How did cacs conquer the world?

Danktoker94

The Dude
Supporter
Joined
Jan 29, 2016
Messages
6,247
Reputation
-695
Daps
18,535
dope post makes sense that's power over the world never made any sense to me it always seems malevolent
Simple Guns, and their ability to make weapons if it was hand to hand things would be different.

And not to mention their greed and lust for power, thats why they are incapable of living in peace if they arent trying to steal and kill non whites they will try and kill and subvert their own. Then throw in the fact that they will come together to defeat anyone who tried to undermine their authority and if you really want to get into it they also enlisted the help of demons, seems far fetched but i can back my claims up with atleast a 6000 year history of their contacts with demons.

There are some good docs. done by cacs that shows how their government enlisted the help of demons to achieve what they want to achieve. Yall think everything thats happened is coincidence, its not every revolution theyve had a hand in, every single time a non cac country tries to break away from their banking system they overthrow them and install their own puppet government that will do their bidding.

Why do you think they overthrew Libya,Iraq,are destryoing Syria raped Africa, etc

Gaddafi was trying to make an African currency that did not rely on the cac banking system and they killed him.
Saddam tried to do the same and unite the Middle East and they killed him and unleshed extremist in Iraq.

They are the single reason why the world is in the state its in.
 

Starman

Superstar
Supporter
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
16,114
Reputation
-2,779
Daps
35,642
invasion =/= conquered

True, but I would say there isn't too much of a difference in reality. How different would the world be if the white man did "conquer" (using your definition of the word) it from how it is today?

surprised nobody dropped this one yet :ehh:
125953._UY473_SS473_.jpg

that other book people keep posting has :mjpls: vibes to me

You ever read GG&S? What's the theory behind the book you posted?
 

BIXBY

Pro
Joined
Feb 24, 2017
Messages
456
Reputation
-410
Daps
1,236
It is, what I should have said was Sub Saharan Africans... two distinct cultures in Africa
 

BushidoBrown

Superstar
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
7,352
Reputation
1,563
Daps
20,032
Reppin
Brooklyn
True, but I would say there isn't too much of a difference in reality. How different would the world be if the white man did "conquer" (using your definition of the word) it from how it is today?



You ever read GG&S? What's the theory behind the book you posted?
Didnt read GG&S

Destruction really goes from the beginning of everything..im not all the way done with it but they were talking about the immigration into africa from southern europe and how the mulattos that resulted from the race mixing were propped up in society to be regarded as a higher class than the non mixed blacks etc and also their non black side of their lineage (europeans) at that time had gained control and influence over those societies into which they assimilated

I stopped reading it cause my girl peeped it and swiped it from me

Im sure as the book goes on shyt gets way more live:mjpls:
 

southpawstyle

Superstar
Joined
Aug 31, 2013
Messages
4,296
Reputation
1,360
Daps
15,532
Reppin
California
Everyone saying guns are mistaken. Pre-colonial Africans had guns, or at least a word for them.



I don't have an answer for OP, but its more insidious than just "guns"
 

the cac mamba

Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
105,041
Reputation
13,995
Daps
305,003
Reppin
NULL
Ehh...

The British Cac alone invaded all but 22 countries at various points in time. France did damage too. I don't think its a stretch to say they conquered the world. Many of the 22 uninvaded were white countries, and the remaining had no chance of stopping the Brits. They're just fortunate the Brits didn't get around to them.

BRITAIN_2388153b.jpg


British have invaded nine out of ten countries - so look out Luxembourg
theres not really any debating that britain had conquered the world at one point in time

i mean just from an objective standpoint :huhldup: i dont see how it can be disputed
 

Dave24

Superstar
Joined
Dec 11, 2015
Messages
17,377
Reputation
2,599
Daps
23,233
Yep, they tried to do the whole Sparta thing "Dying a glorious death is the greatest honor" type shyt. Then their former colonies inherited it kind of. Everytime a new monarch took the throne, it was a given they had to go to war to prove themselves, and that war was good for the winners economy.

If yall want some insight, read up on British History till about Queen Elizabeth Tudor. Shyt is just pure blood shed and fukkery
American presidents go to war to prove themselves as well when you think about iy
 
Top