "this country" and "people". When talking about Blacks, it is "my group". Herp-derp - I love this equality-on-unequal-terms - and "terms" here means both terminology and in regards to one side's preferences.
"To be around people who wanna stand-up for change and see the World be a better place."
What's "better"? Define it. Replacing Whites in White areas with Blacks? Replacing White things in White areas with Black things? Michael Jackson might have sung "It doesn't matter if you're Black or White", but he was wrong. It does matter. White countries are for White people. Don't cry - Black countries are for Black people; Asian countries are for Asian people. Get over it. Is that not the way Nature made it, before (((politics))) and then (((media and "education")))? Michael Jackson was clearly very insecure and lacking in pride and self-worth and self-esteem. Akon can help Blacks with solar panels; Davyon can help save people's lives! You're here, in White-built-up-and-forged White areas crying while trying to undo what has been weaved for many, many, many years; you're trying to pull-up the very-deeply-buried roots that have been growing for many, many, many years. Do you expect the garden will be clean and tidy while you unroot us? Lol, and you cry "racism" because of the mess. eyeroll Dear fucking me...
"Freedom of expression."
Whites are not "allowed" to say "all lives matter" in response to "Black lives matter" because that's muh waysist! You said, "I'd love to see that energy being put behind racism online" for those opposing you, and/but want freedom of expression for yourself. Herp-a-derp. Whites are not "allowed" to have White things, do White things and be White; we're not "allowed" to express ourselves freely, lest you cry and we get arrested - so no wonder we go to the Internet - but you want to express yourself freely? No for us but yes for you? Such dIvErSiTy and such eQuAlItY that is. Herp-derp.
So Whites are not "allowed" to have freedom of expression in our own White countries, so... you, also, are not. Fuck off, yes? It's all for you, in White areas, and not for us, in White areas. That's replacement, displacement - and that is illegal under international "law"; these again -
- and based on the "govern"ment's bullshit dEfInItIoN of "extremism", I am being extremist because I am against tolerating the things that you stand for - the replacement and displacement of me and my people, of me and my country, of me and my group.
"Equality, a decent conversation, freedom of expression."
You're trying to play basketball in a netball match, on a netball court. They may be quite similar, but the rules are different and the games are different. You're trying to change netball to suit your basketball. You're trying to play football in a rugby match, on a rugby pitch. They are similar, but the rules are different and the games are different. You're trying to change rugby to suit your football. While doing that, you're crying that the other players in the other game are picking on you. You're trying to go to the opposite sex's changing rooms and toilets and trying to say it has to be the same, then be offended when you're told to fuck off. It's a case of apples and oranges.
David Harewood said he'll never be the hero because he's Black. That's bullshit. Akon could be classed as a hero for the help he has done. Davyon certainly is a hero for what he has done. You can, and Harewood can, as well - but you both prefer to cr instead. You stay here and try to change here to be more like your things instead. "If Blacks weren't there, then Davyon wouldn't have saved those two people's lives." Consider the butterfly effect.
You can go to help your group where your group resides as the majority, instead of crying that netball and rugby and changing rooms and toilets are too different to amalgamate with basketball and football and other sexes, but you choose not to. You can go build sanitation and better farms and this, that, and the other - but you prefer to focus on the muh eQuAlItY of here while attempting to shut Whites up and attempt to change and replace Whites and White things, in an already-established society that has sanitation and farms and this, that, and the other already. Isn't that theft? Cultural appropriation? One rule for you, another rule for me if I put my hair into cornrows. Great muh equality.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, that you don't realise these things, but that is what you're doing. Go to your group where they reside as the majority and be a fucking hero. Be an amazing hero. You and David Harewood be the best heroes. I know you won't (not only because you won't read this).
"After weeks of negotiation, and to my surprise, Davidson has agreed to meet me. [I'm] about to have a conversation with Jim Davidson, a Man that has said some disgusting things both about me and my group personally, and more generally."
I am reserving this for the end of my post here. Please check below.
"Thanks for accepting the interview, thanks for coming to chat, because I wanna have a real, direct, honest conversation..."
He was real, direct and honest in his video, which you are reacting to. I can't say if he was being sarcastic (since he is a comedian) or was misinformed with what he said about most people on TV being non-White, but he is a comedian, his mentality is for teh l0lz (at least in part). You are reacting to his video, and that is not discrimination, but "all lives matter", a reaction to "Black lives matter" strangely is discrimination.
"You've got to realise, for me to contradict what you're saying - people will say, 'How dare you? How dare you go against what Ashley is saying? You must be a racist'."
He wasn't wrong.
"As far as I'm concerned, that video you made about Diversity was... it was racist in every way. Every single way."
"Really? If I was talking about you, why would that be racist? It'd be personal rather than racist."
"Mate, it was both. It was personal and racist."
I am reserving this for the end of my (3rd) post here. Please check below.
"I'm from this country, I love this country, I'm from a mixed-Race background."
"Do you consider yourself Black or White?"
"I consider myself mixed, mixed heritage."
You're mixed and you admit that, yet you're defending Blacks and BLM against Whites who are trying to defend White things in White areas? (If it hasn't happened already, then)How long will it be before "mixed-White-and-Black" i.e. jew, happens and pretends to prefer to "be White" rather than "be Black"? Of all I have seen, all mixed-Black-and-Whites go towards Black. Is it a choice? It doesn't seem to be. DNA, their Soul, their Racial blood negate decision, but I expect "mixed-White-and-Black" i.e. jew, will happen and prefer to "be White" than "be Black" before long. I would also be very doubtful if any Black-and-White mixed person said and behaved as if they were White rather than Black, as well. I'd bet that the differences and the choice between Black and White will always be at the forefront of their thinking whenever they're doing anything, and think that they have to choose to be White, rather than it not being a decision, and it happening Naturally.
"Do you consider the video you made about me and the rest of Diversity racist?"
"No."
"Not at all?"
"No. You just happen to be Black. It was about you."
"OK, then."
"Do you think it was racist - your performance?"
"It was made to start a conversation."
"Well, it didn't, because the people that I've spoke to and the people that get in touch with me and give me the finger in the street - all that did was cause controversy..."
"Yeah, and..."
"...it's making people more racist."
"...racist people would say that, Jim."
How do you know? Have you asked every racist person, or every person who might be racist, or every non-racist person? You've made your mind up already. Why would anyone saying "What you did is controversial" make them racist automatically? How would it? Why would anyone saying "What you did is making people [more] racist" make them racist? How would it?
Ashley, I'm trying to keep giving you the benefit of the doubt here, but... Well, anyway, Jim said most people on TV are not White; you, though, say that people saying you performing your routine
"People don't like what they see."
A lot of people react without thinking. I refer to those real or fake goggleboxers who just reacted very quickly. Take time to think... Not once did they, on Gogglebox, support Jim, but Jim was right - people will say Jim is racist and question how he can be against Ashley; however, in comments sections on videos, I have seen people agree with Jim. Ashley Banjo wants more and better moderation online. See how often Jim's and my words are not deleted. If I were to post this entire OP on most other websites, it would be removed and I'd no doubt be banned. I may be pushing the limits, if not having broke them, on this website with this OP, but on other websites I'd definitely see something happening as a reaction to my words. It's OK in this "democratic" society for me to have "free speech" and "free expression" but not say anything; yet it actually is OK for e.g. Ashley and Alesha and Imarn and Leila and David and the other David... to say what they want, though - oh, and against not just Jim, but against the entire White Race! Yes, that is very personal and very racist, Ashley Banjo, et al.
"What we're not gunna do is we're not gunna have it where we're talking over each other."
"They'll edit me out."
"No, they won't."
Well, we'll see... or maybe we won't. I doubt the full, unedited interview between Ashley Banjo and Jim Davidson is available anywhere.
"That is why I want to speak to you - because you think differently to me."
How can there be equality when there is diversity, difference?
"I don't see any racism in this. I just see a rotten cop. A rotten cop. If it was a White bloke under there, the cop should have got the same amount in prison..."
"Absolutely."
Daniel Shaver, anyone?! He might not have been under a copper's knee, but he was murdered by a copper.
"...but what you did on the television is use your position to make a statement."
"Yeah. Absolutely."
"My problem was - it was on a light entertainment show on a Saturday night."
"What that murder did - it stoked a flame, it awakened something, it sparked something that is very real for a lot of ethnic minorities in this country and around the World."
Firstly, you can live where you are the ethnic majority, and fix those ethnic-majority places that need fixing, i.e. Children starving to death in Africa, but you choose not to. Secondly, OK, so that murder, of George Floyd, stoked a flame, it awakened something, it sparked something that is very real for a lot of ethnic minorities in this country and around the World. That's OK for you, but when Jim said about a Black Man killing 1 person and injuring 7 others seriously, you ask "What does that have to do with racism?", flabbergasted. That =about George was America, but Jim saying something about here, nope. Plus all the other Black-on-White crimes, nope. One White-on-Black crime, yep, but any Black-on-White crimes, nope. So it's all for you and not for us? Yeah, thanks a lot. Thanks so much, Mr Real, Direct and Honest Conversationalist.
"Yeah, but look at the cop. We don't have people like that in this country, surely."
"I'm happy for you, that you have the privilege in a way of under-- believing that."
Oh. Shit! Haha. Lol. Let's look at this again, shall we, Mr Banjo?
Fuck. Me. Sideways. Herp-derp.
This is like christians, who just repeat the things that they have been brainwashed with like a knee-jerk reaction. It's as if it is not their own thoughts and opinions. They just regurgitate and spew - as Ashley said about Jim, etc. - the... what seems now to be rhetoric, the auto-responses. "You have the privilege of believing that". Whites have so much privilege that even the "govern"ment is against us Whites who won't tolerate shit against us.
"I've been in situations where I've been discriminated against, arrested, taken to the side, stopped and searched."
OK. Have you had a knee on your neck, like George Floyd did? Like this White Baby Boy did?
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Yvq1QX2kHmyX
No. I thought not. MF.
"The statistics prove it. Discrimination is disproportional when it comes to things like stop-and-search and when it comes to people in prison - these are proven things, so these things is what people were protesting against on the day."
I thought BLM protestors were protesting to de-fund the police, etc., that was said above, which you say you were aware of but apparently forgot before you chatted with Jim Davidson... If you are looking at statistics which prove things, claiming it is disproportionate, then is that racism specifically, or is it because - as seems to be the case where Blacks are - Blacks are more prone to crimes due to not thinking things through with their Brains, but instead thinking with their Emotions, which results in more custodial sentences, generally? I know this is not easy to read and consider, it is offensive and things like that, but I'm asking genuinely. Maybe the statistics also show that?
"When you speak about those 7 people being stabbed..."
...but not the one who was murdered?
"...by a - as you refer it - 'Black Man' with heavy emphasis on that--"
"Can you not say 'a Black Man murdered a White person'?"
"Jim, you have to let me finish, please."
"No. I won't let you finish, that's because you're talking bollocks."
Apparently we can't say that. If we say "a Black man murdered a White person", Ashley Banjo gets upset. If we say "non-White", a non-celebrity on the celebrity version of Gogglebox gets upset and asks, "When you say 'non-White', what - you're scared to say the word 'Black', Jim?". Yeah, so we can't win either way. We can't say shit. There is an English saying - you can't say boo to a goose. What is it? Is it that we want freedom of expression, we want free speech, we want diversity, we want equality - but we want it only for "our group", not for you who live in your country already?! Thanks!
"What you see there, and what you emphasise very heavily in the reporting of that story on your channel, was his skin colour."
Skin colour, but not sex? I see Men by the way they look. I see Women by the way they look. I see bananas by the way they look. I see cars by the way they look. It is observation and noticing and being able to tell who is who and what is what. You also made notice of the White copper who knelt on George Floyd's neck, so it's OK for you to mention White but not for Jim to mention a Black Man killing 1 and injuring 7 more?
"Why didn't you have a Black dancer kneel on the neck?"
"Because what George Floyd represented when he was killed by that White officer was a wider problem."
Strange. Lyrics in that song were "I can't breathe"... yet George Floyd was saying he can't breathe before the White copper was kneeling on his neck.
With strong language from the start, some racist images and discussion of race matters.
Ashley Banjo explores British history & the negative reaction to his Britain's Got Talent dance. He meets supporters like actor David Harewood & critics like comedian Jim Davidson.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/AHDu99ebqBQj
In all of that episode of Celebrity Gogglebox, not just this clip, regarding the goggleboxers, not the programmes/films that were being watched, were only Black or Asian or mixed families or friends. There were no Whites. Those two at the end, who were saying about Blacks multiplying and that we having to accept it because she reckons we can't do anything about it, are not celebrities; they are on the regular Gogglebox programme, as are two Asians who were saying about people complaining to Ofcom about being uncomfortable.
My comments are below. My comments may or may not reflect that of Joy of Satan Ministries, its materials, or its users. These are my own. This is quite long, and I didn't think it would be this long, so it might be a good idea to go through it more than once. It
Dear Black readers. I reply honestly in this post. I think that you will be offended by what I say here, but please try to understand what I am trying to say. You have been warned. You are also welcome to watch, read and reply.
Dear Asian readers. This video is about Blacks versus (and yes, I do mean versus) Whites, and hardly anything is mentioned about Asians. I do refer to non-Whites, which of course includes Asians. What I say might also offend you. You are also welcome to watch, read and reply.
I would like to open this with this picture -
"He was around at a time when it was like no Blacks, no dogs, no Irish on the doors."
So it's not racism, then. It's foreigners. We're not xenophobes exactly (although, some probably are), but we want to keep ours ours, we want - and need - to preserve our Whitehood, our Whiteness. What's wrong with that? Why is that so bad, wrong, offensive? With your dad coming over here in the '60s with his brother, undoubtedly their Children would be here... and then more Children... and then more Children... and then more... and more and more and more... and now we're not "allowed" to defend our own and keep our own because defending our own and keeping our own is racist.
"No wonder he was worried."
When one moves into another's home, they must respect that person's home and abide by their rules. The same applies on larger scales to foreigners going into others' countries - but since this is a racial matter, non-Whites - coming in to White areas. I will say something which might be offensive now - the person being welcomed into another's home surely would not try to take over, at the homeowner's expense, and try squatting there. Squatting in that person's home is non-Whites coming into White areas and it is a deliberate or unintentional attempt to take over and replace Whites.
It may be very worrying for your dad, his brother, etc., about whichever country he/they came from, so much so that it must have been bad enough for them to decide that they had to come over here instead, but once you are up and running, having been fed and given a comfortable bed by the homeowner, you should stand on your own two feet and fix your own country, instead of squatting, no?
Regarding them praying - your "god" didn't fix your country, so now you (as an individual, and also yous as non-Whites) are here and taking over Whites' countries. Why bother "praying" to that false-god? It didn't care about you nor your country to fix your country, and you didn't care to fix your country; instead, you're here and wanting to fit-in, expand, replace, instead of actually fitting-in in your and your ancestors' homes/countries. It sounds like replacement, squatting, invasion, takeover. That's illegal under both 1) international law, which is being ignored by all but some of those who are trying to keep ours ours, and 2) Brexit, which also is being ignored... It is, however, what I do in certain computer games when I want or need to defeat my enemy. I work closer to them, then I (depending on the game) build a colony or an area near or in their area, and take over. Deny that, please. Fixing one's own home/country brings immense pride and joy and happiness and self-worth and self-esteem; instead, allowing onself to be put through difficulty and strife and hatred and opposition by those wanting and needing to keep their own their own... is somehow preferred...
"[song in Britain's Got Talent performance] Black. Lives. Matter."
Yes. They do. I won't deny that, nor say that they don't. Asian lives also matter. White lives also matter. Those who say "all lives matter" more likely than not in response to "Black Llves Matter" doesn't negate Blacks' lives mattering. What I think people have a problem with is the BLM movement, and obviously the massive problems of the attempted conquering of Whites' areas.
I didn't archive the pages in this picture.
It's fine to say Black lives matter and Asian lives matter, but not Wwhite lives matter.
"When you see all of that negative press and energy... it is personal. We're called 'Diversity'. How are we gunna not stand up for something like that that we believe in so passionately?"
It is also personal that Whites want and need to keep Whites' things White. With the flooding-in of non-Whites (and also foreign Whites, but this is more about Race than subrace), that means our Whiteness is decreasing. Yes. It is very personal. It's OK for you to stand-up on a non-political stage which you know millions of people will see and make a statement about replacing Whites - which is what it is, even if you don't say that directly nor in those words - for your own, but it's very much not OK for Whites to defend Whites and White things in our White country. It is very personal.
"We're called 'Diversity'. How are we gunna not stand up for something like that that we believe in so passionately?"
A dance group wanting to make a political statement. Why can't dancing be dancing? Why does everything have to be 'a message'? Entertainment is supposed to be entertaining, not politics-debating-and-arguing. The forum or arena for things are there. They exist. "We can use this 'light entertainment programme' as a political stage and 'spread our message'." I understand the opportunity for doing it on there, but it is not for that. Besides, the name "Britain's Got Talent" is wrong. As I say, it is The World's Got Talent in Britain, so...
Notice also all of the 'urban' influence in music and dancing and communicating. "Urban" means "Black", and "street" means "Black" in these cases, but we're not "allowed" to say "Black" in some cases; "urban" or "street" has to be used instead - yet when we say "non-White" we are asked why we're so afraid of saying "Black". We can't win. We're being attacked from all sides. White music can be White without Black influence, rap, reggae mixed-in. I may sound like I am contradicting myself because I said before that I like a small amount of rap/hip-hop and reggae, including in some songs which appear to be White music, and I do like some of it. These are when I was younger and didn't really have my own opinions, with being bombarded by media and things. This was the earlier parts in diversity and Race-mixing AKA the replacement of Whites, burying it in the memory and psyche, normalising it; but at that time I didn't know that it was and the attempt of the repetition of die-versity and "equality" and tolerance made me like at least a small percentage of it.
How can you not stand up for what you believe so passionately in? You can't not stand up for it. We, on the other hand, can't. When we oppose, we're called muh waysist. (For anyone who is translating, "muh" is a crybaby way of saying "my" and "waysist" is "racist". I am being sarcastic and mocking.) When we go on "extreme/Far-Right websites/groups", we're called muh waysist. What about extreme/Far-Left? I never hear anything about that. When we question, we're called muh waysist. When we dislike, we're called muh waysist. When we defend our own, we're called muh waysist. When we try to defend our own, we're called muh waysist. We can't do anything. You, on the other hand, can't not. It just appears that you can't, to give you some resistance so as to help and encourage you to increase your zeal, to drive you forward stronger. In reality, you can. You need friction to be able to have direction. It's much easier to drive along a full-of-friction road to your destination than it is on ice. On ice, you'll crash and burn without being in control; on friction, you can control the speed and where you go. We can't; you can't not.
In London and elsewhere, there are police no-go zones, which have been overrun by non-Whites - I forgot if it is Blacks or muslim Asians, or possibly both. Once upon a time, London was White. Now even the police can't go there... I consider something that a sort-of gangster in GTA:SA says while fighting - "Comin' into mah 'hood 'n' startin' shit!". In real-life, going to someone else's ''hood' and trying to make it their own, instead of leaving it be as it was, is taking over and replacing and is OK and is to make even the police not be permitted to enter; but Whites trying to say, "Coming to my country and doing shit against us" is muh waysist, and Whites trying to defend their own is muh waysist.
"It affected all of us, including my brother and Diversity member Jordan. When I saw him on his radio show talking about it and I saw him break - that was really hard for me because he doesn't break. He's strong."
"It's sad. It's sad, genuinely. I feel anxious and worried saying something like 'Black lives matter', when that's all we want, man. It's just love and positivity."
We have different love and positivity. You're trying to find love and positivity in all the wrong places. Our mentalities and psychologies and ideals and cultures and customs, etc., are all different. We can't accommodate you, we can't accommodate what you need. We're ill-equipped for that. Only your own are well-equipped to help you; only they can.
"No-one's saying 'Only Black lives matter'."
When people reply "all lives matter", you - personally perhaps, but seemingly as a Race definitely, based on what I have seen, and realising how this indoctrination has been going - seem to think that "all lives matter" means "Black lives don't matter". We can't say anything. You say "no-one's saying 'only Black lives matter'"; when people say "all lives matter", they're not saying "Black lives don't matter". In this video, that has been accepted to mean "Black lives don't matter", though. So you saying "'Black lives matter' doesn't mean 'only Black lives matter'" permits non-Blacks to say "all lives matter" which doesn't mean "Black lives don't matter". If someone said, "Asian lives matter" and someone else replied "all lives matter", it doesn't mean "Asian lives don't matter". The same with Whites.
"We've said this now, and I don't wanna take it back but even if I wanted to, we can't - so what does that mean?
"I feel like the routine was just the beginning of this new chapter. I think now that lid has been lifted, you cannot avoid it; the conversations have to happen."
"I wanna go out there, I wanna speak to people who have been active already. I wanna speak to people that disagree with me."
Ashley wants to meet people who disagree with him, yet we can't say "all lives matter" because of either his bias, or him being indoctrinated with bias, has caused him to take offense at us saying "all lives matter" and take it personally and decide that it means "Black lives don't matter", decide that it is "racist". You want opposite, or opposing, opinions, thoughts, ideas... yet you won't accept "all lives matter". You want opposite, or opposing, opinions, thoughts, ideas... yet you want to have equality and diversity. How can one have diversity and equality? They're incompatible. Diverse means many different things. Equal means... being the same... You can't be different and the same. There need to be proper words, such as instead of "racism", have "xenophile" and "xenophobe" (see below). Instead of "diverse" and "equal" have...?
I just said, "How can one have diversity and equality? They're incompatible. Diverse means many different things. Equal means... being the same... You can't be different and the same." It is very important to make a big note of something, bring it to light. When we say things, are we speaking poetically or are we speaking literally and directly? Asians, Blacks and Whites are Humans; Humans are the same, but Asians, Blacks and Whites are different. Males and Females are Humans, so they are the same, but Males and Females are different. In this sense, we are diverse and equal; but in literal terms, different things are not the same. We can't be diverse and equal. Notice I said "in this sense". Literality is literality. If we speak poetically, then it is not literal, so how do we speak? How do we mean things? We can say 1+1=2. Pi=3.14159... We can say "Pi=3" but it is... not literal. It is incorrect. We may be Humans so we are the same, but we are different - you have your People, we have our People, Asians have their People.
When we buy something for £2.99, we say it is £3, but that is not literal. "Definition" doesn't always work; "law" is nonsense. Whatever (((they))) define things as is obviously not working - and I suspect that is deliberately so. We need to be very careful in what we say, how we say it, and what we mean by it. "I want to be myself in your foreign country." "I want to do my own different things in the country that you have established over many, many, many years." "I want to be different, but I want to be equal, and I want your different country to be diverse with me and my people." You're no good for us.
Don't be offended. I said already "we can't accommodate you, we can't accommodate what you need" and "we're ill-equipped for that", so instead of saying "we're no good for you; you're no good for us" I decided to put "you're no good for us" first, before saying this - we're also no good for you. I did it that way on purpose. We can't be what you want - diverse and equal with you, and you can't with us. We're White. Do Black things where Black things have existed already for many, many, many years.
"I didn't set-out to be the brunt of people's anger..."
When people are angry, there is something wrong. You could realise this and ask what's wrong and if you can help, but instead you go on and continue to promote your diversity in our White areas - as you were told to keep doing it, and upsetting people, and fighting "the good fight". You want, you want, you want. What about what we want? To defend and protect and keep our Whitehood, our Whiteness, our White things, but nooooo. You want diversity in our White areas, and that's all that matters. You/your predecessors come to White areas, and stay here, and say "Black lives matter", and you here the response "yeah, so do White lives matter" or "Yeah, so do all lives matter", and you get offended and have a tantrum, then go home and cry, and be told "continue to promote diversity, keep doing it, upset people, fight 'the good fight'". See the 51st State film, where Robert Carlysle goes into an opposing football team's pub and taunts them, and they react...
Some people assault when angry, others walk away and leave the situation. In the documentary when Jim walked out, that was "wrong", apparently. He's upset about things, but he's wrong, and you're right.
"Historian David Olusoga is at the forefront of British conversations about Race."
I didn't know that. I've never heard of him... I don't recognise him. I don't know anything, other than what is in this video, about him.
"It's difficult to navigate because it exists in this sort of toxic reality underneath our society. To be Black is to be told every day 'you are not who you are; you are this stereotype'."
It is difficult to argue. Is that literally it being said every day and being told every day that they are a stereotype, or is that an emotional exaggeration? Jim Davidson said there are no White people on TV; David Olusoga said you're told that you, as a Black person, are the stereotype every day. Ashley responds to Jim's, but not to David's. If one doesn't want to be offended by stupid people, then don't go near stupid people... Again - go to Black countries where you fit-in and where you will be happy. Build-up your Black communities and societies, and let us alone.
Bullshit charities can't make Black countries better, and there are billions of charities (oh, no, I exaggerated) but Akon was able to help with solar power to get electricity to 600 million in Africa. Many charities Worldwide who have many, many, many £millions or £billions - and that false-god you prayed to with at least "unlimited power" and the Worldwide church with at least £1tn 144bn/year - also can't fix your Black country... but Akon did something good to help. The innumerous charities and your false-god don't know how to help, but Akon did. Akon is Black. He ignored the stereotypes. Boo-fucking-hoo for you.
"So it is gunna be difficult to make sense of because it doesn't make any sense."
"It doesn't. For something that feels like it affects you so much, it's almost hard to grab hold of proof - you know, we're not in the '70s anymore, we're not in the '80s. You know, it isn't as obvious."
"The difference between the '70s and the '80s - a lot of the racism was overt, a lot of it was racial violence; there were swastikas and there were NF symbols on walls and it was really in your face. Things have got better, but racism still exists. It exists in new ways because we have new technologies, we have new platforms and I think people feel emboldened, in the last few years, to say things on those platforms that they wouldn't have said a few years ago."
Is it racist (discriminatory, offensive, of course) to go into an opposing football team's pub and be a dick against them? Is it "racist", when someone from an opposing football team comes to your pub to be a dick, for you to be offended and react? I don't mean "racism" in football. That's only a film but is realistic. Whites fight Whites over football. Whites hated the Irish, who are also White. I am using Robert Carlyle's bit in that film metaphorically, symbolically. It's about defending one's own. People have their own thoughts and understandings and free speech..., and (((authourities))) shut them down when they react to others, but now with the WWW/666, we can speak again - hence Jim Davidson's videos, hence the Joy of Satan Ministries and Her Materials, hence the jew paying the jew to defend the jew online...
Notice the opposition of, dislike of, hatred of Irish there, in the documentary. Ireland is White, yet they were still unwanted. It surely is not about racial matters. I interpret it as wanting and needing to defend our own. Yes, Irish are White, but they are their own. Again - and here is a poetic/literal contradiction - Irish are the same but different. It is, as David said, confusing. It is complicated. It is muddy. It is dirty. That, I suspect, is deliberate. While we can't put things into words, we have poetry and emotions/feelings and actions to try to compensate - and usually, we do compensate with these things, but in argumentation, it is too important to be direct and clear and real (as Ashley said to Jim). It's not racial against Blacks. It's preserving our own against even the Irish who are also White. Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland hate each other because one's catholic christian god must be preserved, and the other's protestant christian god must be preserved. The matter around Race is not the actual, true, real reason, but that has been made to be the focus - the repeated, relentless, biased and ignorant focus. With it being the focus, that also redirects the thoughts of those who are reacting, towards it being a Race matter, and if they do have their thoughts redirected, then they forget and/or don't realise it is about defending and keeping one's own. With it being a Race matter, that is a proxy for the real reasons, the real matters of keeping White things White, and - in regards to the Irish here - one's own local White things locally-White.
"It exists in new ways because we have new technologies, we have new platforms and I think people feel emboldened, in the last few years, to say things on those platforms that they wouldn't have said a few years ago."
I think people would have said things a few years ago. They just couldn't. They don't want to have to go through having to be cancelled, shutdown, arrested, etc. The WWW is dangerous for the jew and its plans - in jewish numerology, W = 6, and 666 is Nature. It is Natural and it is Nature, and the jew is afraid. (That surely also means the jew has 666 coursing through its veins... and in its other biological bits and pieces. The jew is so uncomfortable and eurgh.)
"There were people that voted for us, and they still then complained."
Ashley said there was nearly 7 million people watching. Not all of those viewers would have rang-in and voted. Presume half of those who watched did vote, then half or more of those voters might have - and yes, only might have - voted for Diversity. Maybe Diversity won with 30% of the vote, and the remaining 70% was split-up too much to be a majority. Ignoring that, as I said "only might have voted" - we don't know if the vote and results were genuine or if they were fake. When playing the lottery, other peoples' purchases of lottery tickets goes towards the winner or winners. With "israel" making a political song in Eurovision, which is against the rules, it still won. With Honey G on X Factor, who got booed left, right and centre, it still got to the final 5 and said it couldn't hear the booes, yet the booes were obvious.
You don't know who voted for Diversity, and you don't know who watched Britain's Got Talent - some people watch only the auditions and not the rest of the series - and you have no idea if the same people who, firstly, watched BGT were those who complained, and secondly who watched and voted for Diversity (if the vote was genuine) were the same people who complained. With the 7 million watchers, unknown number of voters, and the 24000 complaints, saying "there were people that voted for us, and they still then complained" seems to be inaccurate and unfair.
Ashley said that the British public voted for us who then complained; does Ashley not consider himself British?
How many Blacks voted for Diversity? Presumably all? (You can presume, so so can I.) Anyway - how many Blacks voted for Diversity and how many Whites didn't? How many Blacks complained and how many Whites didn't? You have no idea, so claiming the same voted for you and then complained about you is not an argument.
"So I think that's because it's alright when we were entertaining people and dancing around, but it's not alright if we speak our mind"
BGT is not (supposed to be) a political stage. It's an entertainment programme for the family. There are political arenas/forums - both online and off. An evening, family entertainment programme is not the place for it. I do understand taking the opportunity for doing so - and to be very honest, I actually don't blame you for doing so. In a way, you should have taken that opportunity, but you should have used discernment to realise the fallout. Others have done similar things - such as to thank frontline workers and things (and these were White and didn't win, so that's diverse, equal and far - NOT), and any other acts, but behind the programme, no doubt (((Simon Cowell))) and (((TPTB))) saw this opportunity of Diversity to promote non-White things in White areas. I know someone way back when when Pop Idol was on was trying to vote for Gareth Gates versus Will Young, and they couldn't get through on the phone, so they voted for Will Young. It was the only time they ever did such voting. Will Young won it. I doubt the phone-in vote made the blindest bit of difference for Diversity winning. We just have to trust and believe it is all genuine and honest. We can't exactly know, can we?
"and I actually had a post to that effect. It was to me, Lewis Hamilton, and Anthony Joshua, and esentially it was, 'Shut up and do what you do, because that's how you'll be accepted. You're not here to talk politics, you're not here to talk about what matters; your here to dance, drive and box'."
Who sent you that message? A White person? An Asian person? A Black person?I could also say - never send a Boy to do a Man's job. You're not as politician or a spokesperson for racial matters. I am guessing that you think that because you became famous and you got real or fake votes and won a talent competition that you can politicise things to suit yourself and your group. That's the wrong avenue - and the wrong venue, the wrong stage, the wrong arena, the wrong forum, the wrong platform. You don't play football in a wrestling ring - and you can cry and whinge and bitch all you want. Wrestling rings are for wrestling. You can cry and whinge and bitch that your car won't fly you to your favourite holiday destination, or fly you to the Moon and try to undercut Richard Branson or Elon Musk all you want.
"That's the type of post that makes you feel like less of a person."
Why do you need to get your self-worth from other people accepting your political message on a family entertainment programme in the evening? If you want to feel like less a person, then go see Roy "Chubby" Brown and he might let you know. (I am not 100% certain if Chubbs touches on racial matters, though, but he is a blue-humour comedian.) Go somewhere that makes you feel bad where you don't fit-in, or go somewhere that makes you feel good and where you fit-in. You want to win in White areas instead of winning in Black areas.
"Is that how people see you? Dancing object, a dancing monkey. Is that it?"
You came on to BGT as a dancer, in a dance group. Obviously that's what people expect of you. (((Friends))) made a joke of something along the lines of "that's what I'm expecting from these people". You're trying to mix family entertainment in the evening with important political matters. That's the wrong place and the wrong time. You got the venue wrong. People expect from X what that X thing offers. They don't expect other things. Did you ever work? Did you go into e.g. a farm job while trying to be a dancer, or a shop job while trying to be a farmer? From BGT, people want entertainment, not to be told "You need diversity in your country by letting me and mine in and letting me and mine be important".
"I think it gets to the heart of the forms of racism..."
This David Olusoga "is at the forefront of British conversations about Race". He is saying here it's about racism, not telling Ashley the truth. If he doesn't realise, then he may be forgiven, but this is pandering. It is brainwashing. It is evangelising. It is indoctrination. This applies to any audience member who is watching and sympathetic to it, as well - e.g. those real or fake reactions on Gogglebox, and anyone watching the documentary.
I know those persons on Gogglebox are at least partly fake. They do things for the camera - as they just would, wouldn't they? - and this has been proven. e.g. 1) one was being silly and took their glasses off and put them in front of their face, and angled them perfectly for us, the home audience, to be able to see directly through the camera so when we look at his eyes, they appear silly due to the correct angle of his glasses from his eyes to the camera; 2) any drawings presented by those in the programme, e.g. that they drew or that their Child drew, they don't just hand to their friend or family member; they have it angled so that we, the home audience, can see it through the camera.
So I think this David Olusoga is doing the same for Ashley there and anyone sympathetic to this cause who watches this documentary, hoping to catch as many fish in the net as possible. Again, maybe he really believes it, but it is repetition of things, it is an echo chamber, in different ways. Maybe not a church or a mosque, or a political arena/forum, or an online forum or website or video channel, or any other platform, but it is still presented in a biased way as an echo chamber. I know that people are very biased in arguments. I don't know how many people try to be fair. Yes, I have strong views, that is very obvious, but I have also tried being fair in this post. I have said where thre have been contradictions I have shared, and I have also sort of supported Diversity's (and whomever-else-who-is-connected's) opportunity-taking for using BGT for this. I don't agree with it, but I understand it is a chance to reach millions of people. People are biased - and this David Olusoga is, whether maliciously or not. He doesn't admit that the BGT stage was the incorrect place to do this (the closest he said was that he thought they were going to come for Ashley); instead, he speaks against Whites (and Asians?) here, saying it's muh waysism.
I notice that on-camera, Alesha Dixon didn't say that it is racist. She said that Pandora's Box, or a can of worms, has been opened, and now people have to talk about it. This "forefront historian of British conversations about Race", David Olusoga, who I expect is not very well-known, can say biased things, whereas well-known Alesha Dixon can't.
"...we inherited from the 18th and 19th centuries. Those forms of racism said Black people did have some qualities. Black people can be Physical, they can be strong, they can be athletic."
Is that racism, or is that working to your strengths? If Whites don't want non-Whites to be their leaders - simply because of preserving Whiteness, Whitehood and White things, and also because Blacks don't represent Whites - then why is that racist to prevent Blacks from being Whites' leaders? Blacks obviously are healthier Physically and stronger Physically, more durable, have more stamina, etc., Physically. I presume and expect that the conditions back then were not as good as they could have been, but if (((media))) tells us anything, those holier-than-thou aristocrats back then, the toffs, the arrogant higher-ups back then were all full of themselves. See how conditions were for White people under "White" i.e. (((certain))) monarchs. Quick Victoria didn't care about workers' conditions. See how society was - for Whites. This might be very offensive but perhaps you should be happy that you were treated the same way along with us, whether at the same time or at different times. It seems like you were put to good use for your strengths - that being Physicality. The working and living conditions left much to be desired, I expect, but it sounds like you were still used according to your abilities.
"What you couldn't do was have analytical, cognitive intelligence."
How much 'class' or 'caste' was there? The aristocrats were supposed to be the wise ones. oNlY tHeY kNeW wHaT wAs GoOd FoR tHe CoMmOnErS; tHe CoMmOnErS dIdN't KnOw WhAt WaS gOoD fOr ThEmSeLvEs. This includes White commoners who were to remain "in their station in life". Me saying above that Blacks were put to good use for their Physical abilites does not mean that I think their Mental abilities were not good.
"When people say 'Stick to what you know, just be a dancer', what they're saying is 'I'm comfortable with the structural racism of the society I live in, I'm comfortable with you in this box, I'll celebrate you in this box, but that's the limits of who you are because of your skin colour'."
Have you asked them that? Do you know what people mean when they watch BGT and expect BGT, not Britain's Got Political Messages? How is being advised to stick to what you know, what you're good at, instead of trying to fake your way into a pretend political place, a bad thing and something to be upset about? Not everything against a Black person is a racial matter. It seems to be getting about as bad as the jew's muh holocaust. Everything is about muh holyco$t, muh troloco$t. Waaah-waaaaaah.
There is so much bias in what David Olusoga said. Fair enough to the extent that he is defending Blacks and Black things, but that is very much incorrect for the entertainment stage of Britain's Got Talent in the evening for family entertainment. Was there any warning "The following programme/section contains Pro-Black, political messages in White Britain. Viewer discretion is advised", or was it just shown without any prior warning or notice or information, without any possibility of knowing what to expect?
"A lot of the criticism I received was framed in this way."
- So you say. There has been quite a lot of inaccuracy and bias in this programme, so we don't know quite - or exactly - what the posts and tweets you received were.
- OK, so then take advice and grow-up. Do what you're good at, not what you're not.
"Comedian Jim Davidson, once the king of Saturday night entertainment, took to his online channel to express his opinions about our performance."
You took to Britain's Got Talent, a programme for entertainment that millions of people watch, to express yours. On Jim's online channel, we see how many people view videos (but these are not always true, because fake views can be bought so I have been led to believe), and being one with controversial, strong opinions, anyone can choose to watch his videos and choose to not watch his videos; on BGT, with multiple different types of act - a variety act programme - there are many different types of things on there; political messages not one to be expected. So people watching BGT for funny dog acts and scarily-dangerous mentalist acts are the demographic for that who wouldn't expect political messages and who didn't watch BGT for political messages... So... Jim's online channel, where people would go there deliberately and watch deliberately for him to express his opinions, is not OK, but your millions-of-entertainment-expecting-viewers-seeing-unexpected-political-messages TV place is OK? Why?
Ashley was told that he was unaware of some of the things that BLM stood for, and he said he was aware. So he knew, and went on BGT anyway? To... shit all over Whiteness on TV for millions to see... and not expect a reaction?! blank blinking
"...and I saw it on the day that a Black Man was charged with murdering someone in Birmingham and injuring, quite badly, 7 other people."
"What's that got to do-- I'm sure on that day there were millions of people around the World who did wrong things, and I hope that Man who attacked people with a knife was sent to prison, but... what's that got to do with racial inequality?"
I'm sure millions of people around the World were doing bad things against Whites - but what does that have to do with racial inequality? A White copper kneeling on the neck of George Floyd - a Black Man - versus a Black Man killing 1 and injuring seriously 7. One is OK, the other is not. Why?
So if 1 White versus 1 Black has to do with racial inequality, why does 1 Black v 8 presumably Whites not? "What's that got to do--" Probably a lot.
"Like... it baff-- it actually baffles me."
I don't want to be mean or nasty or anything, but above, David Olusoga said, "What you couldn't do is have analytical, cognitive intelligence". Apparently, you proved him right. As I said, "8 presumably Whites" - I don't know how many, if any, of those 8 were White or Asian, or if any were Black. If none of those 8 were Black, or all 8 were White, then my comments here stand. If any were Black, then Black-on-Black violence is a point, and would that, then, be related to racial inequality, or do any of the stereotypes, that David said and any others, actually fit? The statistics seem to be that more Blacks are in jail for offences. There is so much Black gang violence and murder by rival Black gangs... It does seem as if they don't user their Brains to think. It seems like they think with their Emotions instead.
"...and there's loads of White people sticking-up for you. Young White Girls..."
":O
""walking around with banners, 'de-fund the police', 'support Black people'. 5600 illigal immigrants in this country - that's this month."
"It's irrelevant. The only difference is the racism. Lol. It's the only common denominator - the fact that we're talking about people who maybe look different coming from overseas. The hatred and the venon he's got, and the language he uses is the real ugly, the real ugly side of it for me."
It's irrelevant but the only common denominator is the racism, people who look different coming from overseas? So are you saying racism but not "rEvErSe-RaCiSm"? If there are 2 or more Races, then racism can exist. The mere existence of multiple, different groups can mean, but does not necessarily mean, that prejudice, discrimination, racism, whatever, can exist. Because Blacks look different than Whites and come from overseas from Black areas, it's racism, but because Whites look different from Blacks who are going overseas to White areas... it's not racism?
Jim Davidson is a comedian. You know that he is. For part of his bit, when Ashley met Jim, with some of Jim's reactions, I don't think anything else needs to be said. Also - it's irrelevant because you say so, Ashley, but when it's against you, then it's very much relevant, of course, yes?
"I know that sentiment lives out there. I know it's more alive than I ever thought it was."
With the so-called legislation and regulation of things, moderating online platforms, etc., I think the regulating and moderating is kept to a certain amount on purpose so as to employ big data and data mining. People share their comments online and analytics are used for reasons we're not supposed or "allowed" to know about. AI, for example, can be used to analyse people's thoughts, the general opinion of the people, the 'chatter', see how things are with demographics, etc., all of which is fed to ((TPTB))) so they can then use (((their agenda))) nefariously further.
"That video probably upset my mum the most. Hearing a guy speak so violently about your kids - I just think as a mum, more than anything else, it just broke her a little bit."
Your mum is not the only one who is upset, broke. Our Whiteness, our Whitehood, our White things are being broke, more and more, because we're not "allowed" to keep them White.
"It's not directly about me. It's about the people I love - ironically, most of which are White."
How is it about them? How is Jim Davidson saying things about a Black Man killing 1 and attacking and injuring seriously 7 others, about your mostly-White loved ones? That just seems like an emotional ploy used to get people upset and agree with you, instead of having them think critically with their Brains.
"Last year, my Britain's Got Talent dance routine exposed the vibes in the way our nation thinks about Race."
24000 people is not 60-70 million people. A lot may share similar opinions, and it's not exactly possible to find out exactly, but based on the numbers that we have here 24000 is a lot different than 60-70 million. 24000 is also a lot different than the 7 million people who watched it. There are unknown numbers in Britain who support the BLM movement, as well as agree that Black lives, indeed, do matter. There surely are some who are indifferent. You also seem to have split priorities, and you seem to be confused or 'chatting shit', as it were. You say "my group" but you also say "our nation", and you admit being mixed-Race but you're defending Blacks and seem to be agreeing that saying "all lives matter" means "Black lives don't matter"... and you're saying Jim's reaction is not about mixed-Race you, or about Blacks, but is about Whites - most of your loved ones...
"I'm on a journey to find out why it outraged so many people, including many who are far from racist."
Define "racist". Those who don't like a Black political message on a family entertainment, variety act evening programme are racist? How does one oppose that without being racist?
Black: Black lives matter.
White: OK, yeah. That's true, but all lives matter.
Black: Racist.
That's not just a meme or a joke. It has been admitted, proven, in this documentary!
Can you remember the days when conspiracy theories were just conspiracy theories? Pepperidge Farm remembers.
"Dominique highlighted frequent criticisms of the Black Lives Matter movement, that they're just a front for more-radical groups and policies like de-funding the police - but that's not my position. I want to find out if one of the most-prominent BLM protestors agrees. Imarn Ayton began attending marches last year and is now a leading voice in the movement.
How did you get into activism?"
"Eugh, you know what? The real moment was right here when I organised my first protest on the 6th of June, Saturday, with 20 000 people, including Madonna, and I stood on this plinth right here, talking about institutionalised racism."
We have thousands and thousands of years of Whitehood behind us, now non-Whites come here and we have to put our Whiteness down for non-Whites here, and we have to put-up with with non-Whites here - and yes, I do mean put-up with. We have to tolerate, especially with this new definition by the "govern"ment. If we are not tolerating, then we're extremist, and the "govern"ment will cancel us, meaning that the "govern"ment favours, in "our" society, the toleration of things that we, the people who reckon democracy exists, oppose, things which are against us, and the "govern"ment shuts us down because we oppose them. The "govern"ment will effectively cancel anything it doesn't like. What was the point of Brexit? That has been ignored, and look at this -
It was never meant to be used... So we had no chance, no choice, no option, but to be forced to accept non-Whites flooding in. Raping us. Being violent against us. Destroying us. Destroying our Lands. We must accept it, no matter what. It we don't tolerate this, then we're extremist and will be cancelled by "our" "govern"ment. What, or who, exactly, does the "govern" in "government" mean and stand for?
More and more and more and more non-Whites have been coming-in,
and I doubt it's from only Turkey, and based on this international law, that is illegal; likewise, based on Brexit, that is illegal, yet it is still happening regardless - and the "govern"ment's new definition, while not law, is still to be used so as to de-fund and cancel any groups it dislikes. It says it won't stop free speech, but it will still cancel you. That sounds awfully like "god" - you have free will but if you don't do as "god" demands, nope. You're cancelled, you're discarded, you're thrown into an eternal lake of fire for using your own choice. That's great democracy, that is. It's democrazy -
It is ignoring international law and it is ignoring Brexit, and we, Whites, apparently are not "allowed" to defend ourselves and our things in any of this. We have to share, just like in commjewnism, so instead of it remaining Whites', it has to become "ours".
"You also have those that believe in reform, like myself. So those that advocate for changing the education system, or making sure that reviews, in regards to racism or tackling equality, are implemented."
We must change our curriculum to suit those for whom the already-established curriculum was not designed, because it didn't need to include them because they were not here? Now they are here, despite our protestations, our dissension, you want to change the way we run our own things. You want to have equality in our own White areas with, or replacing, our own White things, instead of being in your own Black areas with your own Black things. You may not have chosen to be born here, and that's not your fault nor your doing, but we don't want our things lessened and deleted and replaced for others' things to be here instead. Why is that so wrong to keep ours ours? Why is it so wrong for you to not go to yours and have, be and keep yours yours? Black lives matter - they do, of course, and Black countries exist for Black lives. Asian countries exist for Asian lives. White countries exist for White lives.
It -
- is wrong for, and
- is as if it is actually, if not officially, illegal for
"Our frame of reference for racism in this country is overt, and that is, obviously, as we know when someone has racial prejudice and it is obvious, deliberate and direct; and in actual fact, covert racism is what is most-prevalent in England, and that is when someone has hidden racial prejudice and they disguise it and rationalise it with an explanation that society would deem acceptable."
You say "racial prejudice". Are you sure it's prejudice and not post-judice? I can't speak for everyone, nor anyone other than myself, for that matter, but pre-judice and post-judice don't matter. What matters is the replacing of Whites and White things in White areas.
"I'll give you an example - the statement 'all lives matter'..."
"Which is true, by definition...!"
"...and that's my point, actually! Thank you very much.
"Of course it's true."
"That's my point."
"Yeah."
"So 'all lives matter' is obviously in response to 'Black lives matter', so it is shrouded with racial prejudice..."
It does not follow that saying "all lives matter" means the person saying it is being prejudiced racially against... Blacks or Asians, regardless of whether or not "all lives matter" is said in response to "Black lives matter". The person on the receiving end hearing you say "Black lives matter" might consider you to be racist against non-Blacks, and presumably would try to be unbiased and say, "all lives matter", or "Yes, of course Black lives matter. All lives matter.", or similar ways of saying it, but you're saying because they're saying "all lives matter", the mere mention of it, means that they are being prejudiced racially - presumably against Blacks and not Asians. That is not the case, necessarily. Unless you actually know if they - Whites, by the sounds of it - are being prejudiced against Blacks (but obviously not Asians), then you don't know. Unless you actually know, then you don't know.
"...however, it is a factual statement; therefore, it is justified."
You say that "Black lives matter" is a factual statement; therefore, it is justified. "Make America Great Again" - this has other iterations. "All lives matter" is a response to "Black lives matter", but it is not discriminatory necessarily; it is inclusive of Blacks - which is what you want, it is diverse, it is equality to say "all lives matter". The evolution of/from "Black lives matter" to "all lives matter", and from "Make America Great Again" to its other iterations, is memetic. That's the way things work, that's how people are.
How many Blacks or Whites or Asians say, "Black lives matter", and then Whites say, "All lives matter"?
How many Blacks or Whites or Asians say, "Black lives matter", and then Asians say, "All lives matter"?
How many Blacks or Whites or Asians say, "Black lives matter", and then Blacks say, "All lives matter"?
Is this alleged racial discrimination aimed at "people", unspecified, or is it aimed only at Whites? Are you being racially-prejudiced now? It is undeniable that England, since you mentioned England, is a White country, which has been forged by Whites and has been White, with White values, White culture, White customs, White thoughts, White feelings, White mentalities, White things... and now "people" are racially-prejudiced for saying "all lives matter" when Blacks, Asians or Whites can and surely do say "Black lives matter". (Now being told "saying "all lives matter" is a racial reaction to "Black lives matter", some stupid people will refrain from saying "all lives matter" because they think they will be - or at least will be accused of being - racist even when they know they're not being.) To whom are you referring when you say they are racially-prejudiced? "In this country...". In this country there are non-Whites, so why not be specific and say "Whites", instead of "this country" or "someone"? You claim "all lives matter" is factually-correct but also is covert racism (presumably against Blacks only), yet you don't specify which "people" you are referring to, which "someones" you are referring to. Talk about covert racial prejudice - and wanting to change the curriculum so that "people" "in this country" - which surely means Whites as well as Asians and Blacks - think like you, on your terms.
According to you, that's wrong. You don't like it. It's wrong to not only be White with White things in White areas, but also to be oneself as one is, and instead one has to change, not say certain words or phrases. So much for free speech. It's OK for you to say that we're being racially-prejudiced by replying "all lives matter" even when we're not, but it's not OK for us to actually say "all lives matter". You have free speech and we don't, and you want diversity and equality? You don't like the way things are as they have been, which are trying to remain. You don't like it, so you say we're racially-prejudiced, and wish to change the curriculum so that Children think your way, instead of their own diverse ways, and altering "reviews in regards to racism or tackling equality" so that they "are implemented". What about those who have their own speech and thoughts and things already? Why change those just to suit you? Why say that they must change because you are offended? Stop being offended. Offence is taken, not received nor given. "No offence"; "None taken". Why should we change for you? I come to your home and force you to live and be on my terms? You come to my country and you force me to live and be on your terms? Where's the diversity? Where's the equality? Force is not equal; it is overpowering. You want, you want, you want, but what about what we want - which we have already and are trying to maintain?
"That is what we deal with. This is the type of racism we deal with in this country."
This is going to be offensive and taken out of context, blown out of proportion, misunderstood. It's just an analogy. It is not literal nor an attack. The Body is xenophobic [still, see below regarding "-ism" and "-phobe" and "-phile"] against foreign invaders - germs, diseases... The Body fights them off, and the Body attempts to remain, keeping itself as it is, as it should be, as it was. I am referring to Whites living in Asian countries and Black countries. I am referring to Asians living in Black countries and White countries. Yes, of course, I am, of course, referring, of course eyeroll to Blacks living in Asian countries and in White countries. Dogs don't like 'foreigners' entering their grounds - perhaps most-humourously the postman. Dogs don't like cats or other dogs entering their garden, but bringing-up puppy with kitten goes against both Animals' Natural inclinations. Indeed, it is unnatural to be replaced by others and it has become illegal only recently in the historical timeline. It is supposed to be illegal, but that is being ignored because of muh reaz0ns.
"Both Imarn and Dominique have shown me that Britain is still divided about what racism is, let-alone how to tackle it. There are so many opinions, but the hurt and damage remain, but why does racism matter so much? For many, the consequences are all too real.
...
Actor David Harewood is launching a book about his experiences, and I want to find out more.
Just the small clips and the small bits I've seen of you talk about your story, there was pivotal moments for you where you felt like you changed."
"When I came out of drama school, the World said to me, 'You're Black. You're Black. You play Black parts. You go for Black auditions. You don't go there... you don't play this, you play that'."
So? Type-casting is something that actually happens - a lot - in the entertainment industries. You have the skills to drive the tractor but you complain that you are not employed to muck-out the farm Animals. It is fair enough that Hermione Granger was played by a Black Girl in the play, as opposed to a White Girl - which some were upset about. The reason it is OK is, according to the person who told me, because nowhere in the Harry Potter books does it say that Hermione Granger is White. What's not OK is James Bond being played by an Australian or an American or a Woman; or in the Powerpuff Girls, there being a magicked Black 4th "sister" after how the 3 White actual sisters were established already and it being shown how they came to be already; or Cleopatra being played by a Black actress; or Eminem doing Black hip-hop/rap, even though I enjoyed some of his music - and as I have said before, in a video clip I saw of Black artists praising Eminem, I think they would have had to praise a White Man doing Black music - and doing Black music better than some Blacks, some would argue - because if they didn't praise him, then I suspect that they'd be in trouble and would not be as famous or continue being. I have no source for this; it is just my own cynicism regarding the matter.
"I suddenly realised, 'Oh. I'm not gunna be James Bond. I'm not gunna be the hero saving the Girl, getting the money, driving the car. I'm not gunna be the hero."
I have not read the James Bond books, so I don't know if he is described as a White Male, and given the time when the books were written it might be reasonable to assume Bond is White and not Black and not Asian, so depending on that it might be fine that you're not going to be James Bond - even though I expect Bond to be played by a non-White and a Woman or a robot or a banana one day. As for being the hero saving the Girl - why not? Why can't you be? Not all heroes are White,
but if you want to be the hero saving the Girl, then I refer back to what I have said - you have so much more freedom in Black areas, instead of trying to be the hero in White areas, but since you mentioned James Bond, driving the car, having the money, saving the Girl, it sounds like you want fame, not to actually help anyone. Diversity with you as a famous actor? Equality with you as a famous actor? Davyon isa real, actual hero. Why make life difficult for yourself - and for us? We have our own things here which others are attempting to change and replace. You have your own things there already. They have been forged and built-up for you.
Besides, why care and be upset about being or not being a fake hero in a film? Why is that important? Why not be a real, actual hero, like Akon? Like Davyon? Why is that not important? Don't you have actual priorities?
"The weight of that really hit me - knocked me for six."
"How did that racism impact you and change you?"
"Dude, it put me in a mental institution. A complete and utter psychotic breakdown."
You're putting the wrong weight on your shoulders, then. Having such strong convictions and expectations and - no offence but - delusions about reality, you're right in saying it knocked you for six. It brought you back to reality somewhat. That's not how things are - but now you are sort of like a hero, for Blacks to look-up to and possibly emulate, and definitely support. Your resolve has been strengthened, and now you are like a pioneer, perhaps. A hero in a way. Surely you don't know or realise these things. You don't realise that things are not supposed to be mixed, Races are not supposed to be miscegenised, we're not supposed to be bubbling away in a melting-pot crucible. You've been a victim in more ways than one, and while you fight to not be a victim, and Whites fight to not be victims, "law", media, "education", etc. is on your side against Whites in White areas.
There is, apparently, no evidence she said this; however, she's been suspended because the jew hasn't experienced racial discrimination, so she claimed. One thought being a jew was a religion, not a race, but whatever. There might not be any evidence that she said White people are the problem in Britain, but Diane Abbott made 'terrible mistake' by saying Irish people did not suffer racism, says Labour grandee. There might not be any evidence that she said Whites are the problem in Britain, but it seems to fit, it seems as if she did say so, if we can extrapolate from other things she has said and done...
"Race is a very difficult... issue to talk about in this country."
"You've noticed!"
"Lol."
Yeah, comedic response. Lolling helps brainwashing. Lolling at things can help in accepting it. It buries deeply within the mentality and the psychology of a person, and it works away unconsciously. Then they believe it and accept it and behave it and become it. It is Cognitive Behavioural Therapy - it starts in the mind, it influences and guides the emotions and then encourages and enacts the behaviours. If one is opposed to something, they block it out; if one lols, they have happy hormones released which helps to influence them. That's no doubt why "comedy" programmes have canned laughter, to try and influence the audience to accept and agree and go along with "the (((moral))) of the story".
"Just the fact that we're not supposed to talk about Race plays into why so many Black people struggle with their mental health."
"I think there's a lot of people that are probably more impacted by it than we know."
"We internalise it. 4-times more Black people than White people end-up in mental institutions. 10-times more Black people than White people have schizophrenia and other mental health conditions."
There are places that are Black-friendly, which have Blacks and support Blacks and be Black. Can you guess any? You're in a non-Black area and trying to remain yourself. We're trying to remain ourselves and having to move around for non-Whites. Make a cup of tea without milk. Then add milk. You expect the milk and the tea to remain unchanged. Then you have sever mental ill health problems.
Patient: Doctor FancyMancy, It hurts when I do this.
FancyMancy: OK. Keep doing that, then.
What about Asians, though? Is this racism thing about only Blacks v Whites? There are Asians, as well, you know? They seem to be ignored - unless it is a subtle, or unconscious, realisation that Blacks are coming in to White areas, and that White areas are White areas and not Asian areas or Black areas...
I'm also going to suggest that - based on the theme of this documentary - the 4-times and 10-times figures of Blacks more than Whites might also be included in the anti-Black racism. Perhaps a large portion of the Blacks in those figures are actually not as bad as the figures say, but because they're Black they're more in the statistics.
"The pressure... just for having this tone of skin is massive."
"You feel it every day."
"I feel it every day."
Then go to where the pressure is tiny or doesn't exist, then! Fuck sake, man. This is exasperating... It won't be easy work - it'll be very hard work, but you can do it. They're your people, and you love them more than I do - more than I can. How many Black-made charities are there? Blacks have so many agencies for them, and White have merely "privilege", and Blacks complain and leave their Black areas in shit. You have more stamina than Whites, so you can work harder for longer and get the job done quicker than we can. Try and change ours all you want; yours needs heroes - real, actual heroes, not fake James Bond zeroes - real heroes, like yourselves.
"It's the first time ever I was scared of being in the public eye. There was a fear, and I would go, 'What does that person think of me? What does that person think of me?' and it was something I'd never experienced."
"I watched that performance - it's fantastic"
"Thank you."
"and it's really, really powerful. The fact that you upset people, I think is a great thing, because they were like, 'We're not having that'."
"Yeah, of course, yeah."
"You must continue with-- you must continue pushing that, because if you don't, I don't think it would ever change. It gives hope to a lot of other people. You're discovering your political power, so I'd have to say to you, brother - welcome to the struggle!"
Oh, thanks. Put this direct and blatantly-obvious anti-White attack in a programme on for Whites to see, on TV. Thanks. Tell us Whites that you're going to offend us, try to change the curriculum, keep forcing your non-White views on us. That sound like rape. It might not be sexual, per se, but it is still what we don't want, it it is still against us, it is still forced upon us, in our own White areas. Thanks. I thought that was illegal, as per the international law and as per Brexit. Great. Thanks.
"10 years ago, I can't imagine this auditorium right now maybe being so mixed and being so diverse. I think it shows you that like the conversation really has widened out, and Dave is a prime example how that can be difficult, life-changing sometimes, but he's harnessed that and what he's doing now is bringing all of these people together."
Yeah, 100 years ago, as well. 200 years ago. 500 years ago. 1000 years ago. 10000 years ago. We want to remain what we are, and we want our history to remain, intact, and our future history to remain, intact, not be replaced.
I have said previously that what we are increases, for good or for bad. Whatever it is that we are and do is what we are and do. It become more and more, Karma-wise. The jew is attempting to put things in "our" Karma so that non-Whiteness grows, increases, becomes more. The jew is trying to create and enforce "our" Karma in a guided and directed way.
"Since my Britain's Got Talent dance routine received tens of thousands of complaints, I've been trying to understand the nature of racism and why it continues to exist."
I suppose that's fair enough, but it seems very much like you're being biased to one side of the matter. You're saying it is against you, against Blacks, but I am saying it is us being against against-Whites; it is for Whites; and when we are against against-Whites, you/your People are, and the anti-White "govern"ment is, against against against-Whites, i.e. it is for against-Whites - and based on what the intended outcome would be - the enslavement of a mongoloid mixed non-race of Asians and Blacks - it is not exactly for non-Whites, but it certainly is for against-Whites. A lot of people surely agree that it is not a matter of against-Blacks or against-Asians; rather that it is against against-Whites, i.e. those who are "racist", but I think a lot of them don't realise, or perhaps don't know, quite what they mean to mean.
"David Harewood told me to fight the good fight, but what does that look like?"
It looks like trying to change and replace Whites, Whitehood, Whiteness and White things in White areas - and you/David/Blacks call that good? I don't think all Blacks agree. I hope not. I once, actually, saw some muslim Asian young Boys playing near someone's car. I don't know exactly what happened but the owner of the car, a Black Man, checked his car and was angry with those Asian Boys, and he said something to the effect of that they should go back to where they came from... A Black Man said about Asian Boys to himself, that they should go back to where they came from, in a White country. I actually found it funny - laughable, not funny-humourous. It's more eyerolly now. "Fight the good fight, brother" eyeroll. Alternatively, go to Black areas and fix them. There are so many charities for helping Blacks, and these charities... "have been" "helping" for many years, yet Blacks still need help. At the end of the day, only one can help themselves - and we're trying to help ourselves, help ourselves remain and stay existent. They're still drinking dirty, insanitary water, still have bad education if any, still are being born with cleft lips, etc., etc., etc. Couldn't they at least clean the water? It's the same with all charities. The charity 'Children in Need' made £1bn in 40 years. For Blacks, Akon helped with toilets. I say to you - fIgHt ThE goOd FiGhT, or actually help where help is needed. You'll be proud and it will be a different type of difficulty, instead of claiming that White-history-made White areas are "ours".
"As one of the UK's most-respected activists, Leila Hassan Howe..."
You must mean being the most-respected in the Black portion of the UK...
"The decision was taken that we ought to have a demonstration to say enough is enough."
Yet enough is not enough. Things continue to happen anyway. It's terrible that people died because a building was torched, but actions have reactions. If Whites stay and "fight the good fight" to keep and remain and be, then that's wrong and racist. Look at how many White places have been replaced by non-Whites; Whites have had to move - and some by authouritarian force. One Swedish family removed a White Swedish family out of their own home so that "refugees" could replace them. So much for that being illegal.
"Fight the good fight" is a euphemism for "continue to infiltrate, change and replace", including with upsetting those who are here already. Why do you suppose there is so much racism, as you call it, or prejudice and backlash? You're damaging us, hurting us, replacing us, displacing us, killing us... in our own White countries - and you're the offended ones?! You are the fucking offended ones?! I wanted to be direct and offensive in retaliation, saying about being fucking retarded and not having the cognitive abilities to understand (referencing what David said)..., but you've been victimised, as well. (((TPTB))), in its 6000-year plan, decided to have White areas be built-up with few births, and Asian and Black areas quite the opposite in some ways, so as to have multiculturalism with the flooding-in of non-Whites into White areas, instead of us all - Asians, Blacks a Whites - remaining and being where we were decades, centuries and millennia ago.
Let me come into your home and "fight the good fight", infiltrate, change and replace against you. You will bend over and let me win. No. You won't. You'd defend yourself, your own, your things, and get rid of me. If "enough is enough", then do one.
"You are being carried by the momentum, by the passion, by the feeling and by the fact that you know it's a just cause."
It's a just cause to infiltrate, change and replace others? That's illegal under international law, which existed in 1981, and it's also illegal now under Brexit.
"Sitting here now after everything you've seen, been through, been a part of, are you optimistic?"
I realised earlier that Ashley, in particular, is an agent for this. I realised, while I know already that this is indoctrination, now that Ashley is similar to "islamists", or terrorists, you might say. It's just a slower, subtle, less-direct and more gentle action and attempt.
"I'm optimistic because I can see a great number of people - Black and White people - who want to make things better."
Define "better". Different people have different mentalities and different ideas and different intentions. Whites have to kowtow to Blacks' ideas and intentions, and pretend to have Blacks' mentalities (e.g. "urban" or "street" culture things), but Blacks don't seem to be kowtowing to Whites' things...
"One thing I'm starting to realise - this is not just Black history; this is British history."
So our history is being replaced already, then?
"It's a part of history that I've never been taught, I didn't know about."
It shouldn't be. In the future, we can look back at these things and repeat those words "never again" with actual meaning, intention and effort and actions and behaviour.
"Keep on keeping on."
"Yeah."
"Always."
Onward, christian soldiers, marching as to war.
"This is about people, this is about the way that we... operate, the way we- we- we come together; our Humanity, essentially."
Really? Seriously?!
"Surely learning a history and having a deeper understanding of what has been is gunna help us massively in terms of where we need to go."
Your history, your ancestors, are not White, and they are not in White areas. You might know unconsciously and racially where you need to go, but your conscious knowledge and understanding have been polluted.
"Accusations of institutional racism continue to be directed at the Metropolitan Police."
I don't know but I presume that the murder of Stephen Lawrence was unjustified, but now police are not sorting out racial matters for fear of being labelled racist. Again - there are police no-go zones in certain areas, and they don't deal with matters for racism reasons.
I can only surmise that, with Stephen being only one example, that was allowed to happen or it was orchestrated, so that nowadays, police are too afraid of entering no-go zones and too afraid to deal with matters for fear of being labelled racist. One thing led onto another, onto another, onto another... and all the while, Whites are not "allowed" to have, keep and be White in White areas. It's a thread, and at points along that thread appear knots - Whites are restricted.
"Institutional racism - is it imagined or is it real?"
"You should ask those lads there, if I was honest - how they've been stopped, how they felt, how they were spoken to, did they think they got a fair crack at the whip. They'd probably say that institutional racism definitely sort of exists."
Previously, Blacks had been discriminated against. Now, there are agencies and groups and things for them, to help them. Older persons, from decades ago, had their mentalities; today, younger ones have different education and media, etc. One wonders what, and how, the older generations were taught so as to give them the mentalities that they had - and why they were taught such things and in those ways, to just have today's people be taught differently than their grandparents were. These days, White people have "privilege"
and that may be American, but it explains the point. Besides, shouldn't Whites have privilege in White areas, just like Blacks should in Black areas and Asians should in Asian areas? We supposedly have the so-called "privilege" of believing that, but you actually do have so many agencies and things to help you...
"I tell young coppers that when I train them - 'if you've made a mistake, tell everyone'."
It's not wrong to admit things, and it's not wrong, in arguments, to say, "I don't know", instead of being biased and trying to argue, probably in ignorance, and definitely in stupidity. That is at least part of the reason of racial matters, such as this.
"It's also easy to not want to listen if it doesn't affect you directly."
Listen to Whites who want to preseve Whiteness, Whitehood, White things in White areas, then. Except that does affect you... yet how much do you listen?
"Detective Sergeant Ray Sekalongo..."
Ray... Sekalongo. RaySekalongo. Race-ekalongo. We love coincidences...
"Well, why should I wait 'til someone's going in custody, having been arrested for an offense, to interview them, to talk about changing their life, when I can do it here and prevent it from going any further?"
It certainly does sound like the police are trained to behave in certain ways. It seems to be that a lot of police officers fit the profile. The training brainwashes them into a way of thinking - a mentality - or it brings that out of them, and that steers things in a direction which may or may not be actually helpful and down to Earth with civilians. It's not a secret that police have lost the respect of civilians over the decades... and if someone, like Ray, can ask this question why he can't help them openly and publicly/privately, instead of institutionally in custody, then it is obvious that he is capable of thinking for himself, but also with me being cynical he might have been taught and trained differently - maybe deliberately - than how White police officers are and were taught and trained.
"Some people said to me that 'taking the knee' pre-game is posturing, it's more sort of... you know... a gesture."
Just like Diversity shouldn't have (although, I can't blame them for doing so) used BGT as an opportunity to reach millions of people, I reckon football, likewise, also shouldn't. Will it go into rugby, tennis, snooker, darts, etc., as well - or does it already?
"I think the thing we have to remember is every form of Black protest has been described as illegitimate"
I don't know if that is true or false, but people watching the documentary will accept it without question and without a second thought.
"I think that the moment that accountability comes into play, and people can't just say what they want without any repercussions - I think that will be a huge game-changer."
No free speech because muh feewings? Grow-up. What about saying what you want, about changing the curriculum? Saying what you want, about using BGT as a political stage? Saying what you want, about wanting to have equality which means changing our White things to suit your Black things? If you want equality and accountability, then try to be White. "Oooooohhhh! You can't say that!" I can, but I don't mean it. It's not a problem for you - with this BLM movement - once you die, all of the effects that happen will no longer be your responsibility, so you'll have escaped accountability (at least in the World's current thinking).
"'We proactively find 65% of the abusive content that we remove.' From being on the opposite end of it, 65% doesn't always feel like enough. It's a real, serious problem."
It means that of all of the content that is removed, Twitter's moderators find 65% of it themselves; the other 35% is reported by users. It doesn't mean that Twitter removes only 65% of all of the content that they deem breaks their rules.
"We've seen that with CoVID and the public health crisis we've had. If social media platforms really wanna stop misinformation, and stamp-down on things, they can. They can really identify this stuff. I'd love to see that energy being put behind racism online."
You misunderstood Twitter's statement, and you're using one misunderstood statement by one website to say that all of online should be better. Regardless of all of that, that's more difficult. A lot of websites are echo chambers. Groups on those websites are echo chambers. If you are not into... e.g. My Little Pony, then you wouldn't be a brony; you wouldn't go to that website or that group, so if in there everyone agreed that non-bronies are fools, then you wouldn't know about that, and if it was classed as "bronism" or "bronist" abuse, then... well... whatever, whether it is moderated or not, or those who ae against that might be the ones who would be "bronist" engaging in "bronism"; if you are not an incel, then you wouldn't think all Females are shit and should be sex slaves; incels who do might be classed as "incelist" who engage in "incelism" or those who oppose that might be "incelist" who engage in "incelism"... you wouldn't see that content nor see it remain or be removed. Regarding so-called and alleged racism - because defending one's own Race doesn't mean hatred of/for other Races - people not of that Race, not of that website, not of that group, wouldn't be a part of it (except to troll and harass, of course, which might be classed as racial abuse even if it is just to mess about).
"What the fuck do you want? Diversity, what the fuck do you want?"
"Equality. A decent conversation."
There is no such thing as equality anywhere. You need to realise this - and I don't mean just racially. I mean "equality" doesn't exist. There is, has been, and always will be hierarchy, no matter what, forever. You have been indoctrinated with nonsense, and you are now further a victim, maybe with heavier weight on your shoulders. I think-- no, I wonder, and I hope, that once people realise eQuAlItY doesn't exist, then things should be easier, maybe, or at least simpler, but if you want "equality"; rather, if you want fairness which aligns with your Blackness, then go to countries that have forged and built-up Blackhood for many, many, many years, instead of trying to change many, many, many years' worth of building-up and forging work of White countries... You say "for my people" (or "my group") - what about those in Black countries who are not living a decent life like you are over here? What about your people, your group? What are you doing for your group there?
I don't doubt that you'd reply, "that's not what I meant". You should choose your words more carefully, then.
I also notice that when talking about Whites (but not specifying Whites, with Blacks and Asians also living here), it is "this country" and "people". When talking about Blacks, it is "my group". Herp-derp - I love this equality-on-unequal-terms - and "terms" here means both terminology and in regards to one side's preferences.
"To be around people who wanna stand-up for change and see the World be a better place."
What's "better"? Define it. Replacing Whites in White areas with Blacks? Replacing White things in White areas with Black things? Michael Jackson might have sung "It doesn't matter if you're Black or White", but he was wrong. It does matter. White countries are for White people. Don't cry - Black countries are for Black people; Asian countries are for Asian people. Get over it. Is that not the way Nature made it, before (((politics))) and then (((media and "education")))? Michael Jackson was clearly very insecure and lacking in pride and self-worth and self-esteem. Akon can help Blacks with solar panels; Davyon can help save people's lives! You're here, in White-built-up-and-forged White areas crying while trying to undo what has been weaved for many, many, many years; you're trying to pull-up the very-deeply-buried roots that have been growing for many, many, many years. Do you expect the garden will be clean and tidy while you unroot us? Lol, and you cry "racism" because of the mess. eyeroll Dear fucking me...
"Freedom of expression."
Whites are not "allowed" to say "all lives matter" in response to "Black lives matter" because that's muh waysist! You said, "I'd love to see that energy being put behind racism online" for those opposing you, and/but want freedom of expression for yourself. Herp-a-derp. Whites are not "allowed" to have White things, do White things and be White; we're not "allowed" to express ourselves freely, lest you cry and we get arrested - so no wonder we go to the Internet - but you want to express yourself freely? No for us but yes for you? Such dIvErSiTy and such eQuAlItY that is. Herp-derp.
So Whites are not "allowed" to have freedom of expression in our own White countries, so... you, also, are not. Fuck off, yes? It's all for you, in White areas, and not for us, in White areas. That's replacement, displacement - and that is illegal under international "law"; these again -
- and based on the "govern"ment's bullshit dEfInItIoN of "extremism", I am being extremist because I am against tolerating the things that you stand for - the replacement and displacement of me and my people, of me and my country, of me and my group.
"Equality, a decent conversation, freedom of expression."
You're trying to play basketball in a netball match, on a netball court. They may be quite similar, but the rules are different and the games are different. You're trying to change netball to suit your basketball. You're trying to play football in a rugby match, on a rugby pitch. They are similar, but the rules are different and the games are different. You're trying to change rugby to suit your football. While doing that, you're crying that the other players in the other game are picking on you. You're trying to go to the opposite sex's changing rooms and toilets and trying to say it has to be the same, then be offended when you're told to fuck off. It's a case of apples and oranges.
David Harewood said he'll never be the hero because he's Black. That's bullshit. Akon could be classed as a hero for the help he has done. Davyon certainly is a hero for what he has done. You can, and Harewood can, as well - but you both prefer to cr instead. You stay here and try to change here to be more like your things instead. "If Blacks weren't there, then Davyon wouldn't have saved those two people's lives." Consider the butterfly effect.
You can go to help your group where your group resides as the majority, instead of crying that netball and rugby and changing rooms and toilets are too different to amalgamate with basketball and football and other sexes, but you choose not to. You can go build sanitation and better farms and this, that, and the other - but you prefer to focus on the muh eQuAlItY of here while attempting to shut Whites up and attempt to change and replace Whites and White things, in an already-established society that has sanitation and farms and this, that, and the other already. Isn't that theft? Cultural appropriation? One rule for you, another rule for me if I put my hair into cornrows. Great muh equality.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, that you don't realise these things, but that is what you're doing. Go to your group where they reside as the majority and be a fucking hero. Be an amazing hero. You and David Harewood be the best heroes. I know you won't (not only because you won't read this).
"After weeks of negotiation, and to my surprise, Davidson has agreed to meet me. [I'm] about to have a conversation with Jim Davidson, a Man that has said some disgusting things both about me and my group personally, and more generally."
I am reserving this for the end of my post here. Please check below.
"Thanks for accepting the interview, thanks for coming to chat, because I wanna have a real, direct, honest conversation..."
He was real, direct and honest in his video, which you are reacting to. I can't say if he was being sarcastic (since he is a comedian) or was misinformed with what he said about most people on TV being non-White, but he is a comedian, his mentality is for teh l0lz (at least in part). You are reacting to his video, and that is not discrimination, but "all lives matter", a reaction to "Black lives matter" strangely is discrimination.
"You've got to realise, for me to contradict what you're saying - people will say, 'How dare you? How dare you go against what Ashley is saying? You must be a racist'."
He wasn't wrong.
"As far as I'm concerned, that video you made about Diversity was... it was racist in every way. Every single way."
"Really? If I was talking about you, why would that be racist? It'd be personal rather than racist."
"Mate, it was both. It was personal and racist."
I am reserving this for the end of my (3rd) post here. Please check below.
"I'm from this country, I love this country, I'm from a mixed-Race background."
"Do you consider yourself Black or White?"
"I consider myself mixed, mixed heritage."
You're mixed and you admit that, yet you're defending Blacks and BLM against Whites who are trying to defend White things in White areas? (If it hasn't happened already, then)How long will it be before "mixed-White-and-Black" i.e. jew, happens and pretends to prefer to "be White" rather than "be Black"? Of all I have seen, all mixed-Black-and-Whites go towards Black. Is it a choice? It doesn't seem to be. DNA, their Soul, their Racial blood negate decision, but I expect "mixed-White-and-Black" i.e. jew, will happen and prefer to "be White" than "be Black" before long. I would also be very doubtful if any Black-and-White mixed person said and behaved as if they were White rather than Black, as well. I'd bet that the differences and the choice between Black and White will always be at the forefront of their thinking whenever they're doing anything, and think that they have to choose to be White, rather than it not being a decision, and it happening Naturally.
"Do you consider the video you made about me and the rest of Diversity racist?"
"No."
"Not at all?"
"No. You just happen to be Black. It was about you."
"OK, then."
"Do you think it was racist - your performance?"
"It was made to start a conversation."
"Well, it didn't, because the people that I've spoke to and the people that get in touch with me and give me the finger in the street - all that did was cause controversy..."
"Yeah, and..."
"...it's making people more racist."
"...racist people would say that, Jim."
How do you know? Have you asked every racist person, or every person who might be racist, or every non-racist person? You've made your mind up already. Why would anyone saying "What you did is controversial" make them racist automatically? How would it? Why would anyone saying "What you did is making people [more] racist" make them racist? How would it?
Ashley, I'm trying to keep giving you the benefit of the doubt here, but... Well, anyway, Jim said most people on TV are not White; you, though, say that people saying you performing your routine
- is controversial and
- makes people be racist
"People don't like what they see."
A lot of people react without thinking. I refer to those real or fake goggleboxers who just reacted very quickly. Take time to think... Not once did they, on Gogglebox, support Jim, but Jim was right - people will say Jim is racist and question how he can be against Ashley; however, in comments sections on videos, I have seen people agree with Jim. Ashley Banjo wants more and better moderation online. See how often Jim's and my words are not deleted. If I were to post this entire OP on most other websites, it would be removed and I'd no doubt be banned. I may be pushing the limits, if not having broke them, on this website with this OP, but on other websites I'd definitely see something happening as a reaction to my words. It's OK in this "democratic" society for me to have "free speech" and "free expression" but not say anything; yet it actually is OK for e.g. Ashley and Alesha and Imarn and Leila and David and the other David... to say what they want, though - oh, and against not just Jim, but against the entire White Race! Yes, that is very personal and very racist, Ashley Banjo, et al.
"What we're not gunna do is we're not gunna have it where we're talking over each other."
"They'll edit me out."
"No, they won't."
Well, we'll see... or maybe we won't. I doubt the full, unedited interview between Ashley Banjo and Jim Davidson is available anywhere.
"That is why I want to speak to you - because you think differently to me."
How can there be equality when there is diversity, difference?
"I don't see any racism in this. I just see a rotten cop. A rotten cop. If it was a White bloke under there, the cop should have got the same amount in prison..."
"Absolutely."
Daniel Shaver, anyone?! He might not have been under a copper's knee, but he was murdered by a copper.
"...but what you did on the television is use your position to make a statement."
"Yeah. Absolutely."
"My problem was - it was on a light entertainment show on a Saturday night."
"What that murder did - it stoked a flame, it awakened something, it sparked something that is very real for a lot of ethnic minorities in this country and around the World."
Firstly, you can live where you are the ethnic majority, and fix those ethnic-majority places that need fixing, i.e. Children starving to death in Africa, but you choose not to. Secondly, OK, so that murder, of George Floyd, stoked a flame, it awakened something, it sparked something that is very real for a lot of ethnic minorities in this country and around the World. That's OK for you, but when Jim said about a Black Man killing 1 person and injuring 7 others seriously, you ask "What does that have to do with racism?", flabbergasted. That =about George was America, but Jim saying something about here, nope. Plus all the other Black-on-White crimes, nope. One White-on-Black crime, yep, but any Black-on-White crimes, nope. So it's all for you and not for us? Yeah, thanks a lot. Thanks so much, Mr Real, Direct and Honest Conversationalist.
"Yeah, but look at the cop. We don't have people like that in this country, surely."
"I'm happy for you, that you have the privilege in a way of under-- believing that."
Oh. Shit! Haha. Lol. Let's look at this again, shall we, Mr Banjo?
Fuck. Me. Sideways. Herp-derp.
This is like christians, who just repeat the things that they have been brainwashed with like a knee-jerk reaction. It's as if it is not their own thoughts and opinions. They just regurgitate and spew - as Ashley said about Jim, etc. - the... what seems now to be rhetoric, the auto-responses. "You have the privilege of believing that". Whites have so much privilege that even the "govern"ment is against us Whites who won't tolerate shit against us.
"I've been in situations where I've been discriminated against, arrested, taken to the side, stopped and searched."
OK. Have you had a knee on your neck, like George Floyd did? Like this White Baby Boy did?
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Yvq1QX2kHmyX
No. I thought not. MF.
"The statistics prove it. Discrimination is disproportional when it comes to things like stop-and-search and when it comes to people in prison - these are proven things, so these things is what people were protesting against on the day."
I thought BLM protestors were protesting to de-fund the police, etc., that was said above, which you say you were aware of but apparently forgot before you chatted with Jim Davidson... If you are looking at statistics which prove things, claiming it is disproportionate, then is that racism specifically, or is it because - as seems to be the case where Blacks are - Blacks are more prone to crimes due to not thinking things through with their Brains, but instead thinking with their Emotions, which results in more custodial sentences, generally? I know this is not easy to read and consider, it is offensive and things like that, but I'm asking genuinely. Maybe the statistics also show that?
"When you speak about those 7 people being stabbed..."
...but not the one who was murdered?
"...by a - as you refer it - 'Black Man' with heavy emphasis on that--"
"Can you not say 'a Black Man murdered a White person'?"
"Jim, you have to let me finish, please."
"No. I won't let you finish, that's because you're talking bollocks."
Apparently we can't say that. If we say "a Black man murdered a White person", Ashley Banjo gets upset. If we say "non-White", a non-celebrity on the celebrity version of Gogglebox gets upset and asks, "When you say 'non-White', what - you're scared to say the word 'Black', Jim?". Yeah, so we can't win either way. We can't say shit. There is an English saying - you can't say boo to a goose. What is it? Is it that we want freedom of expression, we want free speech, we want diversity, we want equality - but we want it only for "our group", not for you who live in your country already?! Thanks!
"What you see there, and what you emphasise very heavily in the reporting of that story on your channel, was his skin colour."
Skin colour, but not sex? I see Men by the way they look. I see Women by the way they look. I see bananas by the way they look. I see cars by the way they look. It is observation and noticing and being able to tell who is who and what is what. You also made notice of the White copper who knelt on George Floyd's neck, so it's OK for you to mention White but not for Jim to mention a Black Man killing 1 and injuring 7 more?
"Why didn't you have a Black dancer kneel on the neck?"
"Because what George Floyd represented when he was killed by that White officer was a wider problem."
Strange. Lyrics in that song were "I can't breathe"... yet George Floyd was saying he can't breathe before the White copper was kneeling on his neck.
