TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Revolution necessitates killing; it's a revolutionary act. We haven't called for the killing of white people—at least not yet. I can't predict the future, but with things escalating as they are, a revolution in this country is inevitable. The statement that we are not calling for the slaughter of white people, at least for now, implies that we might in the future. We're not ruling out that possibility. Whether or not we will, at some point, call for the slaughter of white people, remains to be seen. It's a question for a future date.

I thought women's liberation was about equal rights and work, but I was told by someone that the Rockefellers funded it to increase taxes and influence children's thinking by breaking up families.

I express extreme frustration and anger towards white individuals, suggesting that they should all perish. I advocate for a global elimination of their genetic presence, using any means necessary.

A speaker stated that some males will refuse to vote for a female president because they don't think females are smart enough. The speaker then said, hypothetically, that those men could be lined up and shot for not understanding the way the world works. The speaker immediately retracted the statement and asked for it to be removed from the recording to avoid repercussions from the dean.

A revolution demands killing as part of a revolutionary act. It was stated that there has been no call for the killing of white people, at least for now, but there are no guarantees about the future. If things continue as they are, there will be a revolution. When asked for clarification, it was confirmed that "we are not calling for the slaughter of white people, at least for now" means that at some future date, there may be a call for the slaughter of white people. It was stated that this may very well happen in the future. The phrase "shoot to kill Hamazah. Kill the poor, the farmer" was also stated.

The speakers discuss the idea of killing as part of a revolution. Speaker 1 mentions that they have not called for the killing of white people, but cannot guarantee the future. Speaker 2 expresses concern about the message being shared on Twitter, but Speaker 1 dismisses it as crybabies. Speaker 1 emphasizes that if things continue as they are, there will be a revolution. Speaker 2 questions whether Speaker 1 is ruling out calling for the slaughter of white people in the future, and Speaker 1 responds that they don't know what will happen. The conversation ends with Speaker 0 repeating the phrase "kill the poor, the farmer."

If someone supports genocide like Zionists, Nazis, and white supremacists, should they live? They harm vulnerable people and hinder progress. While I haven't harmed anyone, I won't hesitate to defend myself against threats from these groups.

Professors across various universities make controversial statements about white people, advocating for their harm or criticizing white privilege. Some suggest mass suicide, genocide, or giving money to black people. Others equate white people with racism or criticize white masculinity. One professor was hospitalized for threatening to kill white people. Slides in classrooms depict white tears, colonization, and white privilege. These statements reflect a range of extreme views on race and society.

Speaker 0 argues that white Americans will soon be a minority, and that this is great. Speaker 1 counters that whites will not be the majority and describes it as an exciting transformation and evolution, a progress of the country. Speaker 2 states that whites will be a minority very soon and says, “I'm okay with that.” Speaker 1 asks, if the white working class is in trouble, whether new Americans should be brought in. Speaker 3 predicts America will look very different in a hundred years, with racial labels becoming less distinct (“You're black, you're white, you're Hispanic, you're Puerto Rican, whatever”), and says that complexity will be good in the end. Speaker 2 contends that white Americans feel they are losing their country and ownership, and that they are, in the end, not the future. Speaker 3 asserts that for the first time in American history, the number of white people went down; “White population is declining for the first time in history in America.” Speaker 3 cautions that white people will not be the majority in the country anymore, noting it will be the first generation with whites as a minority. Speaker 1 proclaims, “Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.” Speaker 3 proclaims that to abolish whiteness is to abolish white people. Speaker 1 contends that white people are committed to being villains in the aggregate. Speaker 3 declares, “We gotta take these motherfuckers out.” Speaker 2 asks whether it was the duty of every good revolutionary to kill all newborn white babies. Speaker 3 responds, “We have to kill white people,” and, when pressed, mirrors that sentiment with, “When we say we wanna kill whites, we don't really mean we wanna kill whites. We do. We have to exterminate white people off of the face of the planet to solve this problem.” Speaker 1 comments, “When do we start killing white people?” and then, “start killing all white folks, but maybe?” Speaker 3 reiterates the extermination goal, stating, “We have to exterminate white people off of the face of the planet to solve this problem.” Speaker 5 adds, “An unrelenting stream of immigration. Nonstop. Nonstop. Folks like me who were Caucasian of European descent will be in an absolute minority in The United States Of America. Absolute minority.” He concludes that this shift is not a bad thing and calls it a source of strength.

One speaker suggests killing unwanted children in foster care. They ask for statistics on the percentage of foster children who are abused, molested, or enslaved. Another speaker says they would be okay with killing babies in foster care and killing children who have been abused. One speaker states that if they don't want to have a baby, they should have the choice not to, because people should still have the choice, and that the other speaker doesn't understand the magnitude of having a child.

There were very fine people on both sides of a white supremacist rally. I'm not referring to the neo-Nazis and white nationalists, who should be condemned entirely. However, there were many individuals in that group who were not neo-Nazis or white nationalists.

A speaker stated that males are smarter than females, then immediately said that anyone who believes that females are not smart enough to be president should be shot. The speaker then retracted the statement about shooting people, saying they did not want the Dean to hear it.

The speakers discuss the idea of killing as part of a revolution. Speaker 1 clarifies that they are not currently calling for the killing of white people, but cannot guarantee the future. Speaker 2 questions if they may call for it in the future, to which Speaker 1 responds that they don't know. Speaker 0 adds a statement about shooting and killing.

Professors from various universities make controversial statements about white people, including advocating for their mass suicide, calling for their deaths, and labeling them as racist. Some professors equate beliefs like hard work and math with white ideology and privilege. One professor even suggests that white people are a plague to the planet. These statements reflect a trend of anti-white sentiments and calls for violence in academic settings.

My coworker was all in a tizzy because she gonna tell me that Charlie Kirk got shot, and I said, good. So we get into this whole conversation about it, and she goes, well, you can't hate people for their political views. And I'm like, yes. I can. Like, that's specifically why I hate people sometimes. You can't hate me for my views because my views don't infringe upon your rights. You don't hate me for what I believe in because it doesn't interfere with your life. Some of these views are dangerous, and I'm glad he got shot. Hopefully, he dies. I don't care.

Speaker 0 asserts that Joshua Zimmerman is “the Jew” who is a traitor and an enabler to murder, claiming that Jews engineered the destruction of South Africa and the rise of the African National Congress led by the convicted terrorist Nelson Mandela, whom Speaker 0 says “was in jail for acts of terrorism.” They state Mandela “was not an angel or humanitarian.” The speaker then condemns Julius Malema, alleging he is inciting crimes, and warns of “Genocidal Jews” across Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran. Speaker 1 introduces Joshua Zimmerman as the person present in Ward 72 at Glen Hazel, saying they are there with fellow fighters to “conscientize the minds of those in the suburbs that the EFF is an all inclusive party regardless of race, class, or status,” and that “Slowly but surely, we are going to start winning more in the suburbs.” Speaker 2 leads chants: “Long live the commander in chief. Long live. Long live. Long live the commander in chief, Julius Malema. Long live. Long live. Viva EFF. Viva. Viva. Aman Clark. Away to.” Speaker 3 describes a crowd of “just under 100,000” chanting “kill the boar.” They identify the Boers as the remnant white South Africans who built South Africa, and say Julius Malema is leading the genocidal chant as head of the South African Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF). They claim the Boer community was betrayed by liberal whites decades ago. They describe South Africa as once prosperous, now suffering under majority black rule, with unreliable electricity and a collapsed agricultural sector, labeling it an economic basket case of savagery typical of failed African states. They claim white people face daily violence and live in a state of siege, particularly those who did not leave after Mandela and the ANC took power. Speaker 3 provides context on the EFF as a South African far-left pan-Africanist and Marxist party founded by Julius Malema and allies in 2013, noting Malema serves as president and that the party is the third largest in both houses of Parliament and growing. They state the party “hasn’t yet started the mass killings of whites, but it will if Malema is to be believed.” They reference an October 2022 speech in which Malema told branch members they should “never be scared to kill.” They cite a 2018 rally where Malema urged supporters to “go after the white man” and proclaimed, “we are cutting the throat of whiteness.” They mention a 2016 rally where Malema said, “we are not calling for the slaughter of white people, at least for now.” Speaker 3 notes that after Robert Mugabe’s death, Malema tweeted quotes hostile toward white people, including “the only white man you can trust is a dead white man,” and asserts that Malema has given warnings of white genocide. They claim that white people who acquiesce to replacement, mass immigration, or intercultural guilt narratives will face death, insisting: “Death follows. Be warned if your current white majority nation has adopted multiculturalism, diversity, and inclusion policies. It won’t end well.” The speakers claim the media hides the truth, leaving whites “supine and docile as they’re killed,” and reiterate Melena’s call: “Kill the whites.” They conclude with a call for whites to be racialists, meaning to defend their own kind.

Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 if they are ruling out the possibility of calling for the slaughter of white people in the future. Speaker 1 responds by saying they don't know what will happen and it may or may not be them. Speaker 0 clarifies that it could be Speaker 1 and asks what would necessitate that. Speaker 1 doesn't know and questions why they would do that. Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 to pledge to never call for the slaughter of white people, but Speaker 1 refuses to make that pledge. Speaker 0 understands.

A speaker stated that some men won't vote for a female president because they don't think women are smart enough. The speaker then said, "We could line all those guys up and shoot them," before immediately retracting the statement and asking for it to be removed from the recording to avoid repercussions from the dean.

Targeting a white mayor is effective because it causes significant emotional pain within that community. We are directly confronting the issue of whiteness. Another politician, from the Black First Land First party, incited violence at a rally, urging the crowd to kill white people, their children, and pets. This demonstrates a political leader openly calling for the genocide of white people.

A speaker stated that some males will refuse to vote for a female president because they don't think females are smart enough. The speaker then said, hypothetically, that those men could be lined up and shot for not understanding the way the world works. The speaker immediately retracted the statement and asked for it to be removed from the recording to avoid repercussions from the dean.

The speakers discuss the idea of killing as part of a revolution. Speaker 1 clarifies that they are not currently calling for the killing of white people, but cannot guarantee the future. Speaker 2 questions if they may call for it in the future, to which Speaker 1 responds that it is a possibility. Speaker 0 interrupts and the transcript ends abruptly.

Speaker 0 expresses a strong desire to challenge National Geographic and urges the audience to join in killing all white people. They emphasize the importance of fighting against the white man, regardless of personal opinions or others' perceptions. The speaker firmly believes in the death and destruction of every white person, regardless of age or innocence.

Speaker 0 questions Speaker 1 about their statement regarding the potential future call for the slaughter of white people. Speaker 1 initially states that they are not ruling out the possibility, but later clarifies that they cannot guarantee it. Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 to make a pledge to never call for such an act, but Speaker 1 refuses. The conversation ends with Speaker 0 acknowledging Speaker 1's response.

A speaker stated that anyone who believes males are smarter than females has serious problems. The speaker expressed frustration that some men would refuse to vote for a female president because they don't think females are smart enough. The speaker then said, "We could line all those guys up and shoot them," before immediately retracting the statement and asking for it to be removed from the recording. The speaker did not want the dean to hear that statement.

Speaker 0 was alarmed to see the MSM, either CNN or MSNBC, defining a certain action as reparations and stating, "This is what reparations means." Speaker 1 stated that certain people should experience being in a farm in the middle of the night when someone comes for them, gang rape, and witnessing the torture and death of a loved one before reparations can be discussed. Speaker 1 does not recommend gang rape, based on personal experience.