The manifesto. Reading it proves this cunt is far from right wing...

Media has to feed the people their narrative.

This is all Trump's fault!

Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies...
Orang man promut genocid

he didn't kill "people he disagrees with"
he killed people who he sees as invader threat to whites and their existence.

Also he disavows Trump's policy in the manifesto, says he only supports him as a symbol of whiteness or whatever.

Really I'm sure that east Asian woman he gunned down outside the mosque was a true Islamic warrior. Head out your arse lad, slaying innocents in their place of worship is cowardly.

>slaying innocents in their place of worship is cowardly
This is why Constantinople fell. The Muslims were brutal and had no remorse. War requires killing men, women and children.

Rome fell because of uncontrolled debt, degradation of societal standards and general debauchery. Remarkably like the modern west. I think isolating the cause singularly to Muslim invaders is historically ignorant; a well-funded and societally organized Rome stood a better chance of defeating those invaders. The fall was multivariate in my estimation.

If you resort to barbarism to counter barbarism, you prove we are all barbarians. This removes any notion of racial or cultural superiority to begin with, I feel. To be superior we must behave in a superior manner. Currently, we have cause to describe Western culture as superior. The numbers demonstrate it is freer, safer, richer, etc. Let's not ruin that over a few ragheads, ey?

how do you know she was east-asian? don't make shit up

Call it a guess that most muzzies in NZ are going to be immigrants from Indonesia, Malaysia, Sechels, or Bangladesh

>If you resort to barbarism to counter barbarism, you prove we are all barbarians.

"If someone kills your son and you kill him. This makes you the same as the killer"

fuck off with that Cuckold mentality

where is the fucking uncut video too see

Process of deduction. GF had the same doubts, but consider several factors, if you will.

>woman was walking by mosque, no clear intention to enter as he fires the first round through the fence
>clothing is that of a mid-30s east Asian female, not a Muslim hijabi/niqabi attending Mosque.
>screams for help uttered in fluent, locally-accented English implying second gen immigrant. Statistically most East Asians immigrated in the 70s/80s, whereas most Muslims immigrated much more recently. Hence a Muslim would likely yell in foreign-accented English or their native tongue.
>body and bone structure of Asian woman, small head with flat features, straight dark hair cut in a bob (common for Asians)

So go on, tell me she was a raghead who deserved it.

>social values to my own is the People's Republic of China'.
Lol did he really? He said a bunch of crazy shot like that he was radicalized by Candace Owens

He's an eco fascist. Another right wing terrorist.

Attached: D02uPSGWkAY67wy.jpg (1600x1108, 514K)

You need to watch it again. She was screaming help in a Turkish accent.

What’s so communist in China though, elaborate?
Major companies are held in private hands. Their banks are state run, but it only means that the debt of companies is socialized, which is done by other mechanisms in western world

this guy holy fuck his manifesto is gonna influence alot of racists

download source...???

Maybe canada shouldn't have kidnapped a prominent Chinese business women transiting the country?

That wasn't my argument but equally sound logic>

If he kills your son I believe we have a whole system for dealing with that in a non-barbaric way... The legal system, maybe you've heard of it. Not that I defend its' current state.

>795034904
My question exactly, when the video cuts one hand is on his weapon and one on the wheel... HOW DID HE CUT IT?

meh a supposed white supremacist who didn't blame the jews for anything, yea people that know better are calling bullshit

john podesta was just in new Zealand BTW

A ideology is in humans mind not in his race this is stupid as fuck

funny he shaved his full Amish beard

Explain how controlling religion, speech, and race are left wing concept you retarded fuckwit.

you're an idiot but thanks for effort posting.

so what does it matter if group of invaders x overlaps with group of invaders y.

How can be people who genocide a people by outbreeding be innocent?

and don't give me the shit of "then whites should just have 20 babies lol"

a race who can outbreed the other.

He claimed explicitly to be a fascist. What the fuck are you talking about?

>right wing
No true Scotsman, amirite?

kiwifarms.net/data/video/694/694847-518a3baf6096388726e4e9ac7ca0336f.mp4

or

bit.tube/play?hash=QmaqgzWG4G54ERY9L6X7KUB38CcCeaHoDuktuv85ScdV5p&channel=127170

Attached: 1552661493587.jpg (1536x1716, 1023K)

What is a justice system?

Or are you pro anarchy?

Fascism isn't necessarily right-wing. He identifies as a fucking Socialist. Also caring about eco-issues isn't right wing since we mostly don't believe the hype.
Sounded locally accented to me but I may be wrong.
They play fast and loose with the term... It's capitalism (for a few years) (so they can sieze it all later). Their social policy is authoritarian commie through and through though.
You mean arrested her under a legal extradition treaty with the US? She was illegally selling to the Iranians and was arrested to stand trial for her actions... Then China disappeared like 10 Canadians ostensibly for leverage to get her back, since the communist state protects its' cash cow Huawei

>Fascism isn't necessarily right-wing
Not that user, but technically it means right-wing authoritarianism. We have no word for left-wing authoritarianism.

Attached: 1552660301302.jpg (1920x1080, 969K)

yeah I'm sure the legal system doesn't work against white people

Attached: mike-allen-amike4761-follow-11-year-old-girl-gang-raped-in-sweden-37801219.png (500x751, 97K)

Tell me history please

China is based.
Liie a race of soulless robots drone npcs literally controlled by ai
Just so happens they are right wing (centrist)

man this shit is so no-ok, this man is a coward for shooting against disarmed people, the only thing that make me feel better is that this fckn piece of shit is going to get gangraped the rest of her miserable life in prison. feels good man

Explain how communists throughout all of history did all three if controlling society along these lines is exclusively a right wing tactic? There is authoritarianism on both ends of the scale so it's a bipartisan concept.

They have more children than us so let's kill them, because killing innocents for breeding is so so morally virtuous. Just expel them and seal the borders, if that's your flavour. No mass murdering, there are other ways.

And then claimed he shared views with Communists and identified somewhat with socialist ideals, railed about environmentalism like a rabid leftie etc. So I'm unsure right-wing extremist is the most accurate definition.

idk i mean there are lot of rightist in this century and this can influence lots of people doing things like that and this scares me.

>They have more children than us so let's kill them, because killing innocents for breeding is so so morally virtuous. Just expel them and seal the borders, if that's your flavour. No mass murdering, there are other ways.
Okay guy, go expel them then. Just ask them nicely to leave, I'm sure they will.

China has a conservative culture you retards. Economics and culture are two different things.

Muh left-right false dichotomy. Take your room temperature IQs back to Ręddit

Instead of pursuing a political career to the bitter end to have a greater impact on (immigration) politics (stricter immigration policies or whatever else you wanted that would potentially have far more consequences, and since you were clearly determined to throw away your life for a cause), you kill some people in a few mosques and then incite more division, and thus encouraging & giving even more reasons for the radicalized fucks for those attacks you so much opposed, as if they didn't have enough of them already. The ordinary muslims already living in Europe and elsewhere in the west might become afraid/unsettled, but not the radical fucks. In fact this might even ignite the normal muslims into radicalization due to this division, leading into more radicalized fucks and attacks, truly fantastic.

Okay so it can be equally applied to factions on the Left for whom we have no accurate descriptor. A right-wing authoritarian and a left-wing authoritarian are both in my view, fascist. Just a personal set of definitions though you're free to disagree.
I said I don't defend its' current state for this and other reasons.
Can't, too much data.
I live in China, not based at all lmao. Unbased as fuck. Based means 'based in reality', which China's economic and governmental practices most certainly are not. Also culturally they're communists, 'mei banfa' for the greater good collectivist morality type shit. So, you're a bit wrong.
Cowardly, I agree, but a symptom of a corrupt lying political, economic and societal system more than an anything. When the news lies it makes people go nuts, distorting reality makes people snap like this.

I never said to kill them, but in this clownworld with what looks like an Elite that can do whatever they want, it's no surprise that something like this happened.

nobody is honestly shocked about it

He's not wrong.

>Okay so it can be equally applied to factions on the Left for whom we have no accurate descriptor.
I agree that the word should apply to both sides.

We could deport them if only the white people on the plane didn't LITERALLY ARGUE FOR THEIR RELEASE lmao
Culturally they're communists, 'mei banfa' for the greater good collectivist morality type shit. So, you're a bit wrong. I live there, I'd know.
kek
This af

ok, i saw the video and hell yes, now i have a non good feeling. need some beer...

HELP GOBBLE GOBBLE

>loves guns
>hates immigrants
>is violent and insane

yeah sounds pretty american right wing to me honestly

You sound like a passive fool.if i killed your mom, what would you do?

Most of those are neo-liberal principles held by neolibs and the majority of the american media which happen to align with neo-lib ideology.

If you want to get into muh not a true liberal muh classical left feel free but no one cares.

Cowardly, but a symptom of a corrupt lying political, economic and societal system more than an anything. When the news lies it makes people go nuts, distorting reality makes people snap like this.
I live in China, you don't want to be me.
>supports gun control
>hates anyone who threatens his worldview
>is violent and insane

He actually sounds kinda liberal when I phrase it that way though. He wants gun control so Americans start a civil war over it.

what you tellin us for go tell twitter and democrat 2020 niggers

>DOOM MOD OVERLAY
>NOW THAT'S WHAT I CALL EDGY!
>PHOTOSHOP SKILLS OVER 9000

fucking idiot.

>You mean arrested her under a legal extradition treaty with the US? She was illegally selling to the Iranians and was arrested to stand trial for her actions..
Lmao if you think that makes it OK to arrest a socially prominent Chinese businesswomen .. for things that have nothing to do with Canada or china.. don't be surprised when a Canadian gets arrested too.

Kebab remover, says the rifle. Among other things.

beer is a depressant. RIP user

Boys you can try to cover your ass as hard as you want with this one. That manifesto had a fuckin' Sonnerad on the cover and he wrote "Kebab Remover" on his gun.

>mass shooter using assault weapons supports gun control

lol sure kid. hows trumps cock taste today?

>I said I don't defend its' current state for this and other reasons.

you can't have it both ways with stuff like: we have a legal system*
*(but I don't like the current state of it too much)

the point was does it heavily work against white people, and it does.
No justice = people take their own justice.

>implying I made it

Attached: 1552660034940.jpg (645x360, 85K)

I'd likely not care since we have a strained relationship, but if you targeted someone I like you'd be at the bottom of the Thames because I'm a hypocrite lmao
This
You already know this link is instantly removed from twitter, without it they simply express disbelief.
What's the point of international law if we don't use it to prosecute those who have violated it?
He said this word for word in the manifesto. Read it.
Or we could just improve the system rather than trying to tear it down like rabid leftists.

Can we tie this back to the shitty Democrats? I'm sure we can.

(full disclosure: I just wanted to post this pic)

Attached: whiteysoscareofmeayepapi.png (495x532, 291K)

>implying I implied you did

Why are you foreign losers obsessed with America and our superior culture? I don't even know a single politician from NZ, and yet they're all obsessed with trump and America. Fucking weird.

I mean in a way, if they hadn't racialized everything I don't think guys like this would be so mad.

>Or we could just improve the system rather than trying to tear it down like rabid leftists.

how?

Everyone loves America and our way of life. The ones that say they don't are lying cunts and crying soy tears because they can't live here. BRB I'm going to leave work early, go play some golf, drink a shitton of beer, then go to a rock and roll concert.

Attached: IMG_5307.jpg (800x800, 90K)

Religion- Left wingers got religion kicked out of public schools.
Speech- Left wingers no longer want he/she pronouns use.
Race- Left wingers started the whole affirmative action programs which discriminate against non minorities.

Thats just one example of each there are many more that can be added. Your welcome for the redpill snowflake you can now go back to living in your hypocritical bubble.

Seemed like you did, though this is the internet so intent is easily taken incorrectly. Either way, my bad then.

>I also have no idea what I'm posting, aside from it being a random related meme.

Attached: 1552664472522.png (976x720, 627K)

I don't condone rape, but i've seen enough porn to know that a threesome is not a gang bang or gang rape.
"11-year old girl raped by 2 immigrants" would have sufficed, but this headline makes an horrible act done by two persons seem even more awful by making it look a lot more sinister.

By allowing cops to racially police, first and foremost. Demographic-driven policing gets results, says every cop I've ever met. They're just not allowed to target certain communities for fear of the old 'racial profiling racists' smear. This is also why they tend to get off easier in court. Plus there are many ideological subversives in the institutions themselves and that must be weeded out. This is a big topic though man, I could talk for hours about criminal justice reform.

you miss the point entirely. but that's because you're a fucking moron. what he was referencing in context was a single people/ethnicity and the government's willingness to overtly support that singular culture/ethnicity over diversity-for-diversity's sake.

But keep on pushing your false narrative. One day, some idiot will believe it.

It's actually vice versa. That would have been best said to the terrorists.
Every action has a reaction, this was just something that was bound to happen.
You're right about one thing, either their attacks stop or they'll increase the violence, but their terrorist attacks would have continued whether this attack happened or not.

By this fucking moron's own logic, pic related, he would've done more to help white people by actually meeting a woman in real life and having sex.

Attached: so just get a girlfried you moron.png (879x318, 88K)

Uh, there's already a term for "threesomed against their will" and it's "gang rape".

He had Luca Traini's name written on his rifle. Traini is an Italian far-right wing terrorist that shoot 6 people last year.

>in context
What context lmao, he made this statement in isolation, he never expanded upon it like you're saying.

But keep on pushing your false narrative. One day, some idiot will believe it.

Attached: context.jpg (589x661, 56K)

WITH HIS OWN MOUTH HE SAID HE IDENTIFIES WITH ELEMENTS OF AUTHORITARIANS ON BOTH ENDS OF THE SCALE. He is not a right wing extremist, was my one and only point.

Attached: rightwingextremist.jpg (266x118, 9K)

>literally mfw everyone thinks this base-spec incel mass shooter is actually based

Never mind. A gang is a group and group can exist out of 2 people or more people. The headline was correct.

It's best said to anyone who would rather turn to violence yes, I oppose the radical muslims as much as radical right-wingers, doesn't matter. But that "reaction" could have been much more productive. It could have motivated him to pursue a political career, or become a political writer/commentator/whatever at the very least. Through politics he would have had the chance to influence policies that are beneficial to his own goals. Hitler would have gotten nowhere if he were simply frustrated with jews and contended with shooting up a synagogue. I'm not taking any sides here, but from his perspective, his determination to become a politician and influence policies based on his own ideologies is what made him achieve what he achieved, and the same principles, I'd strongly argue, apply today, even if nobody in today's democracies would become a dictator. Yes, there will be more terrorist attacks in the future regardless, but why on earth would you want to accelerate them, that's the thing, while greatly opposing and condemning them.
You also have people like say Jordan Peterson, who, who might not be politicians, nevertheless instead of violence influence the political atmosphere through their voices. JP has been in countless of interviews across the world, held speeches and lectures and so on. That's what makes a more powerful impact, hard work and dedication.

here is his original post on / pol 4+4

Attached: ec5aac961c2af39ee03a18f2dabad9da3457968a7758b3df663c5c638fe4c147.png (1837x482, 217K)

Attached: Screenshot_20190315-122425_Instagram.jpg (1080x2220, 519K)

The manifesto has the NAVY SEALS copypasta in it and is a joke

And he said "subscribe to Pewdiepie" so he is a 9 year old faggot/ just joking

kek i guessed it was someone from /pol/

Android P faggot lol

I sincerely doubt all 74 pages of mostly serious content are jokes but maybe.

much love user. much love

It’d be hypocritical to not throw all religious people in camps, why single out Muslims

Nigger I can't tell if you're trollin or just autistic as fuck. Congrats.

Just for the record. I watched the video and read the manifesto out of curiosity and boredom. I have no interest in shooting up anything for any particular reason.

If you are reading this I recently lost a hard drive of porn with clips from the late 90s/early2000s. You'd really make my day if you could somehow forward that one clip I have probably seen about half a million times. Losing that hard drive is tearing me up but I learned my lesson about backups.

But it was actually more like "if someone kills your son and you kill his son"

You mean "If someone kills your son and you kill someone halfway across the planet that belongs to a similar religious group"?

Attached: 1552666225182.png (836x589, 78K)

she has a point...

a couple simple steps, see if you are really desperate to get laid and then see if you're actually able to pull a woman. and if not, then yeah get them on a list and watch em.

From page 18 of his manifesto:

"Why do you believe you will be released from prison?
I do not just expected to be released, but I also expect an eventual Nobel Peace prize.As was awarded to the Terrorist Nelson Mandela once his own people achieved victory and took power.
I expect to be freed in 27 years from my incarceration, the same number of years as Mandela, for the same crime."

He unironically believes that he will eventually receive a Nobel Peace Prize for these actions. Unironically.

So its basically that you can kill all invaders to your country. Does that mean every australian outside of australia can be legitimately exterminated?

up her ass?

if these nitwits had their way, peace would be redefined as war. yeah i think it makes sense. it only works if "they" win

kek

Attached: 4005050_1.jpg (400x400, 13K)

i guess most americans too then.

nice wallpaper

>he listened to "gas gas gas" while driving
>You can't listen to "gas gas gas" while on your car anymore because everyone is gonna think you're a terrorist
Fuck this guy

Nuff chatter and gimme the second shooting video. I feel like ive watched a teaser trailer, there are so many more toys in his car

If you're a loser and fit in nowhere else, join this shit.
discord.
gg/GCSZbTF

Attached: WhyAreYouReadingTheFilenameFag.png (417x345, 21K)

Your reading comprehension is terrible. Go read the text ppl here are discussing or plz GTFO

see, I've been saying forever if everyone lived with their own race the world would be much better off. policing your own race can't be seen as racist and shaping up the shit of society would be far easier without people bitching that you're being something-phobic. I hope we get more shootings this year.

I just want to know if missalice is okay

Lol you mad. Are you outside of australia right now?

I'm sorry, but we've condemned radical muslims for a decade in Europe and nothing really changed.
The response was that right-wingers gained more followers and that muslims became more conscious about extremism, though a lot of immigrants actually came here to escape extremism, to build a better life outside of fundamental Islam.
You should base your conclusion on history, because everything you said has already been tried and made things as they are now.
There are hundreds of anti-radical muslims working with the left and even with the right to battle extremism, but look at where we are now.
So politics is out for those not versed in it.
Hitler had a major backing to begin with.
He never went shooting into a synagogue, because as the half-Jew he was he let others do to killing for him (you're not guilty of murder if you don't commit the crime directly according to th Talmud).
There is no evidence that the terrorists attacks will increase, they could decrease as well you don't know.
However, it's good that you agreed that they will commit acts of terrorism regardless, proving my point that olitics has failed or at the very least isn't working fast and acting hard enough.
I loathe Jordan Peterson. I'm an anti-theist, Peterson identifies as a conservative Christian, while he should have made a point to educate the masses on real things like science and philosophy.
He reminds me of the type of Christianity the Nazi party wanted to implement.
Also the thing wrong with conservatives is that they want to "conserve" what they have, ultimately halting our well earned progress in favor of outdated stupidity, but i digress.
You should have mentioned Hitchens who was a far greater speaker or even Sam Harris, hell even Richard Dawkins' content is much more relevant if you value truth as is and not in Petersons word salad.

there's no such as race dipshit. there's an infinite amount of overlap.

He's being painted as a far-right extremist, which couldn't be further from the truth.
Keep up.

Yeah if this is the shooters logic then every guy outside of his homeland is an invader and can be killed

she lives in Auckland. and isn't a towelhead

yeah except him being right wing and all

see this is the kind of thing your race needs to beat out of you lmao.

lurk moar

>I'm centrist right!
>The media is smearing the right!
>We should be fair!
>haha fucking rabid lefties amirite guys lol!!
Eat shit you're no different than the people you demonize. Maybe if you pulled your head out of your ass you'd be able to form a coherent thought. You might as well dye your hair and start waving cardboard signs about "mens rights". You're literally just a conservative version of those hippy pukes

you're just too dumb to represent any collection of traits. i hope you don't share some of mine

China is traditionally more collectivist, its conservatism is different from the European version. It is still much more conservative than the West.

can someone give me the link to the video

Yes, all people do is look at the extremities of skin color or whatever and ignore all the in between colors. It's silly.

lmao you're right, if I was as much of a faggot as you I would kill myself.

the guy hated conservatives
and was a nationalist SOCIALIST

Join this server, we got the whole thing recorded and screenshots

discord..gg
/hh4txHj
(Take off the extra dot)

you're not you're much more of faggot so go get your knife

>If you resort to barbarism to counter barbarism, you prove we are all barbarians. This removes any notion of racial or cultural superiority to begin with, I feel.

Feel what you want, it doesn't make you right.

Barbarism must be counteracted with barbarism. Rome had great armies to slay anyone who stood in their path and disagreed with their imperialistic ideologies. They were superior, superior in every aspect; culturally, economically and militarily.

>you're a fag
>nuh uh you are
amazing. truly this is the power of superior intellect.

itt people who don't understand history at all pretending to be historians

Yeah, i did NAZI that coming

>fairly extremely

Attached: Screenshot_20190315-125317_Instagram.jpg (1080x2220, 291K)

>calls someone a fag on /b
>thinks he's original

if we just nuked the middle east there would be tears for a time but in the long run it would be like getting cancer removed.
you're a fag

All of those are true. I am center right, the media DOES smear us, we should be fair and much of the left are rabid and incoherent. So i don't get your point.
Socialism with Chinese Characteristics lmao

>documentcloud.org/documents/5770516-The-Great-Replacement-New-Zealand-Shooter.html
>that part about choosing to use guns because it'll make the left try to abolish 2nd amendment
very few people on the left want to get rid of guns altogether. like, tiny-few. im a lefty and i would never agree to that, i own guns i like guns.

right now any fuckwad can get ahold of one, thats the shit that needs to change. and im not sure a agree with the whole 'we need assault rifles because the gov't does too' argument, private citizens will always be waaaay outgunned by our gov't, so why keep letting tards play with assult rifles in public places. guns that are designed specifically to maximize human death should be way harder (not impossible, but reasonably increased scrutiny) to get.

The guy is mentally deranged and makes contradictory statements.

That was posted on 8...chan not /pol/

Does anybody have the video of the shooting?

>ban them from social media and push them into echo chambers
>then want to ban them from echo chambers and actually send them offline in a fucking militia group or something

Big words for a unproductive member of a 1st world nation. Why do you leech on our society?

try harder cuck

I'm not talking (only) about condemnation but actual policies such as stricter immigration policy, stricter deportations and so forth. I don't see how history disproves the notion that political action can have an influence, quite the contrary. Politicians and leaders are the ones who dictate policies. Battling extremism (or anything else for that matter) means quite by definition that it still exists, so the point that these problems, extremism or whatever else still exist, are rather moot. It's better to fight than not fight. What comes to Hitler, my point was that he achieved what he achieved not by shooting up a synagogue or personally attacking Jews, but by becoming a politician, because through politics he could eventually influence policies that served his ideology, and that same principle still does apply today, only of course a bit differently since we live mostly in democracies and not in dictatorships.
There's absolutely no reason to rule out the possibility that an attack on a mosque will provoke the radical muslims, thus making them even more willing to perpertrate attacks (this would only make sense). In fact there was a tweet about this by BNL news: twitter.com/BreakingNLive/status/1106520653329588224
The fact that terrorism will continue doesn't really prove anything about politics failing... of course there is no way to ever reduce terrorism or any other crimes for that matter. There exists a justice system in all countries, law enforcement etc. but yet all countries suffer from crime, some more or some less, but that doesn't mean they're useless.
My point about JP was that he is just one good example of influencing things in a civil and more productive way. He has had more influence with his voice than he would have had with a gun. Could have replaced him with any other public figure, really.

Yea sure you subhuman just say it cmon say it its white devils fault whites are evil blablabla.

It should be noted that the peoples republic of china and communist countries in general have a very low muslim population and a very restrictive immigration policy.

Pretty much every Yea Forumstard by now

Do you have it? Cus i'm still looking

This is the intellect of the average white nationalist lol. Can barely put a coherent sentence together. Not a very good representative of the master race, are you.

that's why he said / pol 4+4 you dork

Typo fix: To ever completely eradicate terrorism or any other crimes for that matter*.

So based on the shooters ideology he wanted to kill the invaders to NZ. Even tho the shooter comes from australia. Doesnt that make it himself an invader to NZ? Or is it ok because hes white? But hes one shitty kind of a white guy mentally unstable and armed to the teeth and probably lowly educated and unproductive. Is this what new zealanders want for immigration?

Has everyone forgotten that innocent people are killed everyday in the name of ISLAM

Simply being from somewhere else burnt stabbed decapitated

Not being a Muslim burnt stabbed decapitated

How about when all of Islam were going to go out and kill any westerner if a image of Muhammad were displayed on television.

Knifing innocent people on the street Islam religion of peace

Imams demanding that Muslims travel to places were there are no Muslims and breed others out.
Brenton nut jobbo may be a crazy nutter at least his reason was not hurr 536 year old paedophile wills people to die for not believing in him kill all the blah blah

kek u sick fuck

terrorism is just like any other murder, and it's just like war (which is politically motivated mass murder usually)

meanwhile crazy people look for motivation to attach to their crazy schemes. in fact that's what we all do. we have thoughts and ideas and then we look for an ideology that roughly matches what we already believe. there's a strong element of genetics to it but we pretend it's shaped by environment so we can assuage our own guilt.

>Not all white people!
>conservatism is a movement of peace!

>the US is mostly christians country
>murders happen every day in the US
>therefore murder is done in the name of chrisitanity every day too

dumb argument. there's still likely the same % of crazy people in every culture. what stops them is a rigorous police force, adequate justice system and a culture of not putting up with it.

There are like 10's of different links in each thread already

I thought she moved to Christchurch?

here

>assualt weapons.
You should cut the CNN morphine drip at some point.

you are correct, I got the 2 confused

Has everyone forgotten that innocent people are killed everyday in the name of conservatism?

Simply being from somewhere else, gunned down, stabbed, hung or bombed

Not being a conservative white man bombed, stabbed, shot dead, hung, dragged behind a truck, lynched

How about when all of riuht-wing were going to go out and kill any non-conservative to start a race war?

Shooting innocent people in churches....

>rock and roll
Jesus, are you 60 and/or a Russian troll? Nobody calls it that, just say "Rock" if you want to sound American.

>i am an idiot and a hypocrite
>whats your point?
I mean. Idk user you can probably figure it right?

Stricter immigration policiy will not magically change the mindset of the extremists already present here.
Those are the ones who join ISIS, those are the ones who terrorized the streets long before the immigrant crisis started.
It's not immigration that has failed, it's a failure to drop Islam for humanism, which is what the current West is based on.
So, no, politicians won't do much, because politics is division by definition.
Debates as done in Australia and Brittain have been more influencial to the muslim communities than any politician ever has.
Again, the ongoing failure of politicians is what fuels the right-wing.
Consensual deconversion is the only way out.
Hitler was spreading anti-Jewish sentiments all along.
He used politics take what he was doing to the next level, not the other way around.
It still happens today in far right-winged parties who openly spread racist ideology, most of them were active in those circles before they rose to power.
Also, to broaden the scope, if Hitler would have shot up a mosque and died, he wouldn't have had his empire, but his actions would have caused a ripple effect, still enticing other people to do the same and another Hitler would have risen.
The hate for Jews was already present in Austria and Germany, but also in Italy and other (mostly conservative Christian countries).
I rephrase, the Muslim attacks would have continued whether this guy shot up the mosque or not.
How are you going to provoke those who already felt provoked enough to commit terrorist attacks across Europe?
There is an equal chance of muslim terrorism dwindling down out of fear or increasing out of anger, that was the point i was making.

cont.

Stricter immigration policiy will not magically change the mindset of the extremists already present here.
Those are the ones who join ISIS, those are the ones who terrorized the streets long before the immigrant crisis started.
It's not immigration that has failed, it's a failure to drop Islam for humanism, which is what the current West is based on.
So, no, politicians won't do much, because politics is division by definition.
Debates as done in Australia and Brittain have been more influencial to the muslim communities than any politician ever has.
Again, the ongoing failure of politicians is what fuels the right-wing.
Consensual deconversion is the only way out.
Hitler was spreading anti-Jewish sentiments all along.
He used politics take what he was doing to the next level, not the other way around.
It still happens today in far right-winged parties who openly spread racist ideology, most of them were active in those circles before they rose to power.
Also, to broaden the scope, if Hitler would have shot up a mosque and died, he wouldn't have had his empire, but his actions would have caused a ripple effect, still enticing other people to do the same and another Hitler would have risen.
The hate for Jews was already present in Austria and Germany, but also in Italy and other (mostly conservative Christian countries).
I rephrase, the Muslim attacks would have continued whether this guy shot up the mosque or not.
How are you going to provoke those who already felt provoked enough to commit terrorist attacks across Europe?
There is an equal chance of muslim terrorism dwindling down out of fear or increasing out of anger, that was the point i was making.

>there is no way to ever reduce terrorism or any other crimes for that matter.
Not true, find the root and erase the problem.
People commit crimes, because people are poor/greedy (for wealth) or, because their mentally impaired (stupid).
You can fix poverty and you can properly educate people, both of which we currently don't do.
Peterson influences people without guns, cool.
Genghis Khan had the largest empire in the word and gained it trough violence, same is said for all empires.
We can get things done via violence and peaceful discussion, we can cement the agreements via law and politics, but we can't force laws upon people and expect that they'd instantly agree and follow them.
To think that is naive and could result in more people rebelling against the system.

Excellent critique, 10/10.

Philistine.

genghis khan killed the rich people he came across first. it's a good strategy for building an empire

Policies aimed at deporting suspected extremists could be a thing too you know. Also stricter immigration policy would limit the amount of people a country takes, e.g. stricter requirements for citizenship/right to live in the country, etc. and that's better than nothing. Shooting up mosques will definitely however provoke those extremists, which is really counter-intuitive if you oppose terrorist attacks.
Humanism is also a form of politics, so clearly this proves politics has great effect. The policies just might need to drastically change. Political debates can still be politics, so I didn't say/imply that only poltiicians can have an influence on politics (I even mentioned JP, who isn't a politician himself). Failure of politicians doesn't equal failure of politics. It means at most that there are just that, incompetent politicians, but that doesn't mean that things could turn for the better if there were competent politicians doing good politics (depending who you ask of course but still).
Yes, Hitler spoke alot against jews when he was rising to power and when he was in power, and this is part of politics. The shooter wasn't a politician holding speeches or trying to become a politician for that matter, to influence policies to better his country. Yeah, Hitler could have possibly motivated other people through a small but violent act, but he chose to take the path of struggle and hard work (from his perspective), which eventually lead him to power and influence of Germany's politics. You even admit here that there's a hierarchy, that a "Hitler" (or some other leader/politician) is the desirable outcome, and so the shooter was below in this hierarchy so to speak.
Once again, there will be terrorist attacks just as there will be other crimes despite there being a justice system in all countries. But an act like this will only accelerate and motivate more attacks which is rather counter-intuitive. (continues)

The radical muslims won't be demoralized by these kinds of attacks, if anything quite the opposite, it will give them even more motivation and reasons for more attacks.

Smart, because those have the most means to overthrow you

Not a single society or country is crime-free, not a single one. Some have it better than others surely, but you can never eradicate crime completely. Some things you can not fix, such as stupidity, impulsivity or anti-social behavior or other mental disorders or others of hundreds of factors that make people commit crimes. Can we improve conditions so as to reduce crime rate? Obviously, but can we 100% get rid of crime? That is naive if something.
We're not talking about empires here, but policies/politics. To say that shooting up some people is more efficient than building a possible career on politics, so as to influence actual policies, in my opinion is just silly. As I mentioned before, the extremists will only get fuel from mosque attacks, not vice versa.
That also is my point, we have a justice system and law enforcement, but that doesn't mean they will be automatically followed by all people, but it's still better than to not have them.

and it makes the poor people happy to redistribute their shit.

plus he recognized the useless class when he found them. people could be laborers or craftsmen and artists but a rich person is useless without his money.

>working backward to a conclusion
>states he wants to kill marxists
>aligns with a despotic police staate
>massacres muslims which leftists apparently spread their cheeks for

"he's a lefty"

I hope you guys are just pretending to be troglodytes

bit.tube/play?hash=QmaqgzWG4G54ERY9L6X7KUB38CcCeaHoDuktuv85ScdV5p&channel=127170

I was looking for this, thanks.

hahah that serbian army music while driving got me

stop educating russian bots you faggot

any one have link to the stream??

where can I find a link to the vid?

Boy he shure got a thing for fertility rates.

Fuck humanity. That's fucked up...

>Policies aimed at deporting suspected extremists could be a thing too you know
Have to find them first
> stricter requirements for citizenship/right to live in the country
Which will ultimatelycome down to become less islamic and more Western, hence proving my deconversion point.
>and that's better than nothing
Don't end with such a weak stance/ phrase

Humanism is as much politics as Buddhism or Scientology are politics. Humanism influenced our policies, which is a lot different from it being a form of politics.
Even musicians can have influence on politics, but that doesn't mean that it will result in the removal of harmful components in Islam or any other extremist ideology or group.
>Failure of politicians doesn't equal failure of politics.
Unless the politicians fail, because of the restrictions in politics.
Representative democracy has been considered to fail during the time of the ancient Greeks, which is why they never implemented it.
This means that even good politicians could not succeed, because no politician will get all the others behind him/her.
Self-interest and corruption.
>The shooter wasn't a politician holding speeches or trying to become a politician, to influence policies to better his country.
He made a manifesto to influence the readers to better the country and to gain a cult following simialr to that of Hitler and JP.
>You even admit here that there's a hierarchy, that a "Hitler" (or some other leader/politician) is the desirable outcome, and so the shooter was below in this hierarchy so to speak.
I was laying out what would have happenend had Hitler shot up a mosque, i have made no mention of desirable outcomes unless you mean consensual deconversion.

cont.

There will be terrorist atacks despite politicians fighting against it for decades.
And law is irrelevant, you're acting as if the justice system prevents crimes.
It doesn't, it only serves to punish criminals.
Or do you think that a starving man won't steal a bread to keep himself when the penalty would be to chop his arm of?

My point was exactly, that not one country is crime-free so acting as if laws will change anything is naive.
Make immigration policies, cool, it only means that more immigrants will be labelled as illegal, it does not mean that they'll stop coming over.

The way to reduce crime is not with laws, it has to do with currency and education.
Not policies, because those outside of politics can and have been providing for our needs at times already.
You said e can't ever reduce crime rates, not 100% stop them btw, you're strawmanning yourself.
I showed you the groups that achieved the most and they weren't politicians, emperors, kings, all those to whom politicians bow and crawl have achieved far more.
I have not said that shooting a mosque is the way, the point was that you're in no position to accurately predict the outcomes of his actions, so to say that the results will 100% cause in an increase in terrorist attacks is overstating your knowledge.
You are free to guess, but don't state guesses as facts.
>That also is my point, we have a justice system and law enforcement, but that doesn't mean they will be automatically followed by all people, but it's still better than to not have them.
Never said that we shouldn't have them, so that's a moot point.
To think that everybody cares about anything in equal amounts as you do is what's silly and we have paid many times for that type of reasoning.

>He unironically believes that he will eventually receive a Nobel Peace Prize for these actions. Unironically.
Did you even read it, you fucking moron? That's more likely to be obvious satire or social commentary than an "unironic" belief, you literal fucking retard.

>It doesn't, it only serves to punish criminals.

it also takes them off the street and an effective one will prevent SOME crime by appearing to easily apprehend criminals.

HH

Attached: branton.jpg (800x450, 72K)

Indeed. So many people celebrate him because he's white and killing browns, and when it's the other way round they are scum. Makes no difference, when stuff like this happens it leaves a twisted feeling deep in the pit of my stomach. I watch. I always do because I'm morbidly curious but it hurts to know what humans are capable of doing to other humans. And for what? These people had families & friends, hopes and fears, just like anyone else. Now they're a statistic.

>right wing

oh right,more idiots who think foreign country's right wing is the same as america's

the difference is, that we didnt start this war.

kind of seems very similar

That's a logical consequence, but not an intent

It doesn't matter who started it.

The playlist in order, if you're curious...
- Serbia Strong (Remove Kebab)
- The British Grenadier March
- Fallschirmjäger - Grün ist unser Fallschirm Remix (NDW 2005 by Fler)
- Crazy World of Arthur Brown - Fire
- Manuel - Gas Gas Gas [Eurobeat/Initial D]
Not condoning anything, just letting people listen if they want to.

Jesus fuck. The guy cites to wikipedia like a damn 8th grader. Cringe. At least the Unabomber had a decent writing ability.

Same user, same...
This just confirms how fucking doomed we are as a species. I'm actually glad that we'll be extinct at one point in history.
Hipocrisy is just around the corner with these fucks, radical thinking turns into radical actions, we are light years away from having a sane, rational society.

>Have to find them first
Well obviously?
>Which will ultimatelycome down to become less islamic and more Western, hence proving my deconversion point.
And this is thanks to policies, proving politics can have an influence.
>Don't end with such a weak stance/ phrase
What?
>Humanism is as much politics as Buddhism or Scientology are politics. Humanism influenced our policies, which is a lot different from it being a form of politics. Even musicians can have influence on politics, but that doesn't mean that it will result in the removal of harmful components in Islam or any other extremist ideology or group.
You don't seem to quite understand what politics means. Humanism indeed can influence politics, hence it is part of politics. For example left-wing politicians tend to be more humanitarian, so humanitarian policy is a part of their overall policy.
>Unless the politicians fail, because of the restrictions in politics.
Even Donald Trump got elected, and many populistic/conservative parties/politicians have gained support as a result of the immigration crises. But how they do their politics is up to them, the only thing that "restricts" them is that their policies need to abide by the constitution/law of their countries.
>This means that even good politicians could not succeed, because no politician will get all the others behind him/her.
This has no basis. There are good politicians that have gotten results in whatever goals they may have had.
>He made a manifesto to influence the readers to better the country and to gain a cult following simialr to that of Hitler and JP.
It is still nothing compared to actual activism such as what JP does, he does it on a constant basis, he's active, holds speeches and travels the world for interviews, has lectures and so forth. This is what gains a following more than some internet manifesto. (conitnues)

Is there a 2nd part? Since he shoot up 2 mosques?

Yeah, but it's like The Matrix 3, you're better off without it.

>I was laying out what would have happenend had Hitler shot up a mosque, i have made no mention of desirable outcomes unless you mean consensual deconversion.
You did imply a desirable outcome, e.g. that these ripples would have possibly led to a new Hitler, Hitler being the ultimate goal, e.g. someone that actually takes control of the political situation/influences the country's politics. For what good are those ripples if they would not inspire a new Hitler, so to speak? That was my point.
>There will be terrorist atacks despite politicians fighting against it for decades.
>And law is irrelevant, you're acting as if the justice system prevents crimes.
>It doesn't, it only serves to punish criminals.
>Or do you think that a starving man won't steal a bread to keep himself when the penalty would be to chop his arm of?
Yeah, just as there will be crimes despite there being a justice system and law enforcement enforcing the law and order. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to strive to have as good policies as possible. Law was only an analogy to policies when you brought up that crime can be eradicated (which it can't). The justice system does prevent crimes because there is law enforcement and punishment. Do you truly believe that this has no psychological impact on people's behavior at all though? Think again. Yes, punishment is a "scare" factor, that was one of my points. But I didn't compare the justice system to policies completely... I only brought it up to point out that just because something happens, doesn't mean it's not worth having policies/laws to fight these diseases such as terrorism / crime. I never said that law absolutely stops behavior, that was in fact my original point that you can't eradicate crime completely, and you're now agreeing with me. (continues)

may I have a link please?

>bitchute.com/video/4SlN5Xy9foe1/

We have been catching extremists for a while now.
Catching more will not mean that extremist ideology will dissappear.
You can make a million policies, but you only need one extremist.
Policies will not deconverse Islamic people as much as criminal laws will stop people from stealing.
You need to address the root of the problem, but you don't seem to think that the root of fundamentalist Islam are the fundamentals of Islam.
By saying that we need to Westernize immigrants by implementing policies, you say that not immigrants, but their ideologies are the problems.
So, why are you plugging your finger in a hole by not addressing the ideology?
Saying "it's better than nothing" is a weak argument.
Like i said, by your definition every ideology, group and creed are part of politics as they have all influenced it at one point despite themselves not adhering to the principles of politics.
Regarding Trump, exactly, the laws that govern the political process are what enabled congress to oppose him. Same goes for Obama during his terms. These are the restrictions of politics which can cause a politician to fail.
You may not find online activision actual activism, but we have accomplished a lot online.
Anonymous started out as an soloely online activist group and increased in size and influence dramatically.
I don't consider JP an activist, he's an author selling books on his academic trade.
His right Christian stance simply falls in cue with the people who generally fall for hucksters, prove me wrong.

>Make immigration policies, cool, it only means that more immigrants will be labelled as illegal, it does not mean that they'll stop coming over.
No, it can mean that they won't even be accepted here or that they will be deported much more easily. Also being an illegal immigrant is a basis for deportation.
>The way to reduce crime is not with laws, it has to do with currency and education.
>Not policies, because those outside of politics can and have been providing for our needs at times already.
>You said e can't ever reduce crime rates, not 100% stop them btw, you're strawmanning yourself.
Nowhere did I say that you reduce crime by laws, that's a strawman, I only ever said you can't completely eradicate crime no matter what. Also yes, others than politicians can have an influence on politics as I've stated countless of times now. However politicians are the ones making/deciding the actual policies. I also fixed the typo way back to say that we can't completely eradicate crime, not that we cannot reduce it, I wasn't strawmanning myself.
>I showed you the groups that achieved the most and they weren't politicians, emperors, kings, all those to whom politicians bow and crawl have achieved far more.
It's the policy makers, not politics, if things go wrong. If someone sucks at football, it doesn't mean football is a terrible game, only that the player is terrible.
>I have not said that shooting a mosque is the way, the point was that you're in no position to accurately predict the outcomes of his actions, so to say that the results will 100% cause in an increase in terrorist attacks is overstating your knowledge.
It is not an overstatement to think that an attack on a mosque will provoke extremist muslims.. did you even read the tweet about ISIS calling for revenge? Those ragheads are ready to kill and die for their religion and something like this can only be fuel for them. (conitunes)

>Never said that we shouldn't have them, so that's a moot point.
Yes and that was my analogy to politics/policies, meaning politics is not useless just because there exists flaws in society... just as the justice system is not useless just because there's still crime. But things would be chaotic without them.
>To think that everybody cares about anything in equal amounts as you do is what's silly and we have paid many times for that type of reasoning.
I don't know what this argument even is, I never said anything about other people caring in equal amounts as I do, seems like a strawman of some kind.

You probably could talk for hours about it, but from what you’ve said here, you know literally nothing about it :)

The fact that you feel that way just shows there may actually be hope. +1 internet for not being an edgy cunt

49 people died and it wasn't islam. i'd say the ideology really isn't the problem so much as general extremism and the crazy that that entails.

society is safer and more sane than ever dummy

fuck...

Attached: child.png (594x644, 565K)

any cop who makes that claim is an idiot and needs to lose his job

suomi mainittu. Torilla tavataan

Not a desirable effect, i addressed the possibility that the eventual outcome of increased unrest would still happen. I never gave it a value of being good or bad.
Hitler was not the end goal. Hitler rose trough power, because of the desire for a grande pre-WW1 Germany (which in theory happened). This is why someone else or a collective could have produce the same results without going through the democratic process, but via coups and other means.
>But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to strive to have as good policies as possible.
Ok, so we have established that policies might not be the best way to eradicate the problem. That's progress.

>The justice system does prevent crimes because there is law enforcement and punishment.
Well, conspiracy (in a lot of cases) is a crime in itself and punishable by law, so it's not really preventing a crime.
>Do you truly believe that this has no psychological impact on people's behavior at all though?
You're equating the consequence with the intent of law again.
> I never said that law absolutely stops behavior, that was in fact my original point that you can't eradicate crime completely, and you're now agreeing with me.
I did mention that not law, but currency and education can combat poverty more efficiently.
I also never mentioned the eradication of poverty, you turned reducing poverty into complete eradication by yourself.

you don't sound ̶v̶̶e̶̶r̶̶y̶ any educated

just so you know

first he was a communist but when he grew older like the little bitch he is he felt socity ownd him somthing. Angry he was , frustrated he looked the internet for answers. Sadly australia is shithole country and didnt catch this mad man now many are dead because of rigth wing proganda. The end

mental gymnastics par excellence

Attached: 5 star post.jpg (351x440, 38K)

Catching extremists and deporting or imprisoning them is a good thing, and due to good policy this is possible, I don't see the problem. Nobody said you can destroy an idea or "deconverse" people, since you cannot (completely anyway ever). And nowhere did I say that policies can be mirrored to the justice system, I only brought the justice system to point out that just because crime exists, it's not pointless to have a justice system just as it's not pointless to have politics even if there are political problems. How do you propose you then "destroy Islam"? I'll be glad to hear this. Yes, westernizing immigrants would be great, but this isn't always easy nor even possible if they're radicalized enough, especially. And ideologies you cannot eradicate once again. "It's better than nothing" is a fact; it's better to have politics than no political system at all, as that would be total chaos/anarchy.
>Like i said, by your definition every ideology, group and creed are part of politics as they have all influenced it at one point despite themselves not adhering to the principles of politics.
I don't even know what you're trying to say here. I'm talking about a specific country's policies which can always be improved if there are problems, such as stricter policies on immigration, background checks, deportations and so forth. Also nothing, as I said, restricts Trump other than the constitution/law. He can't order mass executions as that would be illegal, but there are legal ways of improving policies regarding say immigration. He even wants to build a wall to the border of Mexico, but I'm not going to go further into that.
Online activism is a start, but if one truly cared for change they would start speaking publicly and possibly pursuing a political career. All the public figures and politicians had the most influence, not some anonymous internet users, at the end of the day. (cont)

JP is an activist of a kind, since he opposed the Bill C-16 in Canada and in general the extreme left and identity politics. That is political activism.
>Not a desirable effect, i addressed the possibility that the eventual outcome of increased unrest would still happen. I never gave it a value of being good or bad.
Hitler was not the end goal. Hitler rose trough power, because of the desire for a grande pre-WW1 Germany (which in theory happened). This is why someone else or a collective could have produce the same results without going through the democratic process, but via coups and other means.
Then what is the end goal? You said yourself that an attack on a synagogue would have sent ripples and eventually create a new Hitler, implying that Hitler (a leader/policy maker) would be the culmination of this friction. Whether you notice it yoursel or not, you're building a hierarchy on this matter. Do you think that a lone attacker on a synagogue would have had more effect than Hitler would have with all his power?
>Ok, so we have established that policies might not be the best way to eradicate the problem. That's progress.
Where did I say that? Don't strawman. Policies are good to have, despite there being flaws in society, that is all that I said.
>Well, conspiracy (in a lot of cases) is a crime in itself and punishable by law, so it's not really preventing a crime.
I don't know what you're reaching for here. I only stated that there's the psychological fear factor of punishment that controls people's behavior, so as to make them conform to laws.
>You're equating the consequence with the intent of law again.
What consequence? It's pretty much a fact that the presence of law enforcement/justice system controls people's behavior. It does not prevent it, but it greatly controls it for most cases. (cont)

>I did mention that not law, but currency and education can combat poverty more efficiently.
>I also never mentioned the eradication of poverty, you turned reducing poverty into complete eradication by yourself.
Currency nor education will not eradicate crime 100%, and that was my point, crime cannot be completely eradicated. Good if you at least admit that you cannot eradicate poverty entirely, thus not being able to eradicate crime entirely, which was my point. I also never said you can completely eradicate poverty/reasons for crime, quite the opposite.

there's no such thing as race, so no, that can't happen.

>No, it can mean that they won't even be accepted here
Illegal immigrants aren't accepted already. That's what the "illegal" stands for.
Again, making stricter immigration policies won't mean that they'll stop coming over.
>Nowhere did I say that you reduce crime by laws, that's a strawman,
Laws are a part of politics and your analogy was to prove that policies work, correct?
> Also yes, others than politicians can have an influence on politics as I've stated countless of times now. However politicians are the ones making/deciding the actual policies.
Ultimately proven that the way to reduce fundamentalism is outside of politics, which is my oint.
>It's the policy makers, not politics
I did say that representative democracy is doomed to fail, proving that politics can make things go wrong. You need direct democracy.
Again, what is the root of the problem, the fact that representative is easily subjected to corruption and self-interest by wealthy parties or the fact that wealthy parties use representative democracy that increase their wealth and self-interest? Who or what is to blame? Which would be easier to change?
>It is not an overstatement to think that an attack on a mosque will provoke extremist muslims
Violence has pacified people. Look at Japan after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Yes, we currently know about the state of Japan at the time, but you don't know the state of every muslim now.
>Those ragheads are ready to kill and die for their religion and something like this can only be fuel for them.
No shit, this why your policies won't work on people who will murder you over a cartoon.
>Yes and that was my analogy to politics/policies, meaning politics is not useless just because there exists flaws in society
Implement policies after a change, not to cause one, It won't and hasn't worked. North-Korea, Cuba, Russia, Venesuela all are going on with their horrific ways long after decades of sanctions against them.

Every action has a cause and it's fundamentalist Islam in this case. Had the shooter shot up a mosque without the attacks in Western countries? Most likely not.

and the muslims are responding to some real or imagined slight by the west. what's your point?

>this faggot actually thinks authoritarian communists are left wing.
Sometimes people use words to fool others.

*crime not poverty

From what I've gathered no right-winger is deliberately stupid. They're just born that way.

>The manifesto. Reading it proves this cunt is far from right wing.

WRONG

if you look at his other stuff hes
NATIONALIST SOCIALIST

HE HATED CONSERVATIVES
HE DID THIS TO FIRE UP THE POLITICAL LEFT
TO GO AFTER CONSERVATIVES HE FUCKING CALLED OUT BY NAME
AND TO GO AFTER THE 2ND AMENDMENT

confusing words for one another (legal status vs. social aceptance)

grat mindbending skillz there, pal

Attached: data lol.jpg (1440x1080, 1.05M)

none he can articulate properly, I'm willing to bet

Lies do have functions in social communication processes.

Social Psychology, one of the earlier lessons

other muslims understand i bet.

the point is everyone doing shit like this feels justified in some way.

outright (sic!) lie

Did the guys use money? he's a right wing capitalist. There are no left wing governments in the world atm.

>We have no word for left-wing authoritarianism.
SJWs are left-wing authoritarians.

(s)he has to

otherwise it would be much harder to do such horrible shit to other people

this dude used the attacks as justification for his fear of being replaced, the white "race" nonsense

You could be rigth or perhaps its the school system creating losers. If you dont fit the box the system gives up.

>Catching extremists and deporting or imprisoning them is a good thing
Sure, but re-educating them would be better, so they won't commit the same crimes again. You do know that most criminals are recidivists, right? Take the root of the cause, unless you want to deport them and have them educate those in the motherland about the weak points in our nations.
> it's not pointless to have politics even if there are political problems.
Fundamentalist islam and muslim extremism isn't a political problem, but you want to solve it through politics. Religion is a philosophy, it therefore is a problem of education. Meaning that we can do it ourselves and i have opened the eyes of quite some Muslims by using my knowledge of history, epistemology and theology.
>Yes, westernizing immigrants would be great, but this isn't always easy nor even possible if they're radicalized enough
If we spent halve our time in showing how theology is nonsense, instead of spouting hate memes, they'd be more open to listen. Hell, it's why countries like Iran are slowly moving away from theology, it's why the atheist movement is growing in the middle east as it. Though, countries like Brittain and the USA with their pro-theology stances (the theology they adhere to at least) aren't helping. You can't promote rationalism while having irrational beliefs. Muslims see this and they use it against us specifically by demanding equal rights as the christians, which they have all the right too according to law, but what if we'd make them don't want to be muslim anymore? That is the end goal.
>"It's better than nothing" is a fact; it's better to have politics than no political system at all
Many other solutions are "better than nothing" so it's a meaningless phrase.

>Illegal immigrants aren't accepted already. That's what the "illegal" stands for.
And they can be deported, depending on the politics/legislation, since they're "illegal".
>Again, making stricter immigration policies won't mean that they'll stop coming over.
Why not? It could easily reduce the amount people are let in. I think Trump even set up a policy to not allow people to move to the U.S. from high-risk areas where there's alot of extremism (some African country/countries, and some middle-eastern countries I believe). Again it depends on what kind of policies are being put forward and how strict they are. Why not try to strive towards as good policies as possible?
>Laws are a part of politics and your analogy was to prove that policies work, correct?
I said that you cannot completely eradicate crime by laws, which was the typo I fixed, I hope it's now clearer what I meant.
>Ultimately proven that the way to reduce fundamentalism is outside of politics, which is my point.
How is this proven? I only said/agreed that anyone can partake in politics, but politicians are the ones with the most power, obviously.
They're the one making the decisions.
>I did say that representative democracy is doomed to fail, proving that politics can make things go wrong. You need direct democracy.
>Again, what is the root of the problem, the fact that representative is easily subjected to corruption and self-interest by wealthy parties or the fact that wealthy parties use representative democracy that increase their wealth and self-interest? Who or what is to blame? Which would be easier to change? (cont)

they're more intellectually lazy than stupid, in my experience.

I agree. If you submit to some bullshit you find on youtube or other .. well stupid and lazy i guess

i think being intellectually lazy ends up with atrophied intelligence.

H-hey um user, can I ask you for a favour? Come join this Discord server please, it's a really good server I promise! It would really make my day if you did... so join using this link right now:
discord
.gg/UD3tHTC

j

Attached: akarin 10.png (419x398, 235K)

Anything can go wrong ultimately in any system, and nothing says that representative democracy is "doomed to fail", even though I also myself would rather have a direct democracy, to have people themselves vote for different policies rather than vote the policy makers. But nevertheless again, this is a matter of the politicians, not politics itself, because it is possible that with a good politician things can turn for the better.
>Violence has pacified people. Look at Japan after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Yes, we currently know about the state of Japan at the time, but you don't know the state of every muslim now.
Are you comparing World War 2 to the threat of extremist islam? I'm sorry but it doesn't quite work. Violence won't somehow pacify the extremists but rather fuel them. The atomic bombs forced Japan to surrender, but Japan is not comparable to extremist muslims. You wouldn't nuke the middle-east and somehow eradicate Islam itself. In fact since they live all across the world, you would have to nuke pretty much western countries too.
>No shit, this why your policies won't work on people who will murder you over a cartoon.
When did I say that policies would eradicate terrorism? In the very beginning I already said you cannot eradicate terrorism completely just as you can't eradicate crime, but good policies are still good to have, just as it is good to have a justice system. On the other hand, attacking their places of worship is a dumb move because it will for the hundredth time give them even more fuel and motivation for further attacks, as if they didn't already have enough reasons for them. It's like adding fuel to a fire.

>And ideologies you cannot eradicate once again.
The Greeks used to practice human sacrifice...haven't seen them doing that for over 1500 years
>I'm talking about a specific country's policies which can always be improved if there are problems, such as stricter policies on immigration, background checks, deportations and so forth
You said that Humanism is a part of politics. I maintained that by that definition every ideology, group or creed can be seen as a part of politics. Again, just because A influenced B, doesn't mean that A = B.
And sure, you can keep making policies (going from placing a bandage on a whole in the dam, to putting your finger in it and hoping that the problem will be fixed) or you take care of the cause instead of regulating it.
>Nothing you said regarding Trump would actually stop the immigration problem. There are more ways to get over the border than that. Instead, look at what drives them to move here and address that. It might even be the cheaper solution. Also, many employees import illegals to work for them, but i'll leave it at that.
>if one truly cared for change they would start speaking publicly and possibly pursuing a political career
For some it was the consequence of their actions and not the persuit of office which eventually gotten them into those places. We know that being a politician could help, but you could also be the one influencing politicians.

fucking campers

>Implement policies after a change, not to cause one, It won't and hasn't worked. North-Korea, Cuba, Russia, Venesuela all are going on with their horrific ways long after decades of sanctions against them.
Once again what does this mean? What I stated was simply that politics is not useless just because there exist terror attacks, an absurd notion you proposed. Just because there are terror attacks does not mean politics therefore are useless and should be thrown away. What the fuck DO you propose then if not better policies and the use of voice? More mosque shootings?
>Sure, but re-educating them would be better, so they won't commit the same crimes again. You do know that most criminals are recidivists, right? Take the root of the cause, unless you want to deport them and have them educate those in the motherland about the weak points in our nations.
I am not against re-education, but some individuals cannot be re-educated, especially if we're talking about deeply rooted religious beliefs.
>Fundamentalist islam and muslim extremism isn't a political problem, but you want to solve it through politics. Religion is a philosophy, it therefore is a problem of education. Meaning that we can do it ourselves and i have opened the eyes of quite some Muslims by using my knowledge of history, epistemology and theology.
How exactly do you deconvert a devout muslim that has been raised a muslim throughout his life? Besides even if you could in theory, I never said you shouldn't; you should have both. It is a political problem in the sense that with stricter policies regarding immigration, potentially dangerous individuals could be deported or also simply rejected the right to enter the country through extensive background checks. (cont)

How fucking stupid are you?
China is more authoritarian right than his favorite faggot emperor on the planet: Donny Trump

yfw the guy doesn't really understand geopolitics at all.

Attached: 1381706291934.png (382x417, 325K)

Religion is a way of life for many, so good luck "deconverting" devout muslims, let alone those that are on the verge of radicalisation. It has become part of their identity, so depriving them of that would deprive a large part of their identity.
>Many other solutions are "better than nothing" so it's a meaningless phrase.
It's not, it's a simple statement. You said earlier that politics was useless because there are terror attacks, which is just plain ignorant. It's like saying the justice system is useless because crime exists.
Human sacrifice is an idea. You cannot destroy an idea; it can still be practiced (and probably is practiced somewhere around the world still by some cults, possibly).
Humanism can be a part of politics (=influence the policies that are made) and humanitarian politics is what the left tend to practice more often, it's not rocket science. Who said you generally shouldn't find the root of the problem? It's not as simple as that always, however. Sometimes you just can't fix the root problem. Also what are you implying, that someone got into the office by sheer chance and not by conscious effort they made to get there? Yeah politicians can be supported monetarily. Also where did I say that Trump's policies would COMPLETELY eradicate the immigration problem? It feels like I'm talking to a child. It still HELPS to have policies making it HARDER to get in a country. What makes them move here, better lives, what do you think? They come from shitty countries.

This guy is retarded, doesn't shock me in the slightest

Wouldn't communism be authoritarian left...

I'm European, so i haven't cared about C-16 at all. I do know that it fits in the right-winged Christian worldview. I find anything not based on Humanist grounds and security not worth my time. The far-right would be in cahoots with Islam, as it was during the slave-trade, had Islam not found their ideology to be superior.
>Then what is the end goal?
Germany was a vat with TNT, they needed a spark to rebel against the status quo. They wanted to overthrow the status quo to achieve their of restoring Germany in its past glory. That it was a Catholic nation, which along with the Catholic church believed that Jews killed Christ made the hate against jews even more fueled. So, the ned goal, if you missed it again, was to restore Germany in its glory. This feeling was in every German who was struck by post WW1 poverty while the bankers were far better off.
>Where did I say that? Don't strawman. Policies are good to have, despite there being flaws in society, that is all that I said.
That's a steelman. When your reaction is that we need better laws after the previous "better" laws have failed, you are showing that policies arent' the best way out. I also cant' find the direct quote, because you keep linking your own posts and i can't go through them all.
"I only stated that there's the psychological fear factor of punishment that controls people's behavior, so as to make them conform to laws."
Sure, there is a consequence of punishing criminals. They are more likely to not eat chicken kebab as a consequence as well, but i'm more interested in the intent than possible consequences. Possible, because not all criminals are deterred from committing crimes, as i proved by saying that starving people will still steal.
> It's pretty much a fact that the presence of law enforcement/justice system controls people's behavior.
Yes, by punishing criminals and by making other people feel more safer due to the fact that less criminals are on the streets. However, see above

>Currency nor education will not eradicate crime 100%, and that was my point
Cool, but i replied to your initial point of not being to reduce crime/poverty and i still am.
Whether crime can or can't be eradicated depends on how well you can control and provide for people. We, in Europe, have far less crime than we used to and especially less than the USA. This is due to education and currency. This has helped us to create our policies (that thing you so love). So, it's not the policies themselves, but being a position to create favorable policies. The USa simply isn't as educated or psychologically advanced enough to get rid of guns and i'm not trying to be conceited.

> I also never said you can completely eradicate poverty/reasons for crime, quite the opposite
Japan has a far lesser rape problem than any other country. It is possible to drop the rates to that, at least and then we can improve on that.
If we can make individuals stop raping then we can make a collective stop raping and we can make individuals stop raping

One is a reaction to the other group and the other is a reaction to what's in their own mind. If you think those are equal, you have a couple of screws loose

Who cares about social acceptance?
Get out of here, hippie

How do I download it?

Everyone needs to formulate arguments to gain sympathy for their cause. He might have said that to gain that sympathy, because "preserving the white race" is what the other white supremacists care about the most. That one phrase made all of them view him as one of theirs. It's all part of the game, really.

>left-wing authoritarianism.
Bolsheviks

>I'm European, so i haven't cared about C-16 at all. I do know that it fits in the right-winged Christian worldview. I find anything not based on Humanist grounds and security not worth my time. The far-right would be in cahoots with Islam, as it was during the slave-trade, had Islam not found their ideology to be superior.
So am I. I brought it up since the bill was about politics and Peterson criticized it heavily, hence it was a kind of political activism. The far-right being in "cahoots" with islam is an absurd notion.
And that spark was Hitler, who took political control, that's the point. That was the culmination of anti-semitism: the rise of an anti-semitic, nationalist party. That is probably what everyone, or at leats alot of people in Germany hoped for... someone who would take stand and be the voice of the people, the political guider. And that's why Hitler eventually got so much support and votes. Making that political leader the "end goal".
>When your reaction is that we need better laws after the previous "better" laws have failed, you are showing that policies arent' the best way out.
Why on earth would it be a bad idea to have better policies and/or laws, and who said that policies are the ONLY way? Stop with this black-and-white thinking.
What the fuck is this about chicken kebab? And what consequences? And nowhere did I say that ALL criminals are deterred from committing crfimes because there exists a justice system. Only that there is that psychological factor that does prevent lots of people from committing crimes, in fear of punishment. that also isn't rocket science.
>Yes, by punishing criminals and by making other people feel more safer due to the fact that less criminals are on the streets. However, see above
No, I meant that the possibility/existence of punishment is what controls many people's behavior as I mentioned just above, e.g. they won't do something since they don't want to go to prison or pay fines, etc.

Please learn to read, I fixed that typo long ago to mean that you cannot eradicate crime/poverty entirely, not that you cannot reduce it, which you definitely can. It doesn't depend on anything, because you can NOT eradicate crime completely. Yes, the more stable the society, the less crime there tends to be, that's obvious. Also education and economy (is what you're probably referriing to) is due to good policies regarding education and economy. Also you just admit that favorable policies are indeed relevant.
Yeah, well, how do you go about "making individuals stop raping"? Easier said than done. Pro tip: you cannot, because crime, or rather criminals, cannot be completely eradicated so crime will always exist. What you can do though is minimize crime as much as possible.

>And they can be deported, depending on the politics/legislation, since they're "illegal".
Yes, they can already(!) be deported
>Why not? It could easily reduce the amount people are let in
Let in =/= coming over, it would not keep them from getting in illegally, it would only increase the amount of people coming in illegally, because the amount that would have been let in, will now sneak in.
>Why not try to strive towards as good policies as possible?
Why not strive to make a plan that would take away their desire to come here? Mexico could use the 7 billion or trillion to better the life for its citizens, but Trump wants it for a wall. The country 1. doesn't has it, 2. it will increase Mexico's national debt 3. that will increase the poverty 4. more people will try to flee from poverty in Mexico 4. Trump and pals will have more illegals to work for their corporations.
Nothing wrong here.
Also, i never claimed that striving for perfect policies are a waste of time, but you can invest your time in better solutions when you can't reduce the problem to acceptable levels
>I said that you cannot completely eradicate crime by laws
And it was an analogy for your stance on politics, correct?
>How is this proven?
The way to reduce fundamentalism is outside of politics. Look at the middle-east, the people oppose fundamentalist Islam, not the state.
Look at the USA, one term the state wants more religion and other terms the state wants less. Politics are division by definition. It won't work. The power should be with the people as the ancient Greeks intended

Controlling religion by destroying it has been a liberal cornerstone for decades. And identity politics around race are SOLELY left wing... you need to get out of mommy's basement

>right wing

>another ameritard who thinks every country's right wing is the same

Bro, that news is faker than Caitlyn Jenner's penis. First, only "voiceofeurope.com" has reported such news, which in itself is quite suspicious but not strong enough to claim that it is fake. However, if you go to the link of the article, it says that an "independent journalist" reported the event; said "journalist" is a Swedish man on Facebook writing a bunch of stuff about the supposed gangrape without providing any evidence.
So I call this shit, racist fake news.
voiceofeurope.com/2018/11/11-year-old-girl-gang-raped-in-sweden-perpetrators-walk-free-and-laugh-in-her-face/

>Let in =/= coming over, it would not keep them from getting in illegally, it would only increase the amount of people coming in illegally, because the amount that would have been let in, will now sneak in.
And, who said that illegal immigrants couldn't find their way into the country? It's the same with drugs, making it harder to obtain them is still a good thing even if people will find ways to get drugs illegally. It will still reduce the amount of drug use since alot of people won't bother since it's illegal. Also since they're now illegal immigrants, were they to be caught, they could be deported, so it is overall a good policy.
Again, the desire to move to a better country is simple... their countries are shit and they want a better life. You would move from a poor African country to Europe if you had the chance, almost anyone would in that situation (hell even I would). Also of course you do whta you must... but policies are a large part of what countries do. By the way the whole wall thing is also politics, and the money used for it, just so you know. Nearly everything is politics in the end.
>And it was an analogy for your stance on politics, correct?
Yes it was. Policies are not some absolute rules of God that work perfectly. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't have good policies. Better stricter immigration policies than looser policies, if you want indeed stricter immigration policy for example.+
How do you reduce fundamentalism? People are raised from a young age in those poor countries, since religion there is such a large part of the culture and also serves to give them hope due to the poor conditions there very likely. Also what comes to politics, you can make it harder for fundamentalists to enter your country, thus reducing fundamentalism in said country. Deconversion is a differnet subject though and good luck with that!

stop posting a text wall you fucking cunt
i was gonna call you a nigger but we all know niggers can't read

stop posting a tex wall you fucking cunt

Operation GLADIO has returned

>and nothing says that representative democracy is "doomed to fail"
The ancient Greeks did, our current political climate is proving it. Any system in which it is quicker to buy yourself into power will be subject to corruption and is therefore a failure.
>even though I also myself would rather have a direct democracy, to have people themselves vote for different policies rather than vote the policy makers
Which is what could start our next revolution
>because it is possible that with a good politician things can turn for the better
No, you'd need the majority of politicians to achieve this. You could have the most intelligent politician ever, but he'd still need the majority. Look at both Obama's and Trumps first couple of months, they were chaos.
> The atomic bombs forced Japan to surrender, but Japan is not comparable to extremist muslims.
1. I was providing an example of violence pacifying a nation. 2. Japan stopped worshipping their emperor as a literal god after WW2. Worshipping a man and fighting for his glorious land is as extreme as it gets. You may cite differences, but they have more commonalities.
>When did I say that policies would eradicate terrorism? good policies are still good to have
What point are they then if you can't destroy Islam with it?
>because it will for the hundredth time give them even more fuel and motivation for further attacks
Doesn't mean they'll act on their motivation. Would you give your wallet when you're robbed or would you give a fight despite knowing you'll end up robbed and beaten? Would you try to scare them or let them have their way? Would you later get revenge, knowing that they'll continue their madness anyway or would you do nothing and let them get away with robbing you and other people in the future?
I'm not condoning murder, but i am saying that the consequences of the actions can go either way and that passivity is the fools way out, that policies won't help as they have failed for decades

>Bro, that news is faker than Caitlyn Jenner's penis
So it's the real article?

Did he use R-901 and Peacekeeper combo?

Fuck, I was thinking about penises instead of vaginas. I think I might be morphing into a faggot.

You seem to be more concerned with people’s view of you over actual results and how you are forced to live.
>it’s not that they raped my family and put me in chains, it’s that they view me as barbaric that really gets to me

>people do shit I don’t like
>a decision is made to send men ready to do violence to find said people
>justice is exacted by system of men ready for violence
You realize their is no anarchy right? Whoever has the power makes the rules.

Not making a moral argument either way. Just stating that we can label it the “justice system” and it’s still “do as I tell you” under threat of violence.

>With enough pressure the left wing within the United states will seek to abolish the second amendment, and the right wing within the US will see this as an attack on their very freedom and liberty.
>This attempted abolishment of rights by the left will result in a dramatic polarization of the people in the United States and eventually a fracturing of the US along cultural and racial lines.

Also he didn't fucking admit that he was left-wing. He said it depends on the definition, especially when it comes to workers.
Try harder next time.

>What I stated was simply that politics is not useless just because there exist terror attacks, an absurd notion you proposed.
Again, policies have failed for decades, perhaps you should look somewhere else to achieve the effect you desire. Policies don't help. Sanctions are forms of policies and they have not caused the the countries mentioned to stop on their horrific practices.
Policies can strengthen a position, but you can't use a policy to destroy an ideology. Hell, you hate hate-speech? Cool, now you can hide under free speech laws. Policies fail look good on paper, but fail in practice and you have a disconnect with this reality.
>What the fuck DO you propose then if not better policies and the use of voice?
I said countless times that you can't get rid of Islam with policies, but with consensual deconversion. Make them see that religion is bs. Goes for all the other theists as well. We're the first world, how the hell so many people still believe in myths is unbelievable.
>I am not against re-education, but some individuals cannot be re-educated, especially if we're talking about deeply rooted religious beliefs.
Not true, it's why the atheist community is growing by the day. It's why more and more people in the ME are moving towards atheism. It's why the pope declared the Old Testament as myth and more. You as an interlocutor just need to know what you're doing.
>It is a political problem in the sense that with stricter policies regarding immigration, potentially dangerous individuals could be deported or also simply rejected the right to enter the country through extensive background checks
Immigration =/= fundamentalist Islamist ideology (Mexicans anyone?)
>Religion is a way of life for many, so good luck "deconverting" devout muslims, let alone those that are on the verge of radicalisation.
Answer out of the book, but it shows you're not talking out of experience

this dude has some bad fucking grammar

>We have no word for left-wing authoritarianism
You’re right and I’m sure that’s by complete accident.
>kills 100 million people last century
>propaganda machine at full tilt already at the beginning of this century
>movement to disarm and silence opponents
>no word to describe

Nothing to see here folks.

>Not that I defend its' current state.

then why talk about it as if it's a solution...….?

US/NATO forces also funded, trained, and "allowed" fascist terrorists to bomb and kill in the name of 'fighting communism'.

Perhaps he had some "help" with acquiring that weaponry...

>The ancient Greeks did, our current political climate is proving it. Any system in which it is quicker to buy yourself into power will be subject to corruption and is therefore a failure.
In representative democracy though you do not buy yourself into power, you're voted into power. What comes to corruption in general though, is that not a matter of behavior? Since you loved to teach people to behave (not to rape etc.) shouldn't corruption be rectifiable too (e.g. teach people not to be corrupt)?
You're implying that no politican has ever achieved anything positive? Usually also parties share the same ideologies/values so you indeed have lots of people who share the same values. Then which party is in power usually will support policies according to their party's values.
Yeah but how do you destroy islam itself, dropping an atomic bomb in the middle-east? It was only a smart move from Japan to surrender to avoid more destruction, since the Allies now had tremendously powerful bombs at their disposal. But radical islam is not something you can eradicate like that. There are plenty of muslims all over the world anyway, even in your own country. Hard to tell who's radicalized and who isn't, too.
>What point are they then if you can't destroy Islam with it?
You can NOT destroy islam or any ideology/idea for that matter so that question is rather moot. Nazis were defeated in WW2, but that did not destroy the idea of national-socialism. Hence neo-nazis exist even today. This is a bit like asking why have laws and law enforcement if you cannot eradicate crime, but the point is prevention and action against it. These policies act a bit like the justice system against crime... to fight and prevent it as much as possible, even if you cannot prevent it completely. Would you rather not have a justice system at all, no law enforcement and basically be paranoid 24/7 since anyone could now assault and rob you? (cont)

Holy fucking shit. I’m honestly not sure if you just don’t know any history at all or are just trolling?

Jesus fucking Christ this guy is even worse than Elliot Rodger, at least Rodger's manifesto wasn't a complete joke

No you’re right. Nobody ever suffered or died under communist rule while doing all three of those things.

Fucking retard. Go back to virtue signaling on social media while you screech about history but deny hundreds of millions of deaths by left wing assholes.

Attached: DB80F1B7-8EEC-4B40-BE88-7E495E0B620F.jpg (700x615, 70K)

>china = communist/socialist
>government controls everything

>right wing = conservativemaintaining adherence to the democratic principles upon which a nation was founded (democratic governance by the people, for the people pursuant to adherence to a written instrument and the laws)

pic one, retard

Attached: retard thread.jpg (1238x1024, 103K)

This Libtards be so dumbererest.

Attached: this3.gif (300x186, 446K)

agreed

/thread

op is an idiot

Left and right wing are stupid terms with zero meaning. There are a few binaries that dictate political alignment.
>authoritarian vs libertarian
>economic left (socialist) vs economic right (capitalist)
>globalist vs nationist
etc etc.
China is authoritarian and economically left (government has most of the money), although since they give the population dick all in return you could say they are not really socialist but more just government/ totalitarian capitalists. To muddy the water even further, they are strictly nationalist and restrictive of outside cultural influences, which is a more right wing concept to most people.

Ultimately categorising China into left or right wing is pointless. They are totalitarian nationalists. That's the only description you need to describe them, forget using this retarded "left vs right" bullshit