So basically, when you cite things that are factually NOT TRUE, if I point out your fallacy, I'm a white supremacist. Only people who agree 100% with you are OK?

I am going to take you seriously and assume you are actually interested in facts. To me this is respectful, So, responding to you as though you are actually interested in a real exchange of knowledge:

Technically, from the 1600s to the 1800s, it was mostly whites who owned slave ships. Many of them were Jews. There were also some non-whites, though, who were transporting slaves. However, in modern times, the current global network of slavery is NOT white, it's Arab:

https://www.walkfree.org/global-slavery-index/findings/global-findings/#:~:text=An%20estimated%2050%20million%20people,million%20were%20in%20forced%20marriages.

The above link points out that Saudi Arabia continues to import slaves from many other countries that form a global network that is actually wider than the one between Africa and the Americas.

Also, a case can be made that before the 1400s, the known world for Europeans, Africans, and Asians consisted of those continents - and based on that, the Mongols, Arabs, Greeks, Egyptians, Romans, etc. had (what was to them) a global network of slavery.

If you can show through facts and data that I am wrong, I will reflect on it and respond. If you can't provide facts to back you up, why would you be expected to be taken seriously?