They didn't sprout from the ground of those lands, they took those lands from the previous tribes living there. There's absolutely no moral high ground here, and the only reason why people are b***hing is because we won.
Because indigenous peoples have an insatiable thirst for knowledge of the world, but are also humble enough to ask others for answers to the questions they don’t know
Yeah they didn't have to because they genocided other tribes out of existence.
Or did you really think Whites were the only ones to ever do that?
Depends on the fricking tribe, age and localización, otherwise It was no different than central Europe's endless war state, and somehow we still have a lot of Europeans, while almost no natives.
>and somehow we still have a lot of Europeans, while almost no natives.
I mean lets be real, smallpox did most of the legwork. Not saying the settlers didn't facilitate it where possible, but
It's why africa is still full of blacks despite centuries of colonization. logistically, settlers can't normally make just a continents worth of people disappear even if they have better weapons and wanted to. but throw a plague in the mix and its a different story.
This
Over 90 percent of the native population was decimated by disease. Hell I bet alcoholism did more to curb the Native population than warring with invading colonists did.
>Over 90 percent of the native population was decimated by disease
100% a lie.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Do you have any proof that native populations weren't absolutely ravaged by wave after wave of diseases? Because most historians think that 90% is a conservative number.
8 months ago
Anonymous
While you're right that smallpox did the heavy lifting, the constant killing stopped the population from bouncing back by killing the young and strong. >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_massacres_in_North_America
8 months ago
Anonymous
Anon, there was basically no way for the population to bounce back in that timeframe even if Europeans decided to frick off and never return to the continents. Early agricultural/hunting societies like the Native Americans typically saw population growth rates of less than 0.1% per year due to food scarcity and poor living conditions. Even the Roman Empire, a complex settled society, only saw growth rates of 0.1% in their best years. It'd take a thousand years at those rates from their population to go from 10% of what it was to about 27% of what it was.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Pay a little attention, usually native killing didn't have more than 40 casualties, while European killings of natives could easily go above +100 (and we're talking after the smallpox epidemic), the scope is waaaay bigger.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah I'm not suggesting that the Europeans didn't have a hand in making things worse, they objectively did and their treatment of the natives was inexcusable so far as I'm concerned. My point is more that as soon as the diseases ripped through it was already hopeless. It would have taken the natives literally thousands of years to fully repopulate after that even with 0 European contact, and since the Europeans didn't frick off what happened was inevitable.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Is not impossible, since Europe managed to bounce back from the Black Plague killing 50% it it's population, >https://www.americanscientist.org/article/the-bright-side-of-the-black-death#:~:text=The%20Black%20Death%20was%20so,when%20the%20plague%20reached%20London.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Europe was a fully settled agricultural society that was undergoing the fastest population growth it had ever seen due to rapid advances in agricultural practices towards the end of the Late Medieval Period. The Native Americans were at the absolute best Bronze-age societies that historically only ever saw growth of 0.1% per annum and most of them were early agricultural/hunting societies where population growth was typically even lower. Those aren't even remotely comparable.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Comparing a continent that at the time had the most advanced agricultural practices on Earth to the point it was literally experiencing overpopulation before the black death due to a sudden surge in growth, to early agricultural societies that didn't even have established cities outside of Mesoamerica and the Andes
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Europeans >most advanced agricultural practices on Earth
lol
lmao even. Agriculture was the one area where Europe was getting their ass kicked by Asia and even the Americas. >https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226352423_Indigenous_Agroforestry_Systems_in_Amazonia_From_Prehistory_to_Today
8 months ago
Anonymous
People just underestimate the importance of domesticated cattle for society.
8 months ago
Anonymous
You've gotta be trolling with this, the fact that Amazonian peoples had developed systems of forestry agriculture isn't even remotely comparable to the advances the occurred in Europe during the Late Medieval Era. That's precisely when European agricultural practices finally overtook Asia, and then leapfrogged them even further in the early Renaissance due to a series of innovations initially practiced in the Low Countries that rapidly spread to France, Britain, and Germany combined with an influx of new crops from the New World. By the time Europeans established regular contact with the New World they were easily the most advanced agricultural society in the world, and that's why their population started to seriously explode then.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Again, crop rotation is tied to cattle needs, so you underestimate the importance cattle has on those advancements.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Europeans >most advanced agricultural practices on Earth
lol
lmao even. Agriculture was the one area where Europe was getting their ass kicked by Asia and even the Americas. >https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226352423_Indigenous_Agroforestry_Systems_in_Amazonia_From_Prehistory_to_Today
someone get that mesoamerican anon that always posts in these thread because i'm pretty sure the Maya/Incas etc kicked some serious ass in those departments.
didn't they have literally the biggest city on the planet at one point?
8 months ago
Anonymous
No no he's right, the Mesoamericans and Andeans had some incredibly elaborate agricultural techniques for their level of development and the conditions they had to work with, but the Europeans from around that same era were on another level entirely.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Europe didn't have invaders resistant to plague attack them in quick succession.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Is not impossible, since Europe managed to bounce back from the Black Plague killing 50% it it's population, >https://www.americanscientist.org/article/the-bright-side-of-the-black-death#:~:text=The%20Black%20Death%20was%20so,when%20the%20plague%20reached%20London.
And Ireland still hasn't recovered from the Potato Famine.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Nta but dude you have absolutely no evidence warfare was the primary cause for the depopulation of indigenous peoples in the Americas. Multiple other posts in this thread have provided sources showing disease was the main cause. Like bro you lost. Take the L. The White man is no where near as evil as your biases have led you to believe.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Meant for
>NUH-UH
Kill your self, moronic homosexual.
Honestly unsure how I clicked the wrong reply
8 months ago
Anonymous
Weird thing since the thing you quoted contain numbers like Cortez Massacre after the fall of Tenochtitlan (100,000 to 240,000 warriors and civilians killed in the siege overall)
8 months ago
Anonymous
Schizo moment
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Because most historians think that 90% is a conservative number
"Most historians" is something I'd read on Wikipedia, not from a guy who is so sure of the numbers he's pulling out of his ass anyway.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Ok but can you find even a single shred of evidence that the 90% claim is overstated? I can find dozens of peer-reviewed articles right now just by using google suggesting that 90% is arguably a low-ball, here are a few from the very first page:
>can you find even a single shred of evidence that the 90% claim is overstated?
It's your claim. The burden of proof is on you. You fricking idiot.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah and I literally just posted 3 articles backing up my claim as evidence in support of it. What's your point? I'm asking you to find a counter-example.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>backing up my claim
The first article is barely related to the topic at hand, and the only 90% figure in the entire thing is in regards to COVID infection rates among Alaskan natives.
It helps if you read the shit you're linking.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah and there's an entire section detailing historical epidemics, maybe you should read the article yourself moron.
I accept your concession.
That wasn't even me, you're just acting bafflingly moronic. Post a link yourself or frick off.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Yeah and there's an entire section detailing historical epidemics, maybe you should read the article yourself moron.
Which has nothing to do with the point you're trying to prove, you stupid fricking moron.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Still hasn't posted a single link to back up his own claim
I accept your concession.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>NUH-UH
Kill your self, moronic homosexual.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>PROVE ME WROOOOONG
Not how it works. Just make sure to read the studies you post next time, smug-kun.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I provided links, you can't provide any, still. Sad really. Take the L and stop crying.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>I provided links
Which failed to prove your point. Because you didn't even read them.
8 months ago
Anonymous
You're the one that didn't read them, you're still caught up on the first link and won't even address the other two, and completely fail to explain how the section in my first link is in any way invalidated. You lost, at this point it's just pathetic. You're on an anonymous internet board, nobody knows who you are, there's no reason to defend your ego this badly.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>you're still caught up on the first link
Probably because it showed none of what you were trying to proof, leading to believe that you googled some stupid shit like "indians 90% infection" and copied/pasted the first studies you could find.
Your homosexual reaction tells me I was 100% right.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Yeah at this point this is just really sad man, gonna have to call it here. Sorry you're this asshurt about an internet argument. Still no link by the way, not that you'll ever post one.
8 months ago
Anonymous
have a nice day
8 months ago
Anonymous
>It is estimated that 95 percent of the indigenous populations in the Americas were killed by infectious diseases during the years following European colonization, amounting to an estimated 20 million people.
Literally the very first link he posted.
Now shut the frick up and stop shitting the thread with your moronation.
8 months ago
Anonymous
NOOOOOOO I AM FRICKING RETAAAAARDED!!! I CAN NEVER CONCEDE ANY. FRICKING. ARGUMENT. BECAUSE I AM A moronic b***h AAAAAAAAA!!!
8 months ago
Anonymous
AIFJAOFIJADINASDIOJ NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO HE'S THE ONE THAT DIDN'T READ HE'S THE ONE THAT DIDN'T READ I CAN'T STOP SAYING IT I HAVE TO KEEP SAYING IT
8 months ago
Anonymous
AIFJAOFIJADINASDIOJ NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO HE'S THE ONE THAT DIDN'T READ HE'S THE ONE THAT DIDN'T READ I CAN'T STOP SAYING IT I HAVE TO KEEP SAYING IT
>lawless
They weren't, but they didn't have "land laws" the way European did. Mostly because since there wasn't any cattle you didn't need to say to whom belong what, instead they had hunting grounds which they either shared or disputed,
>Native tribes didn't pass laws to get each other off their land like the colonists did.
No, they just killed whoever was on the land that they wanted. Pocahontas’ people, the Powhatan, were notorious in the region for taking women and children from offending tribes as sex slaves, and flaying the men alive with sharpened mussel shells as a warning to other smaller tribes. They famously gave Governor Ratcliffe the same treatment when they ambushed him and a group of colonists who came to trade for food.
With how Disney have banned all portrayals of native americans and forced companies like fantagrahics to remove them from stuff like the barks comics I'm honestly shocked this movie hasn't been hidden by disney yet
As horribly racist as the song and depiction was, I did always think that it was kind of sweet that the answer in the song was that the "first" Indian was just so flustered from being kissed by his sweetheart that he passed that blush down to his entire every one of his descendants.
The blood of countless generations of other indigenous tribes that he enslaved, raped, and murdered before the White Man ever set foot on those shores.
Why is it always all of Europe being pulled into these shitposting circlejerks when every nation and kingdom in the area didn't send expeditions overseas? I know you homosexuals aren't referring to Denmark when you talk about how people on the continent were so awesome and epic.
The best part is that I can't even tell who's who anymore, it looks like 2 or maybe even more anons just going into a full meltdown. They need to KEEP SAYING IT though.
anger at the immoral theft of their ancestral lands
You took the beads, Squanto, no backsies.
Shouldn't have lost.
Real Indian giver right here.
They didn't sprout from the ground of those lands, they took those lands from the previous tribes living there. There's absolutely no moral high ground here, and the only reason why people are b***hing is because we won.
pussy
He drank the red potion.
A beautiful maiden kissed one of them and he blushed so hard, all of them turned that shade of red
The reason they say ugh is because the aforementioned Indian said ugh when he first saw his hideous mother in law
Oh yeah? Explain why do they say hau if you're so knowledgeable.
Because indigenous peoples have an insatiable thirst for knowledge of the world, but are also humble enough to ask others for answers to the questions they don’t know
That's an incredibly sweet way to explain their skin color. Man, people nowadays get mad about everything
That is unironically different. Native tribes didn't pass laws to get each other off their land like the colonists did.
Firstly yeah they did, secondly sometimes instead of laws they just used genocide.
Depends on the fricking tribe, age and localización, otherwise It was no different than central Europe's endless war state, and somehow we still have a lot of Europeans, while almost no natives.
>and somehow we still have a lot of Europeans, while almost no natives.
I mean lets be real, smallpox did most of the legwork. Not saying the settlers didn't facilitate it where possible, but
It's why africa is still full of blacks despite centuries of colonization. logistically, settlers can't normally make just a continents worth of people disappear even if they have better weapons and wanted to. but throw a plague in the mix and its a different story.
This
Over 90 percent of the native population was decimated by disease. Hell I bet alcoholism did more to curb the Native population than warring with invading colonists did.
>Over 90 percent of the native population was decimated by disease
100% a lie.
Do you have any proof that native populations weren't absolutely ravaged by wave after wave of diseases? Because most historians think that 90% is a conservative number.
While you're right that smallpox did the heavy lifting, the constant killing stopped the population from bouncing back by killing the young and strong.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_massacres_in_North_America
Anon, there was basically no way for the population to bounce back in that timeframe even if Europeans decided to frick off and never return to the continents. Early agricultural/hunting societies like the Native Americans typically saw population growth rates of less than 0.1% per year due to food scarcity and poor living conditions. Even the Roman Empire, a complex settled society, only saw growth rates of 0.1% in their best years. It'd take a thousand years at those rates from their population to go from 10% of what it was to about 27% of what it was.
Pay a little attention, usually native killing didn't have more than 40 casualties, while European killings of natives could easily go above +100 (and we're talking after the smallpox epidemic), the scope is waaaay bigger.
Yeah I'm not suggesting that the Europeans didn't have a hand in making things worse, they objectively did and their treatment of the natives was inexcusable so far as I'm concerned. My point is more that as soon as the diseases ripped through it was already hopeless. It would have taken the natives literally thousands of years to fully repopulate after that even with 0 European contact, and since the Europeans didn't frick off what happened was inevitable.
Is not impossible, since Europe managed to bounce back from the Black Plague killing 50% it it's population,
>https://www.americanscientist.org/article/the-bright-side-of-the-black-death#:~:text=The%20Black%20Death%20was%20so,when%20the%20plague%20reached%20London.
Europe was a fully settled agricultural society that was undergoing the fastest population growth it had ever seen due to rapid advances in agricultural practices towards the end of the Late Medieval Period. The Native Americans were at the absolute best Bronze-age societies that historically only ever saw growth of 0.1% per annum and most of them were early agricultural/hunting societies where population growth was typically even lower. Those aren't even remotely comparable.
>Comparing a continent that at the time had the most advanced agricultural practices on Earth to the point it was literally experiencing overpopulation before the black death due to a sudden surge in growth, to early agricultural societies that didn't even have established cities outside of Mesoamerica and the Andes
>Europeans
>most advanced agricultural practices on Earth
lol
lmao even. Agriculture was the one area where Europe was getting their ass kicked by Asia and even the Americas.
>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226352423_Indigenous_Agroforestry_Systems_in_Amazonia_From_Prehistory_to_Today
People just underestimate the importance of domesticated cattle for society.
You've gotta be trolling with this, the fact that Amazonian peoples had developed systems of forestry agriculture isn't even remotely comparable to the advances the occurred in Europe during the Late Medieval Era. That's precisely when European agricultural practices finally overtook Asia, and then leapfrogged them even further in the early Renaissance due to a series of innovations initially practiced in the Low Countries that rapidly spread to France, Britain, and Germany combined with an influx of new crops from the New World. By the time Europeans established regular contact with the New World they were easily the most advanced agricultural society in the world, and that's why their population started to seriously explode then.
Again, crop rotation is tied to cattle needs, so you underestimate the importance cattle has on those advancements.
someone get that mesoamerican anon that always posts in these thread because i'm pretty sure the Maya/Incas etc kicked some serious ass in those departments.
didn't they have literally the biggest city on the planet at one point?
No no he's right, the Mesoamericans and Andeans had some incredibly elaborate agricultural techniques for their level of development and the conditions they had to work with, but the Europeans from around that same era were on another level entirely.
Europe didn't have invaders resistant to plague attack them in quick succession.
And Ireland still hasn't recovered from the Potato Famine.
Nta but dude you have absolutely no evidence warfare was the primary cause for the depopulation of indigenous peoples in the Americas. Multiple other posts in this thread have provided sources showing disease was the main cause. Like bro you lost. Take the L. The White man is no where near as evil as your biases have led you to believe.
Meant for
Honestly unsure how I clicked the wrong reply
Weird thing since the thing you quoted contain numbers like Cortez Massacre after the fall of Tenochtitlan (100,000 to 240,000 warriors and civilians killed in the siege overall)
Schizo moment
>Because most historians think that 90% is a conservative number
"Most historians" is something I'd read on Wikipedia, not from a guy who is so sure of the numbers he's pulling out of his ass anyway.
Ok but can you find even a single shred of evidence that the 90% claim is overstated? I can find dozens of peer-reviewed articles right now just by using google suggesting that 90% is arguably a low-ball, here are a few from the very first page:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8785365/
https://academic.oup.com/jah/article-abstract/107/1/52/5862186
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002962915344815
>can you find even a single shred of evidence that the 90% claim is overstated?
It's your claim. The burden of proof is on you. You fricking idiot.
Yeah and I literally just posted 3 articles backing up my claim as evidence in support of it. What's your point? I'm asking you to find a counter-example.
>backing up my claim
The first article is barely related to the topic at hand, and the only 90% figure in the entire thing is in regards to COVID infection rates among Alaskan natives.
It helps if you read the shit you're linking.
Yeah and there's an entire section detailing historical epidemics, maybe you should read the article yourself moron.
That wasn't even me, you're just acting bafflingly moronic. Post a link yourself or frick off.
>Yeah and there's an entire section detailing historical epidemics, maybe you should read the article yourself moron.
Which has nothing to do with the point you're trying to prove, you stupid fricking moron.
>Still hasn't posted a single link to back up his own claim
I accept your concession.
>NUH-UH
Kill your self, moronic homosexual.
>PROVE ME WROOOOONG
Not how it works. Just make sure to read the studies you post next time, smug-kun.
I provided links, you can't provide any, still. Sad really. Take the L and stop crying.
>I provided links
Which failed to prove your point. Because you didn't even read them.
You're the one that didn't read them, you're still caught up on the first link and won't even address the other two, and completely fail to explain how the section in my first link is in any way invalidated. You lost, at this point it's just pathetic. You're on an anonymous internet board, nobody knows who you are, there's no reason to defend your ego this badly.
>you're still caught up on the first link
Probably because it showed none of what you were trying to proof, leading to believe that you googled some stupid shit like "indians 90% infection" and copied/pasted the first studies you could find.
Your homosexual reaction tells me I was 100% right.
Yeah at this point this is just really sad man, gonna have to call it here. Sorry you're this asshurt about an internet argument. Still no link by the way, not that you'll ever post one.
have a nice day
>It is estimated that 95 percent of the indigenous populations in the Americas were killed by infectious diseases during the years following European colonization, amounting to an estimated 20 million people.
Literally the very first link he posted.
Now shut the frick up and stop shitting the thread with your moronation.
NOOOOOOO I AM FRICKING RETAAAAARDED!!! I CAN NEVER CONCEDE ANY. FRICKING. ARGUMENT. BECAUSE I AM A moronic b***h AAAAAAAAA!!!
AIFJAOFIJADINASDIOJ NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO HE'S THE ONE THAT DIDN'T READ HE'S THE ONE THAT DIDN'T READ I CAN'T STOP SAYING IT I HAVE TO KEEP SAYING IT
>STILL AT IT
KEEP SAYING IT LOL
>fail
jesus, from what year is this image from?
>He's still at it
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
Fricking moron.
I accept your concession.
Yes they did. The tribes had fricking copyright laws.
Yeah they didn't have to because they genocided other tribes out of existence.
Or did you really think Whites were the only ones to ever do that?
>THAT IS OKAY THO; THEY WERE JUST LAWLESS SAVAGES WHEN THEY DID IT!!!
COPE
>lawless
They weren't, but they didn't have "land laws" the way European did. Mostly because since there wasn't any cattle you didn't need to say to whom belong what, instead they had hunting grounds which they either shared or disputed,
You are right. I was quoting the subtext of the moron's message.
>Native tribes didn't pass laws to get each other off their land like the colonists did.
No, they just killed whoever was on the land that they wanted. Pocahontas’ people, the Powhatan, were notorious in the region for taking women and children from offending tribes as sex slaves, and flaying the men alive with sharpened mussel shells as a warning to other smaller tribes. They famously gave Governor Ratcliffe the same treatment when they ambushed him and a group of colonists who came to trade for food.
So like some kind of American Vikings.
And still they couldn't even approach the systematic genocide perpetrated by European settlers. What does that tell you?
Skill issue.
HAve some gold sir xD
>systematic genocide
coughing is not systematic genocide
With how Disney have banned all portrayals of native americans and forced companies like fantagrahics to remove them from stuff like the barks comics I'm honestly shocked this movie hasn't been hidden by disney yet
shame cause what makes the red man red is an unironic banger
>hanna munna gunda, hanna munna gunda
>we translate for you!
>hanna means what munna means
>and gunda means that too!
You try keeping your face from going red when you got these ballin' moves, paleface.
... Is this the genesis of the Kennedy Kick Dance
Watch me try redbutt.
As horribly racist as the song and depiction was, I did always think that it was kind of sweet that the answer in the song was that the "first" Indian was just so flustered from being kissed by his sweetheart that he passed that blush down to his entire every one of his descendants.
Yeah. But I wasn't as big of a fan of Song of the South claiming blacks had the mark of Caine.
>as racist
Nah frick that, got myself an indian grandfather on the otheside of my family, he fricking loves this shit
It is objectively wholesome
>As horribly racist as the song and depiction was
WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU???
It's a FAIRY TALE, it's not going to teach that Native Americans are red because the melanin in their epidermis has adapted to their environment.
It's a FICTIONAL STORY, it it's not goign to give a scientific explanation.
The movie says that they a red because a long time ago, a Native once fell in love with a woman. THAT'S IT.
It's SILLY and WHIMSICAL and that's THE POINT.
How the HELL is it "horribly racist" you IMBECILE???
>How the HELL is it "horribly racist"
The Injuns don't behave like White people, that's why.
Bot post.
You type the way Chris Chan talks
Take your meds.
>You type the way Chris Chan talks
>Take your meds.
Getting pissed at your basic b***h Twitter level take is a very rational response.
/co/mblr post
The white man's racism.
The blood of countless generations of other indigenous tribes that he enslaved, raped, and murdered before the White Man ever set foot on those shores.
Savages
Savages?
BARELY EVEN HUMAN!
They're not like you and me, which means they must be evil!
>Sounds the drums of war
SHOW ME YOUR EAR FACE!
WAR FACE!
>blasted tourettes.
>pickled penis woop woop
why are Americans such pussies?
>Shoots 207 indians without even reloading from a 6 cylinder
That seems really fricking badass to me anon.
Do the same about spaniards. See them loose their minds.
Me. I made him red with rage when I laughed at him as I shit on the floor and told him to clean it up. I trade him a few rocks to do it too.
No crying when brownies take over then.
Brown countries suck, though.
COPE
O
P
E
unga wunga
What do you mean by this?
What indeed
So what make the White man white?
Empathy.
Lack of israelitery and Black folk.
Living in caves, like the trogs they are
You know ... it starts sounding like the Natives got what they FRICKING deserved.
Didn't do anything that Europeans hadn't done during their own long history of wars.
Yeah, it is almost as if every group of humans is guilty of such crimes.
Fricking moron, kys.
And none of us would cry a single tear if the Euros got genocided. So it's settled. Frick them injuns.
Jew.
Why is it always all of Europe being pulled into these shitposting circlejerks when every nation and kingdom in the area didn't send expeditions overseas? I know you homosexuals aren't referring to Denmark when you talk about how people on the continent were so awesome and epic.
The same way we talk about all of Africa as one single thing and all of Native tribes as one single thing.
Europe is England, France and Germany.
Maybe Portugal and Spain if you're Latino.
The rest is irrelevant.
Russia is Asian.
Nah Denmark is cool I guess
Denmark had colonies
Is the constant sun exposure
>spamming a dead thread because he's so mad the other guy got the last word
The best part is that I can't even tell who's who anymore, it looks like 2 or maybe even more anons just going into a full meltdown. They need to KEEP SAYING IT though.
>Evidence? Reading? Nah man I le epic troll u.
>Mods deleted the stupid Spurdopost instead of this whole fricking thread
Weird priorities.
Jannies laughing their asses off.
So what do you guys think of the movie? I absolutely adored it when I was a kid even the second one.
A timeless classic.
Return to Neverland is actually pretty decent as a sequel which is a rarity for Disney.
>they deleted the moron's posts
lol
They did? They just deleted a single Spurdo post, the rest of the posts from both of those guys are still up.
https://desuarchive.org/co/search/deleted/deleted/
>https://www.Cinemaphile/bans
Anon you need to calm down
>moron got b& for being moronic
Justice.
Anon, what are you talking about? The ban log doesn't show any bans from this thread and only a single spurdo post got deleted. You ok?
>Schizo keeps going.
Get help.
The sight of smooth, cute, red dicky ripe for the taking.
Did Tiger Lily have breasts? The few scenes she's in aren't that conclusive on the issue.
Rape
Tomatoes
Hail to the Redskins!
Hail Victory!
Braves on the Warpath!
Fight for old D.C.!
imagine unironically thinking that this scene is racist