Qhimm.com Forums
Off-topic forums => Completely Unrelated => Topic started by: DLPB_ on 2016-05-27 04:25:32
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCcp36n2cDg
No greater example than the bastards in the audience.
Also worth a watch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nDkNZk7vtk
-
Milo is freaking awesome. At first glance you would think he's some sort of comedian but once he opens his mouth, he slams everyone with the truth and does so in an honest, ruthless, yet funny and amusing way. And he's pretty much always right.
-
Watch out, Obama is about - and he's apologizing to Japan for the fact they bombed Pearl Harbor and declared war on America. The docile leftist prick can't get enough of victimhood. I've never seen such a weak and useless US president. I'd say he's the worst leader on the planet, but I know that's Merkel.
-
Watch out, Obama is about - and he's apologizing to Japan for the fact they bombed Pearl Harbor and declared war on America.
He specifically did not apologize for that. (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/05/27/obama-visit-hiroshima-bomb-site-pledges-no-apology/85022938/) Lots of Japanese were offended that he didn't and those that weren't would have been offended if he did. The surviving US vets told him not to.
This whole trip was really NOT a good idea. It served no true purpose.
I'd say he's the worst leader on the planet, but I know that's Merkel.
Wait until January of next year. We'll have a worse one.
-
I'd say he's the worst leader on the planet, but I know that's Merkel.
Just wait until the US election, it will get funnier I promise.
-
He specifically did not apologize for that. (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/05/27/obama-visit-hiroshima-bomb-site-pledges-no-apology/85022938/)
He doesn't need to say "I apologize" - his actions and the visit speak volumes. It's a deliberate provocative act from a president that, in my opinion, hates his own country and the West in general. He specifically brought up the bombings when he did not need to - and he visited the places that were bombed. And the timing of his visit was also obviously deliberate. I don't see any other country like China doing the same (also victims of Japan at one point).
I just find it completely ridiculous. Whether he utters "Sorry" or not. It's an apology in all but words, and he knows what a massive backlash he'd get if he said it. Instead he talks about how bad nuclear weapons are - and skirts around the full-on apology as a compromise. Trump called him out on it too. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3615084/Donald-Trump-says-Barack-Obama-brought-Pearl-Harbor-Japan.html)
And from what I am gathering he has also been using the event to push his agenda of anti-Trump?
“I held his hand, and we didn’t need an interpreter,” Mr. Tsuboi, 91, said later. “I could understand what he wanted to say by his expression.”
Can't wait until he's gone.
Instead of politicians laying wreaths and talking about the actions of the past, perhaps they can look to the present. Thanks largely to the action and inaction of spineless politicians, we have the worst thing since Nazism trolling the globe (Islamic State - who Obama likes to call ISIL - a name that they no longer even go by). I find the current predicament far more important than past predicaments. But Obama clearly doesn't. He's done sweet FA about Islamic State or some other big issues. He's sat around talking a lot and doing very little.
Lastly, someone posted this
Let's see now. Cuba, Vietnam, Japan...yep, he's hitting them all for decisions made by past Presidents. Still waiting for an apology for the war on crime by Clinton. How about apologizing for Wall Street? Oh, you fixed it? Tell that to Trump and Sanders voters? The only thing you did for me was to stop Hillary from being President. Twice now. First in 2008, and now 2016, thanks to your exposing the true leftist agenda. YOU have divided this country as never before. Don't play the victim, it was YOUR hatred of America....
I agree. Although I'd say Vietnam was a true crime and one where an apology was needed. And has probably been given numerous times?
Edit.
Here's the thing. The left love bringing the past up and initiating discussion about past atrocities or wrongs, because it creates division and a victim mentality. Obama really has been a massively divisive president. Trump and Clinton will be too - but for different reasons.
-
I'd say he's the worst leader on the planet, but I know that's Merkel.
What did she or he leading? They both are only the major of Midgar. ;)
And what opportunity do we German have? We can't take the freedom to say 'no we don't host anymore refugees'. If we do we are all Nazis and anti-Semite (this really isn't a synonym only for the Hebraic folk). More or less her position is quite understandable. Still not a fan of her, but at the moment we have a lack of options to choose from, so I fear that she will be there another 4 years. :'(
I wonder where all the money was hidden we currently seem to have for all the refugees? If we had put all the new source in our education system then... what do I say, she is only the major...
-
It isn't like the insane cow has taken in a few thousand, either. It's around 1 million, largely from Islamic nations, with more on the way. It's clear that she doesn't care about the massive problems that brings. But you know what, Germany votes for it. As Milo points out in numerous videos, women are their own worst enemy, as they frequently and overwhelmingly vote for these insane leftists that then cause problems that they are directly affected by more than men. It's not going to be good for women under Islam. Good luck, folks.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3617417/18-women-sexually-assaulted-German-concert-victims-surrounded-mobs-migrant-men-groped-copycat-attacks-like-Cologne.html
Each and every last one of these victims are the result of treasonous Merkel.
-
Already the anti gun mob are blaming Trump for the latest atrocity by Muhammad. It makes me laugh. This Muslim has shot up a gay club in what I am told was a gun-free zone. Oh, yeah - gun free for everyone who is not intent on mass slaughter. If you are - just a walk in the park. This isn't the fault of guns. Strong gun controls only added to the misery in France, where 130 were gunned down in streets! If anything - people armed would have had more chance than what they had - zero. And the same applies here.
This isn't Trump's fault - This is an insane religion - founded by an insane man - and practised by people who have been made insane by its hateful and militant ideology. It is not going to go away until we confront the actual ideology itself. People like Hillary and Obama want to ignore it - call it a "lone wolf" - and then allow thousands of unchecked migrants to waltz right in regardless of the serious dereliction of duty that actually is.
And some people vote for them!
Holy shit - just imagine how many of these nutters have walked into Germany.
-
"I feel sorry for the American people having O'Barmy as president, he's as useless as a chocolate teapot."
haha. Seriously - he's banging on about the evils of guns and refuses to mention Islamic terrorism. Does he think gun control was the problem in Paris, too? Get this delusional weirdo out of office.
-
Progressivism is a death cult. Libertarianism too, in a way. They are both the products of the Enlightenment, that is radical individualism taken to it's logical conclusion.
I'm a Populist Nationlist because I understand that the individual is not the most basic unit of society. An individual alone can accomplish nothing of value, it is only when individuals work together for their greater good that their lives improve. However people are fundamentally unequal in abilities and dispositions, so it is pointless to hold back the most fit to care for the least fit... with this in mind, the purpose of social safety nets is to eliminate the need for social safety nets.
https://www.youtube.com/user/stefbot/videos
Moly is an anarcho-capitalist, but he's coming around to my point of view.
-
Obama is what happens when people vote because of a trendy idea. "He's black. Aren't we enlightened?" Nobody listened to people that saw through him and saw he was like Blair - all rhetoric, smiles, and talking the big talk. No real ideas. No leadership qualities. Just talk and smile and promote a flawed "progressive" agenda. He's so delusional that they should section him and drag him off to the loony bin. People are making the same mistake with Hillary now - her campaign and the liberal media is making a huge deal out of the fact she is a woman. So let's vote for someone because of what lies between their legs - yeah - that will end well.
When you have a candidate that is so desperate that she is virtually prostituting herself to women voters in order to gain power, you know they are a useless sack of garbage. If America chooses her over Trump, it deserves everything it gets.
-
There isn't a really good option in my opinion.
I'm kind of with Sam Harris on this, Hillary is a bad person but unfortunately the most realistic choice out of a bunch of pretty bad ones. Just imagine Trump literally exiling millions of illegal aliens from the country. The USA was founded on the principle of fleeing a bad situation and starting better lives, which are exactly what these illegal aliens are doing. That is a pretty big reason why we are aren't England 2.0 right now, it is against the basic foundation of this country's principles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdDo1A7EsyM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdDo1A7EsyM)
-
It wasn't founded on the principle of millions of freeloaders coming across the border from Mexico, causing massive strain on the economy and infrastructure - nor was it founded on the idea of tolerating an ideology that is based on death - and further - allowing untold numbers of its followers to arrive in the country completely unchecked (something Trump opposes, but Hillary supports).
The better choice is Trump, by far.
Illegal is illegal. They have no right to be in America.
it's a very different world now to the one when America was founded.
-
It wasn't founded on the principle of millions of freeloaders coming across the border from Mexico
If a family escapes drug cartels, gang violence and very high unemployment rates - the tropes of the state of Mexico, and does whatever it takes to get into the USA (for poor people, the only way in is illegally in a lot of cases) but then get jobs and contribute to society through buying things and paying sales tax, are they really freeloading?
What if that was your situation?
Illegal is illegal. They have no right to be in America.
Mexico is part of North America
-
What if that was your situation?
That's an appeal to emotion and does not fix any problem. You allow millions in - and more come. And more. Where do you stop? Because land and resources are a finite commodity. That's why socialism is a complete failure. It runs out of other people's money. It isn't my situation. It's tough luck. Every country has a law - and they are breaking the law. A lot of criminals also come across that border. What you are advocating is the right to break the law, which is not a good or rational position to hold.
Mexico is part of North America
You know full well I meant the USA. Please don't cheapen this debate with that kind of nonsense.
-
That's an appeal to emotion and does not fix any problem.
I wasn't trying to illicit any sort of emotion out of you, but more or less try to have you objectively understand multiple perspectives. You do whatever you do to better your situation, whatever that may be, that is what people generally try to do in life.
Because land and resources are a finite commodity.
That is more a problem of being a Human in general than anything else. You can't get mad at people in a certain area for reproducing, we all do it and for usually the same reasons
You know full well I meant the USA. Please don't cheapen this debate with that kind of nonsense.
I couldn't help myself, heard too many dad jokes this weekend.
-
But I wasn't being mad at people. I was being mad at politicians like Hillary that do nothing about it - and separately the ideology of Islam. Leaders are meant to uphold the law and work in the best interests of their own people - first and foremost. Mexicans are free to try their luck - but what Obama and Hillary do is criminal negligence.
-
Luckily, the US government is like a huge ship with a small rudder. The maximum amount of good or evil the president can actually follow through with is minimal in the grand scheme of things due to the checks and balances of government branches. That is the beauty of democracy, the majority of people need to agree before you ruin the lives of millions of illegal immigrants or starting a war
-
That didn't help much with Iraq and Afghanistan (Bush and Blair) - or the rise of IS and the Egyption problem (Obama). All of them disasters and all approved - but not by the people in all cases.
Blair took Britain into Iraq and Afghanistan without any authority from the people - and with Iraq it was based on a pack of lies.
When it comes to illegal immigrants, I'd say they knew what they were doing was illegal when they embarked on breaking the law. I won;t shed a tear if one or all of them get sent packing. Then maybe more will learn to respect another country's laws. Also, instead of fleeing their own country, they may try to repair it.
-
Just imagine Trump literally exiling millions of illegal aliens from the country. The USA was founded on the principle of fleeing a bad situation and starting better lives, which are exactly what these illegal aliens are doing. That is a pretty big reason why we are aren't England 2.0 right now, it is against the basic foundation of this country's principles.
How exactly will we pay for all these illegals?
Also you're wrong. The USA was founded explicitly for White men who owned property. It says so right there on the founding documents.
How are we not England 2.0? We have a presidential candidate who wants to outlaw gun ownerhship (like Britain), we have unlimited immigration for people who can't contribute anything but menial labor to the nation and who commit violent and sex crimes at rates much higher than the White population (like Britain), and we must pay for these knuckleheads too (in the form of free health care, free K-12 education, food stamps) (also like Britain).
Look, if you think that these brown people are so great you should go live with them. When Trump wins you can go live in Mexico.
If you import Mexicans into America, you don't make the Mexicans into Americans. You make America into Mexico.
-
Here here!
I'd wager the people who are pro illegal immigrant have never lived in an area affected by the fruits of it directly. The fact is that the numbers are unsustainable - and the country suffers as a whole when you import or allow huge numbers of people from failed states. It's plain common sense. And there is never an end to it - because the failure keeps on failing, they keep on breeding, and then they keep on coming. All you do is lower the standard for everyone - hence Churchill's comment that socialism is the equal sharing of misery.
-
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light," said Max Planck, "but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."
Although in this case, it doesn't quite work out that way because delusions that lead to death have a funny way of kicking everyone in the rear end.
-
I'd wager the people who are pro illegal immigrant have never lived in an area affected by the fruits of it directly.
Exactly. I was a leftist - a literal socialist, in fact - until I actually had to live with the diversity. Most leftists project their own low-time preference and high trust societies onto the third world hordes. They never stop and wonder, "Why is the third world so shitty?" They always bite take the bait and blame everything on White people.
The fact is that the numbers are unsustainable - and the country suffers as a whole when you import or allow huge numbers of people from failed states. It's plain common sense. And there is never an end to it - because the failure keeps on failing, they keep on breeding, and then they keep on coming. All you do is lower the standard for everyone - hence Churchill's comment that socialism is the equal sharing of misery.
In an era where onanism is celebrated, you can't expect anyone to display common sense.
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light," said Max Planck, "but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."
Although in this case, it doesn't quite work out that way because delusions that lead to death have a funny way of kicking everyone in the rear end.
If the recent night club shooting - the largest mass shooting in US history, where a Muslim man killed at least 50 people in a gay nightclub - is any hint, leftists need to actually have their lives threatened before they wake up and face the mess they helped create. It's one reason why I sincerely hope that Hillary wins, even though I'm voting for Trump - watching leftists eat crow as their pet minorities devour each other is hugely entertaining.
-
I've noticed that leftists seem to have a rather bizarre ranking system - with Female lesbian Black Muslim at the top (if you can find one before she is killed) and White Christian Heterosexual Male at the bottom. The thing is - Muslim ranks above Black or white male or female (I am aware that Muslims are either one of the two, but the point is the ranking system). So if non-Muslim women or gays think that the left will protect them, they better think again. Islam trumps all in the left's insane pecking order.
Also, I was a liberal until around the age of 8. I lived on a rough neighbourhood and saw the scummy thug types laughing at the law and creating misery all around them. Back then, I used to wonder why the people on TV were saying things that made no sense - things that I knew were false (like "helping" thugs and "rehabilitation". They just needed to be understood - and other nonsense). I figured that I was too young to understand. One day, years later, it dawned on me that at 8 years of age, I was smarter and more clued up in how the world really is than most of the liberal elite and government.
And it's only gotten worse since.
-
I don't even like Trump very much, but I do have a new found respect for him, especially after watching this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LibRNYJmZ-I
Trump might say some strawberries we don't like, and he may hold some views that I don't, but the one thing he does is not back down to this obsessive progressive group-think mental disorder that has run rampant worldwide. In my opinion, the ability to say what we want, think what we want, and to name the enemies we face without fear of irrational persecution is far more important than any other economic or social issues. That is why I find myself siding with Trump more and more often.
For the people who say that Hillary would be better... Are you mental? You wouldn't dare say that another Bush would be better would you? (I sure as hell wouldn't.) I don't understand why people are so easily persuaded and manipulated by these supposedly "moderate", lyring, two-faced career politicians that fall on whatever side of the spectrum suits them the best.
Hillary is a pathological liar. She has been caught on camera many times lying and refusing to admit to the lies she spewing during the SAME election season. The Obama campaign tore her campaign to shreds because of how untrustworthy and horrid of creature she is, and now that she is running against Trump we are going to forget all that happened because Trump said some politically incorrect "insensitive" things about muslims and mexicans?
Every (illegal) Mexican that comes over here is breaking our law. Muslims kill people all around the world every day at rates THOUSANDS of times higher than any other religion. Frankly, I don't give a fern about illegals because they don't care about our laws, and I don't care about the "hurt feelings" of muslims when it is primarily THEIR RELIGION causing all of the mass-murder in the modern age. Trump's reluctance to back down from these issues just makes me respect him more. If he ever cowered to these obsessive progressive morons he would be nothing more than any other of these squirmy, spineless, serpentine frauds that have run America for the last 20-30 years.
-
I've noticed that leftists seem to have a rather bizarre ranking system - with Female lesbian Black Muslim at the top (if you can find one before she is killed) and White Christian Heterosexual Male at the bottom. The thing is - Muslim ranks above Black or white male or female (I am aware that Muslims are either one of the two, but the point is the ranking system). So if non-Muslim women or gays think that the left will protect them, they better think again. Islam trumps all in the left's insane pecking order.
That is the Progressive Stack, which coincidentally is also an example of leftists appropriating terms from the hard sciences and engineering (Computer Science in this case) to make their nuttery sound legitimate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_stack
^Leftypedia
https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2mxe5l/progressive_stack_ows_and_defeating_far_left/
^Examples from the OWS
http://www.antifeministtech.info/2011/10/the-progressive-stack-will-not-help-you/
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2011/10/12/occupy-wall-street-white-men-last/
https://i.imgur.com/QQQ0Org.jpg
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2014/04/comrades-and-cannibals-odium-theologicum-on-the-modern-left/
The progressive stack is applied intersectional feminist socialism theory.
When socialist states implemented their forced equality, there were still differences between individuals and groups of individuals. Instead of taking the obvious gambit - these are probably the result of biological differences in individuals - they just assumed that they weren't being socialist enough, and they endeavored to be socialist not just in terms of economics and politics, but in terms of EVERYTHING. Thus you have Black Lives Matters protestors freaking out over a few thugs getting shot and ignoring:
1. White people being far more likely to be shot by cops than black people,
2. Black people committing far more crime per capita than white people, and
3. The huge body of published scientific research on the fields of heritable mental and psychological traits such as intelligence and behavior.
Also, I was a liberal until around the age of 8. I lived on a rough neighbourhood and saw the scummy thug types laughing at the law and creating misery all around them. Back then, I used to wonder why the people on TV were saying things that made no sense - things that I knew were false (like "helping" thugs and "rehabilitation". They just needed to be understood - and other nonsense). I figured that I was too young to understand. One day, years later, it dawned on me that at 8 years of age, I was smarter and more clued up in how the world really is than most of the liberal elite and government.
And it's only gotten worse since.
I hope you have kids, my friend.
-
God, she's awful. Banging on about "first woman president" - hoping that will be enough to win over enough women voters and gain power. It's so damn transparent and pathetic.
- edit
Ah, interesting. I wasn't aware it was documented :P As for kids, although I am sure I'd be a great dad, I will not bring them into this world as it stands. Certainly not this useless country (Britain) as it currently stands. Maybe if I were loaded....
-
Ah, interesting. I wasn't aware it was documented :P As for kids, although I am sure I'd be a great dad, I will not bring them into this world as it stands. Certainly not this useless country (Britain) as it currently stands. Maybe if I were loaded....
You'd rather British women marry muslims?
-
Most people aren't like me, so it will be fine. But what I'd rather is the electorate wising up or, failing that, the human race just dying off because it's an insult to earth for us to keep on breeding with the current level of ignorance.
I am not against a Muslim and a non Muslim having a family - as long as it's an extreme moderate/benign interpretation of the respective religions (something that's very hard to realize with Islam, sadly, because of Muhammad). But if it's a relationship based on forcing a partner into being a second class citizen - or beating them - or forcing them to adhere to opinions or behaviours they do not want... then No.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxf5n7NuIAc
That's why Trump is great. Because he is saying something that Obama and Hillary won't. If he wasn't around - the'd just ignore the elephant in the room. They are trying to even now but he isn't letting them. That's why freedom of speech is such an important thing - it let's the truth out.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFIVXkJWzfA
I'll pop open the wine if this guy is elected. It looks to me like people are finally getting sick of Islam and are not afraid of saying it. The cloud of PC and liberalism is finally dispersing.
He's intelligent as hell. And they must be tearing their hair out. How do you come back to someone pointing out that 130 people were killed in a country with tough gun laws - when your argument is that tough gun laws will stop mass murder? You can't. It's an insane and illogical argument by people who don't want to accept the awful truth - and are using this to peddle their anti gun propaganda. Hillary and Obama are well aware that with guns out of the way, America would be as useless and defenceless as Europe. Just look at Germany- Merkel is laughing her head off at the electorate and no one can do a thing about the traitor.
They laughed at Trump - but they ain't laughing now. The left are a joke and a freak show - they continually underestimate their enemies and are limited by their myopic view of the world and their lackluster imagination.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmyGC96ClcE
He can be a ponderous listen, but it's a 101 on why we are committing suicide with useless appeasers at the helm.
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3641384/Angry-Obama-hits-Trump-aftermath-Orlando-attack-won-t-say-radical-Islam.html#comments
What leftism is Rule 1. Appeasement. To be a good leftist, you need to be a good appeaser. Counting down the days until this donkey is out of power.
Rule 2. Denial. Your agenda and ideology is perfect - so if something goes wrong, it cannot possibly be your agenda at fault. Just keep shaking your head (if you can shake it while it's embedded in sand).
This is a very encouraging sign....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3641118/KATIE-HOPKINS-won-t-Left-admit-inconvenient-truth-Islam-hates-love.html#comments
That would never ever have been printed in the British press 10 years ago. But the gloves are coming off.
-
Oh come on man, just watch this, she'll make far more sense
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqYJRc0TJkQ&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqYJRc0TJkQ&feature=youtu.be)
-
I think the big eye opener in all this is that gays have finally found out that they have more of a friend in the right than they do in the left. I imagine that comes as quite a shock to them. But it really isn't. The leftist approach is all about furthering its own agenda, creating division, and garnering votes. It does it with great success with its constant race baiting, for example. But until now, it's been hard to expose it to the masses. That's what I do thank Muslims for. It's shown up the blatant hypocrisy of the left. Gays have seen the weak and useless president for what he is - and have seen how the left will defend Islam over all else. I'd wager Trump will have had a MASSIVE boost in votes because of how well he handled the aftermath of that brutal attack - and how poorly Hillary did. Many of those votes will come from gay people.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-13/im-gay-activist-after-orlando-i-have-switched-my-vote-trump
As if by magic - a good example is found.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLqkizGtFo0
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipqS6MmxDmk
Introducing Alexander Jahans, a truly eloquent spokesman for the left.
https://www.youtube.com/user/farshnuke/videos
-
haha.... ;) indeed!
-
Rule 3. Hide the truth. The truth is the enemy. Change words and phrases so that the elephant in the room is removed. Rewrite history.
http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/06/21/judge-napolitano-doj-comprised-its-credibility-mishandling-orlando-transcripts
-
Rule 3. Hide the truth. The truth is the enemy. Change words and phrases so that the elephant in the room is removed. Rewrite history.
http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/06/21/judge-napolitano-doj-comprised-its-credibility-mishandling-orlando-transcripts
They're destroying their own support base.
-
Do they not even realize how absurd they look?
-
God I hope Britbongs don't shoot themselves in the foot and remain. November can't come soon enough.
-
I wouldn't be surprised if "we" do. The people of Britain have been dumbed down for decades - and many of them see the EU as a "hand out" club of benefits. They don't see any of the wider arguments. The working class are their own worst enemy - they decry lack of school places, lack of homes, NHS waiting times, massive immigration - and then go and vote for an organization that creates many of those problems and wants to admit Turkey. It also has a "free movement" open border policy that is crippling our economies and security. Many in my family have suffered hardship due to leftist policies but they still vote left and EU. I really don't know what to say.
-
Just heard that Britain has officially Voted to leave the EU. This'll get messy for those that still remain. Britain may not have gotten anything out of them, but they won't be as strong as they were.
-
Whoa, this sounds like a big deal. I should start buying UK stocks, the pound is tanking
-
It isn't tanking at all - it's simply what happens under this kind of change. It will stabilize. Things will be a vast improvement for most people away from that lying deceitful organization - that puts Islam and migration above women and everyone else for that matter. That interferes with everything and is a big undemocratic dinosaur that costed Britain a fortune in membership fees. I can hardly believe that we actually voted out. A proud day for Britain - specifically England and Wales - to finally be rid of the EU. Europe yes. EU no.
We will do fine. We were once a military superpower - and we were not part of the EU when this happened. We were not some silly powerless country before the EU 40 years ago either.
What would have been weak would be being governed by people we cannot elect.
Hello sovereignty! Bye bye EU.
Edit.
I must confess to having a lot of fun this morning reading all the rants from the remainers - the usual "You are a raaaaaycist" doing the rounds. The left still in a state of denial and still making the same errors that pushed so many to leave. Calling people a racist for voicing legitimate concerns is long past its sell by date.
-
The Pound has reserve funds to keep it from tanking long-term. Of course it was going to go down if the exit went through, but nearly a century of economics have taught banks how to stall such a decline.
We will do fine. We were once a military superpower - and we were not part of the EU when this happened. We were not some silly powerless country before the EU 40 years ago either.
That's an outdated argument too. You were a military superpower in WWII and have not had to be since. There have been major advancements in industry and design of war machines since then. Forgive me it this analogy doesn't apply, but it sounds like you're claiming you can be a smartphone hacker because you developed for Windows 3.1.
A proud day for Britain - specifically England and Wales - to finally be rid of the EU.
Scotland and Ireland say "HELP US, EU!!" What would it do to the UK to lose them? Admittedly, probably not much, but they don't feel like the UK is enough for them. If they leave then you are the odd ones out.
What would have been weak would be being governed by people we cannot elect.
This is the strongest argument for leaving the under represented EU. This is also why the US left England. UK was the EU's trump card economically and now it's lost it.
I must confess to having a lot of fun this morning reading all the rants from the remainers - the usual "You are a raaaaaycist" doing the rounds. The left still in a state of denial and still making the same errors that pushed so many to leave. Calling people a racist for voicing legitimate concerns is long past its sell by date.
Meat and potatoes time: leaving the EU would NOT have even come up if the EU weren't expressing refugees to the Isle in the first place. You can site other compounding issues leading up to it and even claim that the US Civil War wasn't about slavery, but it was the tipping point. As such you can see how the rest of the world, who are more focused on their own political problems, view your vote as a direct response to the influx of publicly unwanted refugees. It makes you appear racist and uncaring.
Again, rebuttal that you don't care how others are misinterpreting the entire situation, but that's always going to color their dealings with you in the future.
Devil's advocate aside, I wish Britain all the best of luck with what will certainly be an uncertain transition from conglomerate member to standalone sovereignty. It can work in Britain's favor for sure.
-
Scottish and N. Irish folks and MPs are asking for independence votes and it's looking likely, many Scots, myself included, voted to stay in the UK in order to continue being part of the EU in the first place and now a difference of 1.4 million people has shat all over that plan.
As a side note, the current UK immigration issue is a problem regardless of us being in the EU or not, so using it as a reason for voting leave is plain stupid, we'll still get literal truckloads of them coming in for years to come.
-
As a clueless outsider just looking at the poll results, the average opinion across the UK looked pretty conflicted. Does that mean that the UK is going to break up eventually?
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJMHygzczYg
@knifethesky Scotland and NI really have no political power to break free (and Southern Ireland don't want to reunite). The English (UK) parliament holds the power and can deny them a referendum. Scotland has just had one - so I doubt it will be granted another. But I wouldn't be bothered either way. I assume financially, it would be a bad thing if it left, but I don't know.
As a side note, the current UK immigration issue is a problem regardless of us being in the EU or not, so using it as a reason for voting leave is plain stupid, we'll still get literal truckloads of them coming in for years to come.
No, it really isn't. Inside the EU we HAD to have open borders. We were part of free movement and we had NO way to stop it. No way to elect anyone who was against it and implement any change. Soon, Turkey will also be fast tracked into the club - and that's another ton who will make their way to European countries. Germany had admitted 1 million migrants - a large proportion of those people would also be heading to Britain LEGALLY if we were part of the EU.
We are now a full sovereign state. A lot of problems to fix - and I agree with the turds we have in charge, it won't be fixed overnight... but at least now we a chance. And at least now we are governing ourselves. That's democracy, folks. The EU is anything but and it's gonna die.
-
https://www.rt.com/uk/346505-brexit-how-long-leave/, while UK may now be officially out of the EU, negotiations still need to be held to formalize it. Some excerpts: "Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty says that a member state seeking to leave the EU has two-years to complete negotiations on how it will withdraw and what it’s relationship with the bloc will be like post-Brexit.".
Also,
"Although contractual ties could be dissolved in two years, Tusk said that getting every country to approve the agreement could take much longer.
“Every single one of the 27 member states as well as the European parliament would have to approve the overall result. That would take at least five years, and I'm afraid, without any guarantee of success.”"
The bolded passage implies that the process could be stalled or even reversed by fellow members and the European Parliament. I doubt it, however, the negotiations may indeed go a long time before things like EU legislation are actually phased out.
I predict hard times for UK, not because of Brexit itself (which I support), but because the elites in power, who still support the EU, are going to sabotage and blame all the post-vote ills on the final result, even though initial economic problems were always gonna happen no matter how bad or good the leadership was. With these crooks in power, however, it's definitely not gonna be as smooth. It's not out of question that after UK's economy suffers a slump, that they'll propose another referendum "to discuss things more soberly now", probably even citing the fact that only slightly under 49% were against it. strawberries, am I giving them ideas? :P
NFITC1, opposition to immigration is perfectly legitimate due to identitarian and economic problems. Despite media disinformation in that respect, most of the people that entered Europe in 2015 weren't even refugees. It's deceptive to constantly show images of children and old people when young men of fighting age who were surprisingly healthy were and probably still are the most represented demographic of people freely entering Europe and against the best wishes of native Europeans.
-
It won't be reversed. Some people are holding on to a hope that simply isn't possible. We are out of the EU - and it's already started. The leaders of the EU are already on record as saying they want us out as fast as possible.
Even in the 1000000000-1 chance they even tried, there would be mass riots. I'd be one of the participants.
The majority of people who are clinging on to this hope that it can be blocked or reversed are in a state of denial - Another thing the left excel at.
NFITC1, opposition to immigration is perfectly legitimate due to identitarian and economic problems. Despite media disinformation in that respect, most of the people that entered Europe in 2015 weren't even refugees. It's deceptive to constantly show images of children and old people when young men of fighting age who were surprisingly healthy were and probably still are the most represented demographic of people freely entering Europe and against the best wishes of native Europeans.
Spot on. TO get to Britain you need to have gone through quite a few safe countries. It's a fact that all of them are entering Britain with no legal right to do so - and it's also a fact that most aren't even fleeing Syria. Sadly, most are also Muslims from the most backward countries there are - who then create massive issues with lack of cohesion and religious intolerance in the country they have resettled in. No thanks.
-
If you want a laugh, read the BBC low rated comments - or the Guardian comments. Check it out.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36615028
What a day eh!
So brexit voters, repeat after me:
'i'm not racist'
'i'm not racist'
'i'm not racist'
'i'm not racist'
'i'm not racist'
'i'm not racist'
(ok, it's really about immigration)
Great.
Kick out the foreigners and get British people on benefits pulling up carrots, trimming lettuces and doing the jobs nobody else wants to do.
No foreigners will ever take a 'British' job again.
Rejoice all bigots and xenophobes.
The markets will call this day black Friday which is ironic, considering how racist we are
It's really funny stuff!!! Still haven't learned that the racist card has lost all power.
-
I don't think it's necessarily racist to want to limit who can enter such a small piece of land like the UK, compared to the US. But who cares if it's racist, you can do whatever you want now.
-
The Guardian is actually even funnier. They're so pissed off that they want the vote to be rerun, which should give you an idea of just what lunatics they are. Here are some of the gems:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/24/petition-second-eu-referendum-crashes-house-of-commons-website#comments
Tarantella 6h ago
Given the enormity of the outcome, the slenderness of the lead, the faux politicking behind the whole thing and the fact that the outcome isn't apparently binding --- please let's have a legal challenge. Maybe we can appeal to the European courts? Class action, perhaps?That would be good.
This deluded weirdo is suggesting that the EU itself veto the vote on us leaving the EU. Something that isn't even remotely possible or constitutional. But desperation of the far left is always ultra abnormal.
nonpcman
"Britain has spoken". What rubbish. Half of Britain has belched vitriol and bigotry with little consideration of the consequences. Give us our referendum back!
This poor fellow doesn't even seem to understand the point of a referendum or the fact we just had one. He "wants it back". Well, better go find Doc Brown or a Flux Capacitor.
bartelbe Chrispytl 5h ago
It is simple, if the number of people signing this outnumbers those who voted to leave the referendum is invalid. Not likely to happen, but the maths is simple.
Perhaps most hilarious of all, this deluded individual believes that an online petition should supersede a referendum held under parliamentary rules and with voting safeguards. The desperation is laughable.
diabur
It as beyond ludicrous that such a complex, complicated, critical and far-reaching decision should have been put to a referendum decision.
Many voting had no idea what the whole thing was about ..... but did so because they don't like foreigners.
Haha. Clearly a lover of democracy and people power. Referendums are held precisely BECAUSE the issue is so important. But shhhh, don't tell diabur.
Loatheallpoliticians fourcandles303 5h ago
A second vote, to confirm one way or another and I suspect we'll get one.
Of course if you are so sure you are right then why the problem?
Scotland will get a 2nd vote and if for instance UK parties stand on a mandate of holding a 2nd vote and get elected then they have a democratic mandate to hold another referendum.
You can't bind the future if enough people want another say. The decision was so stupid, so damaging, so driven by lies and the ill educated lower classes being conned that I think another vote will be almost inevitable at some point.
What Leftism is.
I have got up early to go into work, although it is my day off. I cannot sleep because I am so depressed at what has happened. I simply do not want to see or talk to my two UKIP neighbours, both of whom have boasted to me 'I have got my country back', for fear of telling them what I think of them.
My daughters and their friends are devasted at the way the older generations have blighted their future, and my husband and I are devasted for them. These young people will have to carry the burden of the economic downturn to come, whilst the older generations will sit smugly demanding their pensions, and free this and that. I feel ashamed of being British. I wish I could leave.
Hahahaha! Yeah, because old people have not contributed to the economy all their working lives, have they? And older people aren't as wise as 18 year olds, are they? :-D
-
Dan,
you know I am a great admirer and supporter of your work here so I won't discuss politics to avoid any kind of friction.
I just wanted to ask you, do you feel EU has been a wasted opportunity for Europe? What could have been done, in your opinion, to make it work better? I am genuinely sorry to see the UK go because it makes me think we are a little more distant again.
Best of luck. To us all.
-
Most people believe that the EU started with honourable intentions. It was originally put to the people in the 1970s and sold as a common market. The idea was that we'd be joining a union of trade. I happen to believe the population was hoodwinked and it was really all about a socialist empire of Europe all along. If they had told people their real aims from the word go, nobody would have joined it. But that's what devious politicians do when it comes to an unpopular idea - they slowly introduce it bit by bit. The slippery slope. Who would vote for a loss of sovereignty?
The young of today have grown up only knowing the EU. They don't remember when we were self governed. They see the EU like I did when I was 16 - "We're one happy family of people. We are stronger together." ( I used to be Pro EU when I was 16-20. I also wanted to join the Euro.) This would be true if the EU had been really thought out from the beginning, but it wasn't.
Take the idea of free movement of people: sounds like a great idea - but it's only a great idea in a UTOPIAN SOCIETY, which does not exist. In reality, allowing everyone in Europe to travel unrestricted to other European countries has simply been exploited by really bad people. This is because the EU is a leftist institution. It has grand ideas, but never thinks further than what it dreams society to be. The ordinary people suffer.
Another disaster has been the settlement of migrants. Again, on paper, you'd think "Aw, they are fleeing persecution and need our help." In reality, most of these "fleeing persecution" are economic migrants abusing the situation to gain entry into a better country. The vast majority are Muslims who do not share Europe's beliefs on women or homosexuals, for example. In other words, it's another policy that has been devised because of what they want it to be rather than the reality on the ground. Desire: Aren't we so liberal and tolerant and nice. Reality: Massive rise in crime and intolerance. Terrorists paradise. Massive lack of social cohesion.
Other examples of it getting in the way are tough laws against criminals. Criminals have relentlessly exploited the EU Court of Human Rights to escape justice. Desire: Protect the rights of people. Reality: Exploited by criminals and greedy lawyers.
If that wasn't bad enough, the EU is a bloated and massively bureaucratic organization. It stands to reason that so many countries governed under one authority will be harder to govern than each one looking after their own interests. The issue is that by the time they finally get around to debating terrorism or issues regarding mass migration, it's already too late. Far too late.
What I am trying to say is that the EU was always doomed to fail. Without a huge effort from the beginning to make sure that freedoms were not abused and that loopholes did not exist, it was always going to be a liberal's wet dream and end in total destruction. Even if Britain had voted remain, it would have eventually collapsed. The left and the right usually have the same goal in mind - but the left seem to be very handy at dreaming away big obstacles rather than tackling them or debating them. The arrogance of the EU is astounding. It has simply never listened, because it thinks it knows best.
The left's biggest problem is that it has crossed the finishing line before it has run the race. That arrogant twit (let's pretend that's a typo) Bob Geldof is another fool. He helped to raise millions of dollars for Africa in the hope of abolishing poverty - but he didn't use his tiny brain for one second to ask if the money would be misused. It was. A massive amount of the money generated was used to buy weapons and made a situation worse (http://www.spin.com/featured/live-aid-the-terrible-truth-ethiopia-bob-geldof-feature/).
You see the pattern here? Crossing the finishing line without running the race. Not thinking about any of the huge problems that will arise from a good intention. This is played out on shows like Star Trek all the time - but there it's nearly always shown that good intentions lead to good outcomes. The real world does not work that way. The woolly minded left think based on feeling. They feel good giving money, therefore it is good. People like to feel good, and it leads them to do things without actually understanding a complicated situation for what it is. Bob Geldof should be nowhere near any big political decision. He is simply not intelligent enough to grasp reality. He thinks up policy based on whether it makes HIM feel good.
Finally, do you think this (http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/06/25/15/35A6EC3700000578-3659769-image-a-30_1466865800530.jpg) silly clown (protesting for a second referendum) lives in an area of high poverty, high migrants? I doubt it.
-
Or to put it even simpler... if the EU was really a good thing for ordinary people, why after 40 years did the majority vote to Leave? It's had 42 years to get things right and make life better for people - and it's done the opposite. It's useless.
-
I believe your arguments to be sensible, Dan.
And thanks for taking time to present them with such care.
I am not sure I'd say the left and the right have usually the same goal in mind but perhaps I misunderstood what you meant with it. I suppose you like to remind us that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. A waste of resources is indeed a pain to witness.
-
NFITC1, opposition to immigration is perfectly legitimate due to identitarian and economic problems. Despite media disinformation in that respect, most of the people that entered Europe in 2015 weren't even refugees. It's deceptive to constantly show images of children and old people when young men of fighting age who were surprisingly healthy were and probably still are the most represented demographic of people freely entering Europe and against the best wishes of native Europeans.
Oh, indeed. I had no delusions to the opposite. It's just that because OF THAT that the British said "enough" and voted to leave. That's not the only reason to leave, but it was the tipping point. Allowing free movement from France to Britain will allow all sorts of "legal Europeans" into the country. Oh wait, this is almost exactly what is going on between Mexico and the US except it here it's illegal.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbZ9EIOQzXU
-
Oh, indeed. I had no delusions to the opposite. It's just that because OF THAT that the British said "enough" and voted to leave. That's not the only reason to leave, but it was the tipping point. Allowing free movement from France to Britain will allow all sorts of "legal Europeans" into the country. Oh wait, this is almost exactly what is going on between Mexico and the US except it here it's illegal.
What's wrong with illegals, goy? Don't like not getting a raise in the past 20 years? Here, let me import a few million h1b visa workers from China and India - and you know what, I'll pay you to train them to do your job!
-
https://www.instagram.com/babesfortrump/
https://www.instagram.com/babesforhillary/
-
Even in the 1000000000-1 chance they even tried, there would be mass riots. I'd be one of the participants.
Haha. I've liked reading DLPB's political posts when I come here, strange to see it on an FF forum - but whatever :)
This is definitely a victory for the "right" people, which personally makes me happy. The EU is corrupt as hell and would have us all fighting some BS US-led war against Russia alongside the Turks. The globalists will no doubt realize this will never happen now - I believe other EU citizens will have the same resolve as the Brits in voting out of that madness.
Now is a good time for Britain to reform not only education but also diplomatic ties with countries like Russia to make up for the BS in the past. I mean the US/UK tried to overthrow a modern islamic leader (Assad) and replace him with hardcore religious nuts, it's lunacy. We created a permanent enemy for no reason and I feel ashamed, and no-one is even talking about it.
None of the above is likely to happen though, it's not even on the agenda. Seems like a massive missed opportunity - Britain just doesn't have any real leaders. I hope I'm wrong though. But regardless of whether Britain swings to the left or the right from here (some leftist groups also voted out like Galloway's lot), the bigger picture looks good. Globalism has been stopped dead in it's tracks forcing the EU to cut back from expansion (or risk even more countries voting out), this leaves an opportunity for a growing Russia (building a huge trade corridor with China) to either politically, culturally or economically "take over" certain Eastern European countries - the end result being a Europe run more along the lines of Russian policy as the EU further decays/weakens.
Is that a good thing? IMO, yes. The obvious alliance and connections between right-wing groups and Russia is not as unholy an alliance as the left have with decadent Islam. And as the left is naturally weaker, they will surely fail unless World War III is launched (wouldn't put it past them).
Countries like Japan who are strongly allied to the US will be in some trouble too I think (unless Trump is elected, but I fear the US may be too far gone), so there will neeed to be some reform in their outlook of other countries there too. Definitely need to put the whole South Korea-Japan thing to bed.
Haven't seen such an event happen since 9/11. It's huge really in what it could mean for the world.
-
The nuclear weapon has ironically been the greatest thing for peace. It has stopped many major war through the sheer fear of M.A.D. Unfortunately, there is another type of mad... Islam. And some of these crazy bastards don't fear destruction. Iran is one. Thanks to Obama, they are closer now than ever. But Israel won't sit around waiting. Believe it.
-
The nuclear weapon has ironically been the greatest thing for peace. It has stopped many major war through the sheer fear of M.A.D. Unfortunately, there is another type of mad... Islam. And some of these crazy bastards don't fear destruction. Iran is one. Thanks to Obama, they are closer now than ever. But Israel won't sit around waiting. Believe it.
I think Iran could go either way right now, China just refused it entry to the SCO despite Russia's backing - probably because it could cause some tensions with the US. Might be only temporary though. Personally I don't think Iran would use nukes unless seriously provoked. They also helped fight ISIS. But who knows, they could be gearing up for something - Middle East is messed up.
I'm not sure why my title says "Crazy poster" now. Haha, but I assure you I'm not :P (Just kidding, I know its part of ranking system)
-
Fighting IS doesn't really mean much when you read into Islam... basically all of its divisions are bad. And many of them argue on the caliphate. They all believe IN a caliphate, the question to them is who is the true bannerman.
-
Fighting IS doesn't really mean much when you read into Islam... basically all of its divisions are bad. And many of them argue on the caliphate. They all believe IN a caliphate, the question to them is who is the true bannerman.
No, they don't. Where are you getting your information from, Israelis?
There are 3 major divisions of Islam, and various non-Islamic sects (they aren't considered Muslims by anyone except themselves, and sometimes not even then).
Sunni are the expansionists. They want a global caliphate. They are something like 85% of all Muslims. Notable countries/regions include Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Chechnya, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Islamic State, most of North Africa, Malaysia, and Indonesia. In other words, what you usually hear when you find out the ethnic group of a terrorist. These are the retards you see yelling "Allahu Ackbar!" in videos because they believe that god guides the paths of their bullets (hence their inability to aim).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunni_Islam
Shia are the second major division. They pretty much want to be left alone to hang their gays and stone adulterers in their own countries. They are about 11% of all Muslims (and of course Sunni and Shia don't consider one another Muslims, and hate each other). Notable countries include Iran, Assad's Syria, and ethnic enclaves in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and Lebanon. As long as you don't fight them, don't let them into your country, and mind their laws in their countries you will never have an issue with them. These people are currently fighting Islamic State. There are Christian and Yazidi units in their militias in Lebanon and in Syria. Christians in Lebanon prefer their militias and paramilitary units over those of Israel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shia_Islam
The third division - the Ibadi - exist only in Oman. They are so mild-mannered that I didn't even know they existed until about a year ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibadi
Other weirdos include the Druze (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Druze) and the Yazidi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yazidis). They are mostly harmless.
Jews are very closely related to Palestinians, and Palestinians have screwed over every community that tried to help them. Don't believe anything any of these paranoid middle-eastern tribes say about one another until you actually research it yourself.
-
No, I'm getting my information from the Koran, historians like Robert Spencer, Hamas, Saudi Arabia and a dozen more. Islam is and has always been backward. It's leader, Muhammad, was a war mongering conquerer - something that isn't disputed by the Koran, Hadith, or historians.
It isn't going to change the fact that Muhammad killed people, had child brides, said the things he did, and conquered Mecca.
Iran wants a caliphate. So does Hamas. So does Saudi. So does IS.
-
No, I'm getting my information from the Koran, historians like Robert Spencer, Hamas, Saudi Arabia and a dozen more. Islam is and has always been backward. It's leader, Muhammad, was a war mongering conquerer - something that isn't disputed by the Koran, Hadith, or historians.
It isn't going to change the fact that Muhammad killed people, had child brides, said the things he did, and conquered Mecca.
It's debatable if he even existed. Therefore it all comes down to what the specific books and religious/clerical traditions say.
Sunni books and traditions explicitly say that they must go out and convert the unbelievers, either by guile or by war. There is no compromise for this. Therefore, Sunni are on average complete shitheads.
Shia books and traditions basically say to stay put, protect your people and your lands, stay faithful, and wait for the 12th Imam to appear.
Iran wants a caliphate. So does Hamas. So does Saudi. So does IS.
Iran IS a caliphate - a Shia caliphate. What you see in Iran is the entirety of their religious practice, which basically amounts to doing whatever the fuck they want within the borders of their nations/enclaves, protecting other Shia from Sunni or Israel, and cooperating with people of other religions without trying to convert them.
Compare Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah to Islamic State, which is a Sunni organization that considers itself a Sunni caliphate.
Here's something else: Pakistan has nukes. Pakistan is a Sunni state. Pakistan literally helps the Taliban and protected Osama Bin Laden. Yet you don't see Pakistan all over the news, but you do see Iran. Could it be because Iran threatens Israel's encroachment on Lebanese and Syrian soil? Hmmm, I wonder!
Literally the only reason we've got a hamster up our collective asses about Iran is because Israel doesn't like them. I don't give a fuck about that. Israel is a big boy; Israel can take care of it's own messes.
What I don't understand is why you defend Israel when Israel has threatened multiple times to nuke capitals of European nations if we don't help them. Would you help China if China threatened to nuke our ethnic homelands? No? Then why are you such a cuckold over Israel? Israel doesn't give a flying fuck about you, Israelis have stolen state secrets from the USA numerous times, Israelis gave the secrets of the nuclear bomb to the Soviets.
Are you so house-broken by progressives that whenever you would have a patriotic impulse to protect your own people, you instead feel patriotism over Israel?
According to Haaretz - surely the most anti-semetic news source on Earth - Christians are routinely spat on by right-wing Ultra Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem.
http://www.haaretz.com/christians-in-jerusalem-want-jews-to-stop-spitting-on-them-1.137099
The first principle of being right-wing is to preserve your own people and defend your homeland. Technically, this means that right-wingers in one country would get along great with left-wingers in another country who want to bring them in, at least until the right-wingers are a majority. That's the mistake that left-wingers make with Muslims.
Just because someone is right wing doesn't automatically make them an ally, or even a friend. They must also be part of your group, either ethnic or religious. Thus Israel is not our ally, but neither is Iran. That doesn't mean that we should hate them; it means we shouldn't interfere with their business nor should they interfere with ours.
-
IS isn't a caliphate. It desires to be one and to own enough land / control to be a legitimate one. Saudi doesn't recognize IS as a true caliphate. That's the thing - that's why some of the crazy lunatic countries like Saudi and Iran will fight IS - despite agreeing with their overall message. IS undermine their authority.
Also, while I agree Judaism and all religions are hardly bastions of open mindedness - they aren't blowing people up all over the world or using nuclear weapons, despite having them. I wouldn't trust Iran with a popsicle. Israel has shown amazing restraint. If you were a people constantly threatened on all sides by Islamic aggression - had rockets routinely fired at your people - and had countries openly calling for your very destruction - how would you behave?
Israel and Jews are not the problem. Islam is.
Calling me a progressive is a bit silly, since I am constantly at the opposite end of the political spectrum from them. The BBC, for example, is clearly anti Israel. So is Obama and the current American administration. I am not sure why the Jews keep getting brought up when Islam is the religion killing and slaughtering - all over the world. Why are we even debating the Jews in this thread? They are not responsible for IS or suicide bombers or Muhammad or the Koran.
Also, if it's the conspiracy theory that Jews enjoy spreading Islamic destruction, then I would just point out that no true Jewish person would want their own destruction - because Islam and Islamic doctrine is vehemently opposed to them. That's why they are under attack from all sides in the Middle East. The idea that Jews are behind the scenes plotting to help Muslims is far fetched, to say the least.
-
Meanwhile people had been worried that Brexit would mean the end of the Euromillions lottery. It won't.
-
IS isn't a caliphate. It desires to be one and to own enough land / control to be a legitimate one. Saudi doesn't recognize IS as a true caliphate. That's the thing - that's why some of the crazy lunatic countries like Saudi and Iran will fight IS - despite agreeing with their overall message. IS undermine their authority.
DLPB, the one true authority on Islam who couldn't tell the difference between Sunni and Shia. You're acting like those liberals who are 100% authorities on Islam, even more so than actual Muslims themselves who kill Europeans in the name of Islam.
If IS declares that they are a caliphate, I'm inclined to believe them. If it looks like a duck, if it walks like a duck, if it acts like a duck, and if other ducks around the world treat it as if it is a duck - then it's probably a duck.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/06/abu-bakr-al-baghdadi-isis
Baghdadi was born Ibrahim Awad al-Badari in 1971 near Samarra, a city 50 miles north of Baghdad. He took a master's degree and a PhD in Islamic studies at the University of Islamic Sciences in the Baghdad suburb of Adhamiya. When the US invaded Iraq in March 2003, the pious Baghdadi was still studying and was not thought to be connected to either al-Qaida or its local offshoot in the early years of resistance.
http://news.siteintelgroup.com/blog/index.php/entry/226-the-story-behind-abu-bakr-al-baghdadi
A professor, teacher, former educator, recognized preacher, and a graduate of the Islamic University in Baghdad, where he finished his academic studies (BA, MA and PhD). He is known as a preacher and a person of knowledge in Islamic culture, Shariah knowledge, and jurisprudence, and possessing vast knowledge of history and lineage. He had extensive relationships and a clear influence on members of his tribe in Diyala and Samarra, to the extent that they declared, by their own free will and their total certainty, their pledge allegiance to the Islamic State of Iraq and its first emir, Abu Omar al-Baghdadi al-Qurashi. They pledged allegiance to the Emir and his State when it was first created and appeared on the jihadi battlefield in Iraq in the official declaration of the State in the last ten days of Ramadan 2006. Afterwards, Dr. Ibrahim Awwad was recognized as one of the most prominent figures of Salafist Jihadism and its most recognized proponent in Diyala and in the city of Samarra through the Mosque of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, may Allah have mercy on him.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28560449
Turki al-Binali's tract continued by highlighting that prior to the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, Baghdadi received his PhD from the Islamic University of Baghdad, with a focus on Islamic culture, history, sharia, and jurisprudence.
Do you have a PhD in Islamic Studies? Technically you've lived your entire life in the Caliphate of Albion, but he lived in Iraq and later Syria his entire life. He's a little closer to the source of Islam than even your average Londonian.
Besides that, Saudi Arabia is doing a shit job of fighting IS:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/iraq-crisis-how-saudi-arabia-helped-isis-take-over-the-north-of-the-country-9602312.html
Also, while I agree Judaism and all religions are hardly bastions of open mindedness - they aren't blowing people up all over the world or using nuclear weapons, despite having them. I wouldn't trust Iran with a popsicle. Israel has shown amazing restraint. If you were a people constantly threatened on all sides by Islamic aggression - had rockets routinely fired at your people - and had countries openly calling for your very destruction - how would you behave?
Well I wouldn't invade my Shia neighbors - as Israel did in 1978 and 1982 - and treat them so bad that they literally form a Shia militia to defend themselves. You'd think that the Israelis (who nominally invaded to oust the PLO) would be smart enough to work with a people who were glad to be out from under the boot of the PLO.
Considering that the Israeli policy in the event of a military defeat is to launch nuclear weapons - combined with their non-stop militancy against their neighbors - it can hardly be said that Israel is a rational actor in the middle east.
Israel and Jews are not the problem. Islam is.
http://www.newsweek.com/2014/05/16/israel-wont-stop-spying-us-249757.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Pollard
http://www.businessinsider.com/israeli-spying-on-us-has-reached-terrifying-levels-2014-5
https://theintercept.com/2015/03/25/netanyahus-spying-denial-directly-contradicted-secret-nsa-documents/
http://www.merip.org/mer/mer138/israeli-spies-us
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_and_Ethel_Rosenberg
Calling me a progressive is a bit silly, since I am constantly at the opposite end of the political spectrum from them. The BBC, for example, is clearly anti Israel. So is Obama and the current American administration. I am not sure why the Jews keep getting brought up when Islam is the religion killing and slaughtering - all over the world. Why are we even debating the Jews in this thread? They are not responsible for IS or suicide bombers or Muhammad or the Koran.
http://www.jpost.com/National-News/Eritrean-migrants-resettled-from-Israel-to-Sweden-337414
^Israel airlifts illegals from Eritrea (a Muslim north African country) to Sweden.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFE0qAiofMQ
^Barbara Spectre wants to teach Europeans how to be multicultural.
Without Jewish people like Barbara Spectre, there wouldn't be as many Muslim invaders in Europe. Other than that, there are myriad examples of Jewish people being involved in subversive activities that target Europeans, for whatever reason. I only use sources that are Israeli publications or books that are written by Jewish people, to avoid conspiracy theories.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair
^A foiled Israeli false flag operation that was intended to kill Western tourists in Egypt and blame this on Muslims.
http://www.jewishquarterly.org/issuearchive/articled325.html?articleid=38
Extending the subversive thesis, Jewish involvement in the X-rated industry can be seen as a proverbial two fingers to the entire WASP establishment in America. Some porn stars viewed themselves as frontline fighters in the spiritual battle between Christian America and secular humanism. According to Ford, Jewish X-rated actors often brag about their ‘joy in being anarchic, sexual gadflies to the puritanical beast’. Jewish involvement in porn, by this argument, is the result of an atavistic hatred of Christian authority: they are trying to weaken the dominant culture in America by moral subversion. Astyr remembers having ‘to run or fight for it in grammar school because I was a Jew. It could very well be that part of my porn career is an “up yours” to these people’. Al Goldstein, the publisher of Screw, said (on lukeford.net), ‘The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think that Christ sucks. Catholicism sucks. We don’t believe in authoritarianism.’ Pornography thus becomes a way of defiling Christian culture and, as it penetrates to the very heart of the American mainstream (and is no doubt consumed by those very same WASPs), its subversive character becomes more charged. Porn is no longer of the ‘what the Butler saw’ voyeuristic type; instead, it is driven to new extremes of portrayal that stretch the boundaries of the porn aesthetic. As new sexual positions are portrayed, the desire to shock (as well as entertain) seems clear.
https://archive.org/details/AProgramForJewsAndHumanity
^Note that this was literally written by a Jewish Rabbi.
A Program for Jews and Humanity by Rabbi Harry Waton published by Committee for the Preservation of the Jews, New York City: Astoria Press, 1939.
This book declared that Jews will inherit the entire earth through the control and spread of Communism.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3342999,00.html
We mustn't forget that some of greatest murderers of modern times were Jewish
A Jewish publication notes that many member of the first Soviet government (who were responsible for the deaths of millions more than died in the Holocaust) where Jewish.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/06/books/review/the-chosen-getting-in.html
A Jewish man admits that Jewish people have "taken over" academia.
Also, if it's the conspiracy theory that Jews enjoy spreading Islamic destruction, then I would just point out that no true Jewish person would want their own destruction - because Islam and Islamic doctrine is vehemently opposed to them. That's why they are under attack from all sides in the Middle East. The idea that Jews are behind the scenes plotting to help Muslims is far fetched, to say the least.
1. You're not Jewish (are you?) so you can't rightly say what a true Jewish person would or would not believe or do.
2. The issue isn't that Israel helps Islamic State. The issue is that Israel prefers them (according to one of their defense ministers) over Iran. The Israeli airstrikes on Assad's forces clearly demonstrate their stated preference. I don't know about you, but I call airstrikes assistance.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4755215,00.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/01/19/israeli-defense-minister-if-i-had-to-choose-between-iran-and-isis-id-choose-isis/
http://www.timesofisrael.com/yaalon-i-would-prefer-islamic-state-to-iran-in-syria/
Israel is as much a problem as Muslims. They should both be deported to their homelands, so they can live in peace there (or not) and we can live in peace in our nations.
Simple fix: eliminate dual citizenship. Since all Jewish people are granted right of return by Israel, we could buy their assets and send them home. Israel definitely needs all the people it can get and would welcome the people it needs for defense, labor, and scientific research.
More than that, it seems that Jewish people are not comfortable in mono-ethnic and mono-religious societies. This is unfortunate, but if they have a problem with us then they are the ones who need to change. They have killed as many of us as we have of them, as demonstrated by the Holodomor and other Soviet atrocities, so the have no moral standing to cry about the Holocaust when we attempt to hold them to the same standards we hold ourselves. They need us more than we need them, as Barbara Spectre demonstrates when she "teaches us to be multicultural" by helping millions of Muslims to come to our lands and rape our sisters and daughters, abuse our benefits programs, and terrorize us with murder and violence (and the billions of dollars in assistance we give to Israel every year while our own infrastructure falls apart and our people sit idle).
tl;dr
If you are a Muslim or Jewish person, then you have to go back. (https://i.imgur.com/HqIMJVu.gif)
(https://i.imgur.com/HqIMJVu.gif)
-
All that changes absolutely nothing of what I said. 1000 Links won't. Islam is absolutely and totally opposed to Judaism and the Jewish people. That's a stonewall fact. It is an historical fact and verified very well by the Hadith and the Koran. Palestine [Hamas] is currently at war with Israel - mostly because Israel is Jewish. A Jewish person is not going to work behind the scenes to promote a religion or ideology that wants to see it destroyed. Iran, and Israel's neighbours, have consistently called for the state of Israel to be wiped off the map.
Anti Semitic conspiracy theories are just that: Anti Semitic conspiracy theories.
I am not concerned with Judaism. I'll start worrying about it when it has bombs strapped to it or it is running amok with AK 47s in multiple countries or flying planes into buildings.
Israel is the only real democratic country in the Middle East.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_in_the_Middle_East#Measures_of_Democracy
Perhaps concentrate your efforts on the fact that it is legal in around 10 Islamic countries to kill people for being homosexual - and many more where basic freedom is denied. Talk of Jews is a nonsense that needs to stop. I will go no further on that subject.
-
(https://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/66915958.jpg)
Meanwhile, very interesting development between Turkey, Israel and Russia. http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.727526 Turkey has formally apologised to Russia (never saw that coming) and formalized a "reconcilation pact" with Israel. Makes me wonder if Turkey will still go ahead and join the EU.
-
And what a disaster for the EU countries if it does. They've been pushing for this for ages. Turkey brings very little benefit for ordinary people of the EU - but it does bring mass migration. It's also one of the reasons we voted Leave.
-
DLPB, I agree with the all of your points on EU and most on Islam. Most, because confrontations between hostile powers do not occur at all times. Nazis collaborated with the Soviets from 1939 to 1941, and in fact Stalin instituted trade agreements with Germany after Hitler took power. We all know how much those two regimes were different and actually hated each other, apart from the police states they both instituted. Come to think of it, the democracies themselves allied with the Soviets, even though that regime is widely considered the most bloody in 20th Century, and slaughtered many millions of people prior to WW2, as well as in it (not as much afterwards). Jews helped the Muslim Moors invade Spain because their rights had been restricted under the Visigoths (though internal Christian infighting was also important in them being overrun by the invading armies) and hoped to attain a better situation under the Caliphate, which in fact they did for a while. In response, Christians persecuted Jews in Spain after 1492. CIA (which would be expected to install an US-backed type of democracy) actually overthrew democracies in Iran (1953) and Brazil (1964) and installed dictatorships. As you can see, just because countries, ideologies and religions dislike each other, doesn't mean they won't have truces or even temporary alliances for their own gains, as well as seemingly contradicting operations.
It's true that we shouldn't resort to extreme and wild unevidenced theories in regard to anything. With that said, however, I don't see what's wrong with BUILDWALL's post. Plenty of world famous people over the ages have stated similar concerns, including Cicero, Voltaire, Henry Ford, Napoleon Bonaparte, Cervantes, Chaucer, Churchill, Chekhov, Charles d*ckens, Dostoyevsky, Erasmus, Benjamin Franklin, Charles de Gaulle, Hegel, Heidegger, Shakespeare, Thomas Jefferson, Immanuel Kant, Goethe, Martin Luther, Tolstoy or Mark Twain. Are we going to simply dismiss their thoughts critical of Jews the same way the mass media dismisses and ridicules all criticism of Islam as "Islamophobia"? Anti-semitism is born out of both rational and irrational actions, and reasonable Jewish writers like Bernard Lazare, Hilaire Belloc and Samuel Roth (who like many Germans, also admit guilty actions in WW2) have written as much. If we're going to dismiss any criticism of a single group, why shouldn't we dismiss that of others as well? Why not dismiss all the obvious actions of Muslims over the last decades and before? Why not dismiss the killings by Christians in the Middle Ages? Why not claim the Soviet Union killed at most 5 million in its existence and also call as conspiracy theories statements to otherwise? If we're truly open-minded, we need to listen to all the points of view (including Muslims, which are one of the biggest and definitely the most visible threat to Europe) and not become like many close-minded Leftists, who say they're "liberal" and "tolerant", but then turn around and say "Anyone against multiculturalism is a racist!", "Controlling your borders is fascist!" or "Stop stereotyping, you privileged white male!".
I know you're listening to PJW, but people aren't flawless, while he's great on the EU, Leftists and Islam, for example, and I use him as a resource for that, he refuses to read the same kind of literature and material about Jewish people. However, it's also true that there are plenty of nice and hard-working Jewish people, and in fact 1871-1933 German Jews were highly influential in world science and arts. Hans Zimmerman and Howard Shore, for example, are outstanding modern composers. Einstein is pretty famous as well. There are way more examples, but it's enough for now. It's also true to anyone who reads Jewish history that they're incredibly lively, industrious and ethnocentric people, who have established Europe's modern banking houses and even Reuters, the first worldwide hub of international news. And because of their internal connections, they've used them to benefit themselves in times when anti-Semitism ran rampant, such as WW2. However, in the process they often also screwed other people, and it is these events that are at the heart of these "anti-Semitic conspiracy theories", which I dismissed the same way you once did the anti-EU statements. Just like there have been influential German, Turkish, Arab or Japanese extremists, there have existed Jewish ones over the span of history, and it would be abnormal if any person, let alone people, wouldn't resort sometimes to dubious actions for their own benefit. Plenty of literature from both Jews and non-Jews has been written about such incidents over the ages from highly-articulated, intelligent and well-read people, who referenced and sourced their findings, so I don't understand your knee-jerk reaction. But let's talk about Muslims now.
Unfortunately, they're a serious problem in Europe, and no PC wallowing can change the facts. They've created no-go zones, where police and special services are afraid to go in. They've created a mass underworld drug industry. ISIS has been supplying terrorists to Europe and participate in terrorist attacks. However, the true extent of participation of Muslims is unknown, since false flag attacks can also be used for the EU to increase the police state, which they proclaim is to fight "Islamic extremism" and "racism" online. Which means that whoever participates in these attacks, EU benefits by widening the police state and thus strengthening the positions of the rich EU-funded Leftists who live in gated communities, away from high immigrant populations they claim to support. Muslim participation in these attacks is the most likely out of all groups, since that way they can "inflict revenge on Westerners".
Rotherham is simply the tip of the iceberg of the sex crimes in UK, and there are lots of undocumented smaller-scale "industries" of these, and probably even bigger ones that haven't been uncovered yet. Muslims (like many other non-European immigrants) vote Labour, since these will continue the welfare and pro-immigrant agendas Europe's been suffering for decades. As DLPB correctly said, these parties are aware of that and are trying to outdo each other in how much they can appease foreigners. In fact, I've read immigrants voted more favorably for "Stay" because of that, but have no link now. Check out this link (http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/11/14/exclusive-as-paris-burned-uk-islamists-told-muslims-to-struggle-for-islamic-state-in-unprecedented-islamic-show-of-force/), where Muslims attending the conference do not feel themselves as "British", and think Sharia Law should rule UK! Note also the timing. Finally, and most importantly, their population is the most rapidly growing in Europe. In fact, Muslims have the highest population growths all over the world, and have increasingly taken over more and more influence in India, for example. Just imagine how it's in Europe, where the native population has no kids anymore! German adults are slated to become minorities in their own country's demographic by the end of this decade because of the influx of millions into its country, for crying out loud! In 2015 alone Germany received a documented (there have been reports of hundreds of thousands who went into hiding) amount of people of over 1% of its own population, and it's only increasing!
I leave the conclusions to the reader.
-
The problem I have is that Muslims blow the world up and suddenly Judiasm or Christianity get brought up out of nowhere. I don't think it's at all relevant. When those two groups are creating the carnage here and now, today, I will be more open to debating them. But it simply isn't a key concern. I make it clear that I find all religions are against true free thinking, but Islam is the very worst. Also, I frequently see people blaming the bombings and 9/11 on Jews, which isn't just a distortion - it's plain bad.
I am sure there are legitimate concerns, but I've seen too many coming up with conspiracy theories. I don't do conspiracy theories. I do hard fact. When Muslims are responsible for the massive number of atrocities world wide, I do not suddenly say "JEWS!". It doesn't make any sense to do that, especially when you take a few hours to study the life of Muhammad and the Koran and Hadith (which is the life of Muhammad mostly).
It should also be noted that a lot of Muslims still believe that 9/11 was an inside job by the Jews to discredit them. It's this kind of nonsense I have no time for.
Oh - and here's the latest
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36658187
-
All that changes absolutely nothing of what I said. 1000 Links won't.
You're not willing to listen to evidence?
Islam is absolutely and totally opposed to Judaism and the Jewish people. That's a stonewall fact. It is an historical fact and verified very well by the Hadith and the Koran. Palestine [Hamas] is currently at war with Israel - mostly because Israel is Jewish. A Jewish person is not going to work behind the scenes to promote a religion or ideology that wants to see it destroyed. Iran, and Israel's neighbours, have consistently called for the state of Israel to be wiped off the map.
I don't care. That's not my problem, it's theirs.
Anti Semitic conspiracy theories are just that: Anti Semitic conspiracy theories.
Posting links to articles written by Israeli citizens, living in Israel, for Israeli publications that are hosted in Israel is a conspiracy theory?
You must be Jewish. There's no other explanation for your incredible capacity for double-think.
I am not concerned with Judaism. I'll start worrying about it when it has bombs strapped to it or it is running amok with AK 47s in multiple countries or flying planes into buildings.
Well when your local Jewish community advocates bringing Muslims in don't come running to me for help.
Israel is the only real democratic country in the Middle East.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_in_the_Middle_East#Measures_of_Democracy
I don't care what they do or what they are, as long as they do it over there.
Perhaps concentrate your efforts on the fact that it is legal in around 10 Islamic countries to kill people for being homosexual - and many more where basic freedom is denied.
Again, as long as they do it over there I don't care. Not my problem.
Talk of Jews is a nonsense that needs to stop. I will go no further on that subject.
Pointing out facts to cucks until they mentally shut down and stop arguing is a victory in my book. I accept your surrender.
(https://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/66915958.jpg)
Cucks will always and eternally cuck for their favored minority. It's a mental illness, a form of projection. They can't help it.
Meanwhile, very interesting development between Turkey, Israel and Russia. http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.727526 Turkey has formally apologised to Russia (never saw that coming) and formalized a "reconcilation pact" with Israel. Makes me wonder if Turkey will still go ahead and join the EU.
By the time Turkey joins the EU the only country in the EU will be Germany. We all know what happens after that. (https://i.imgur.com/Vbj5OHu.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/Vbj5OHu.png)
The problem I have is that Muslims blow the world up and suddenly Judiasm or Christianity get brought up out of nowhere. I don't think it's at all relevant. When those two groups are creating the carnage here and now, today, I will be more open to debating them. But it simply isn't a key concern. I make it clear that I find all religions are against true free thinking, but Islam is the very worst. Also, I frequently see people blaming the bombings and 9/11 on Jews, which isn't just a distortion - it's plain bad.
I disagree that Christianity is against free thinking. It's against (or used to be against) degenerate, self-destructive behavior, but it's not against non-degenerate free thinking.
Free thinking often isn't that useful. The scientific method, yes. Free thinking in other areas, not so much.
Strictly speaking, is it a good thing that we are allowed to have unlimited amounts of porn available 24/7 on the internet? Is it damaging to people, to relationships, and to society? Would we all be better off if there were checks in place to reduce the amount of porn on the internet?
I don't think porn should be legal. That is 100% against free thought.
I am sure there are legitimate concerns, but I've seen too many coming up with conspiracy theories. I don't do conspiracy theories. I do hard fact.
Except when people provide sources.
When Muslims are responsible for the massive number of atrocities world wide, I do not suddenly say "JEWS!". It doesn't make any sense to do that, especially when you take a few hours to study the life of Muhammad and the Koran and Hadith (which is the life of Muhammad mostly).
It should also be noted that a lot of Muslims still believe that 9/11 was an inside job by the Jews to discredit them. It's this kind of nonsense I have no time for.
Oh - and here's the latest
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36658187
I'm only concerned with Muslim attacks that damage ethnic Europeans. They can kill each other all the want, as long as they don't kill my people.
-
Basically, you are an antisemite. Perhaps this thread is the place for it, after-all. Since that also seems to curry favour with the far left. I hope I am not correct in thinking that you also consider the Holocaust to be a myth? [edit. I was correct. Sigh.] It's a shame, too, because we need people like you to fight against the tyranny of Islam, but this anti-Jew rhetoric is a liability and makes things ten times worse. It pushes people away from the debating table and makes my side of the debate look like it's dominated by rabid racists out to preserve the world for White Guy. As I have said repeatedly, it isn't Jews or any other group slaughtering people all over the world and spreading Sharia Law like Tyrion Lannister does Wild Fire.
Well when your local Jewish community advocates bringing Muslims in don't come running to me for help
The Catholic church and other religious people are already doing that in Britain - so they'll have to get in line.
https://ctbi.org.uk/how-the-churches-are-responding-to-the-refugee-crisis/
http://rcdow.org.uk/news/london-churches-prepare-to-welcome-refugees/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-34220258
The biggest reason we have a soaring Muslim population (and immigrant population in general) - that's only going to get worse - is the poor leftist education system, traitorous politicians that line their own pockets, and useful idiots, like the ones mentioned above. It isn't some Jewish conspiracy. I don't need to go looking for a scapegoat when I can just talk to my own deluded family (non Jewish), their friends (non Jewish), my friends (non Jewish), and listen to the MPs and celebrities (largely non Jewish) of Britain. That's reality - not a hocus pocus cauldron of blame to one section of society. Note, I am even blaming MY OWN FAMILY for contributing to this.
If I were going to look for a scapegoat, I'd have to start with the Christian denominations who welcome dangerous people into the country with open arms (and like in Sweden, state that it's a great thing). But, see, that's where logic kicks in for me... I don't see a big behind the scenes scheme, I see a bunch of silly, naive people, who have no logic but honourable intentions. Like my own family. Because that's reality. There is no scheme. There are just dumb people, naive people, and devious politicians that want to further their leftie self-hating cause.
All you need to do is go online and look at the people holding up "Refugees welcome" placards. Most of these people are ordinary citizens. So why should I blame the Jews for it? If your logic were applied, I'd actually have to believe that most people I know are secret Jews.
I'm only concerned with Muslim attacks that damage ethnic Europeans. They can kill each other all the want, as long as they don't kill my people.
Then that's another thing we disagree on. I care about all people. I don't think we should interfere with these places, because we end up getting another Iraq/Afgan. But I do care. You could just have easily been born there. They are humans, not "other people". They are as much a victim of Islam as we are.
You must be Jewish. There's no other explanation for your incredible capacity for double-think.
The ultimate conspiracy theory. It does the rounds an awful lot, although it's the first time I have been accused of being part of the evil and all-seeing organization that's out to get you.
There is another explanation - and I have given it to you in this post. I don't suppose that it will change your mind, because you're already sure that the world is made up of powerful all-seeing Jewish overlords that are in control of everything - and actually plot their own destruction. It really is possible to have an opinion contrary to yours without being part of the grand conspiracy you think exists. But I am not even sure yet if you are a troll or not.
-
B U I L D W A L L, please keep namecalling out of it. The only reason this thread isn't closed is because the discourse has remained civil. Calling someone a "cuck" (or any other namecalling, really) is not acceptable behavior on this forum. ~Covarr
-
And what a disaster for the EU countries if it does. They've been pushing for this for ages. Turkey brings very little benefit for ordinary people of the EU - but it does bring mass migration. It's also one of the reasons we voted Leave.
Maybe those developments could of been a trigger for ISIS attacking Turkey last night too (I was in an airport at same time it happened, glad it wasn't something global!). I think thats the first time ISIS have attacked Turkey.
-
Maybe those developments could of been a trigger for ISIS attacking Turkey last night too (I was in an airport at same time it happened, glad it wasn't something global!). I think thats the first time ISIS have attacked Turkey.
Sadly, it isn't. There have been a lot of incidents there but it hardly gets reported in the West.
-
Basically, you are an antisemite.
Rhetoric != Dialectic
(https://i.imgur.com/tA1Wf8i.png)
Perhaps this thread is the place for it, after-all. Since that also seems to curry favour with the far left.
Butthurt doesn't make for effective dialectic, fam.
(https://i.imgur.com/7QJN7n3.png)
I hope I am not correct in thinking that you also consider the Holocaust to be a myth?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_%28logic%29
(https://i.imgur.com/f43KM21.jpg)
It's a shame, too, because we need people like you to fight against the tyranny of Islam, but this anti-Jew rhetoric is a liability and makes things ten times worse. It pushes people away from the debating table and makes my side of the debate look like it's dominated by rabid racists out to preserve the world for White Guy. As I have said repeatedly, it isn't Jews or any other group slaughtering people all over the world and spreading Sharia Law like Tyrion Lannister does Wild Fire.
Have you ever argued in real life? No one likes a pussball. Trump didn't win the nomination by being a nice guy; he won by bullyciding Jeb Bush and being a controversial asshole, but one who always told the truth. If you can find it within yourself (hint: check beneath your penis) to be bold, it will help you win arguments and respect. Who cares if someone calls you a fascist, a Nazi, or a racist? If you're conservative, they're going to treat you like one anyway. You may as well do whatever you want and have fun while you're at it, or at least tear a hole in their ass when they try to take you down.
As I noted in the links I posted exclusively to Jewish produced and owned websites and media earlier which you really, really don't want to acknowledge for some strange reason, these things don't really matter. Anything which is not pro-European will eventually become anti-European. If you let in one special group of non-European people because they aren't as destructive as another group, eventually this group of people will want to bring in a worse ethnic group so you won't kick them out.
Look at it like this. Men in Asian countries HATE European men because their women prefer to date European men over Asian men. Weaboos and losers abuse this to date women who are far, far beyond anything they would ever get in their home countries. Should Asians continue to let in unlimited numbers of Europeans and European men simply because European men aren't blowing themselves up and beheading people like Muslims are?
Of course not. European people and European men may not be evil, bad, or particularly destructive, but they are doing real harm to an entire generation of young Asian men (and to the Asian women who end up birthing future spree-shooters (https://www.youtube.com/user/ElliotRodger) with European guys that probably shouldn't be allowed to breed).
Any Asian man who is okay with this either has some skin in the game - he profits from it somehow, possibly by owning a "karoke bar" - or he has abandoned the ideals and best interests of his people. It's one step from abandoning your people to advocating for the opposition.
The term "cuckservative" is defined as "someone who identifies as a conservative while holding liberal ideals dearer than conservative ideals."
Calling someone a cuck is simply a rhetorical flourish on a logical argument, and one which dramatically improves its effectiveness given that I got a warning for using it. But it really means something else entirely. What does it mean? What is another word for cuck or cuckservative?
Traitor.
But of course I would have no need to use such rhetorical devices (which actually contain truth) if you would look at the links (from Jewish-owned and operated media, no less) I posted and provide some sort of explanation for them. It would make you look less insecure, mentally unbalanced, or blind to our audience if you could come up with a reason for why these things exist.
The Catholic church and other religious people are already doing that in Britain - so they'll have to get in line.
https://ctbi.org.uk/how-the-churches-are-responding-to-the-refugee-crisis/
http://rcdow.org.uk/news/london-churches-prepare-to-welcome-refugees/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-34220258
The biggest reason we have a soaring Muslim population (and immigrant population in general) - that's only going to get worse - is the poor leftist education system, traitorous politicians that line their own pockets, and useful idiots, like the ones mentioned above. It isn't some Jewish conspiracy. I don't need to go looking for a scapegoat when I can just talk to my own deluded family (non Jewish), their friends (non Jewish), my friends (non Jewish), and listen to the MPs and celebrities (largely non Jewish) of Britain. That's reality - not a hocus pocus cauldron of blame to one section of society. Note, I am even blaming MY OWN FAMILY for contributing to this.
If I were going to look for a scapegoat, I'd have to start with the Christian denominations who welcome dangerous people into the country with open arms (and like in Sweden, state that it's a great thing). But, see, that's where logic kicks in for me... I don't see a big behind the scenes scheme, I see a bunch of silly, naive people, who have no logic but honourable intentions. Like my own family. Because that's reality. There is no scheme. There are just dumb people, naive people, and devious politicians that want to further their leftie self-hating cause.
All you need to do is go online and look at the people holding up "Refugees welcome" placards. Most of these people are ordinary citizens. So why should I blame the Jews for it? If your logic were applied, I'd actually have to believe that most people I know are secret Jews.
(https://i.imgur.com/E8UxaWo.png)
That European people do it too doesn't mean that Jewish people don't also do it, and at disproportionate rates compared to European people. European people seem to have a sort of pathological altruism, wherein they project their own psychological proclivities onto other groups of people that evolved in radically different environments. My people are very trusting of others, to a fault; I'm not surprised that they would adopt the attitudes that benefit non-Europeans at the expense of Europeans.
The real question is, where do these beliefs come from? Who is putting this stuff out there? And what exactly are the beliefs that make a person advocate against their own ethnic group?
Exhibit A: Tim Wise
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oV-EDWzJuzk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6SL-iCp-Y4
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Like_Me
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Wise
Ctrl + f "Jew"
Wise was born in Nashville, Tennessee, to Michael Julius Wise and LuCinda Anne (née McLean) Wise. His paternal grandfather was Jewish (of Russian origin), while the rest of his ancestry is northern European, including some Scottish. Wise has said that when he was about 12 years old his synagogue was attacked by white supremacists. Wise attended public schools in Nashville, graduating from Hillsboro High School in 1986. In high school he was student body vice-president and a member of one of the top high school debate teams in the United States. Wise attended college at Tulane University in New Orleans and received his B.A. there, with a major in Political Science and a minor in Latin American Studies. While a student, he was a leader in the campus anti-apartheid movement, which sought to force Tulane to divest from companies still doing business with the government of South Africa. His anti-apartheid activism was first brought to national attention in 1988, when South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu announced he would turn down an offer of an honorary degree from Tulane after Wise's group informed him of the school's ongoing investments there.
Wow man, how weird! Here we have a Jewish man who writes books and is paid to give speeches to 18 year old freshman at universities about how he is ashamed of all the evil things that people who are "White" like him did.
Hmmm, but that's only one man. Let's see what's floating at the Times of Israel:
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/ashkenazi-jews-are-not-white-response-to-haaretz-article/
Oy vey!
But surely there must be at least one person who hates White people that isn't Jewish! What about Susan Sontag? She once said this:
"The truth is that Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Marx, Balanchine ballets, et al., don't redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the world. The white race is the cancer of human history; it is the white race and it alone — its ideologies and inventions — which eradicates autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads, which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life itself."
http://www.latimes.com/local/obituaries/la-122804sontag_lat-story.html
That's about as anti-European as it gets!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Sontag
Ctrl + f "Jew":
Sontag was born Susan Rosenblatt in New York City, the daughter of Mildred (née Jacobson) and Jack Rosenblatt, both Jews of Lithuanian and Polish descent.
(https://i.imgur.com/oXicbuc.png)
How exactly is it scapegoating WHEN THEY FUCKING DO IT? Is it scapegoating when I blame black people for committing a disproportionate amount of crime WHEN THEY COMMIT A DISPROPORTIONATE AMOUNT OF CRIME (https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/table-43)?
Does the definition of scapegoating change when it suits you?
I have a proposition. You find me a liberal that is vehemently opposed to the mere existence of ethnically European people and who claims to be White. I will prove that this person is Jewish, involved with Jewish people, or a complete and utter degenerate who deserves to be deported as much as the most violent Muslim invader.
Or you could just ignore my rational arguments, call me a conspiracy theorist, and then have the gall, the utter hypocrisy to claim that I am trolling when you have not made a single rational argument to rebut my claims. One of us is trolling, but it isn't me.
Then that's another thing we disagree on. I care about all people. I don't think we should interfere with these places, because we end up getting another Iraq/Afgan. But I do care. You could just have easily been born there. They are humans, not "other people". They are as much a victim of Islam as we are.
(https://i.imgur.com/shlPaeP.png)
If I was born there, then I would have an entirely different genetic makeup, which would make me very unlike what I am now. In fact if I was born there I would probably want to kill Westerners because the guys who preach to me every day say so.
Instead of spending trillions of dollars in outreach to make everyone like us - what Justin Trudeau apparently wants - I say that we use this amazing technological innovation called a WALL and that we physically remove people who are not like us to their homelands. Weird, I know, and there are very few instances in history were having a big beautiful wall between you and people who want to kill you has ever helped anyone, but I want to give it a try. Somehow, I have a feeling it will work.
Besides that, how do you propose we police them and stop them from killing each other? Should we only import the gay Muslims? Wait, maybe you want us to invade them and slaughter our sons and brothers so their gays can have unprotected group sex with each other? That sounds like the most conservative thought of all time, surely it will be a hit with John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Paul Ryan.
This is more evidence that you really are more of a liberal than a conservative. If I go to a feed store or a barber shop and ask the farmers and old men there if they are conservative and their opinions on Muslim immigrants, none of them give a flying fuck about Muslims - even gay ones. The only conservatives I've ever met that care about people from outside their nations are:
1. Women
2. Non-Europeans
3. Politicians who expect cushy lobbying jobs when they finally lose an election
More than that, it's honestly kind of racist that you think that Muslims are so lacking in agency that they need a European there to babysit them. I mean, why can't they take care of themselves and build nice countries where they want to live? Is it institutional racism, fam? Hmm, maybe it's our unexamined Huwyte privilege?
The ultimate conspiracy theory. It does the rounds an awful lot, although it's the first time I have been accused of being part of the evil and all-seeing organization that's out to get you.
There is another explanation - and I have given it to you in this post. I don't suppose that it will change your mind, because you're already sure that the world is made up of powerful all-seeing Jewish overlords that are in control of everything - and actually plot their own destruction. It really is possible to have an opinion contrary to yours without being part of the grand conspiracy you think exists. But I am not even sure yet if you are a troll or not.
So it's a conspiracy theory to assume that someone who apparently cares more about other ethnic groups than the one he claims to be may not telling the truth? I mean (http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2013/08/16/white_like_me_movie_with_tim_wise_should_be_seen_by_all_especially_white.html), when have Jewish people ever done that? (https://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/11/03/916577/-An-Open-Letter-to-the-White-Right-On-the-Occasion-of-Your-Recent-Successful-Temper-Tantrum)
TBH fam it don't matter (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qX-YfuVQmX8) if you're really ethnic European or not. The end result of not advocating 100% for your own people is always the same (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3462336/The-white-squatter-camps-South-Africa-home-hundreds-families-enduring-terrible-poverty-blame-fall-Apartheid.html).
One last thing: I noticed that you never actually said that you're not Jewish. Technically, you haven't answered me yet. No pressure! Don't be concerned how your inability to answer this simple question makes your arguments look.
-
Haha, obvious antisemite is obvious. Using your language. You didn't even have the decency to admit that you think the holocaust is a hoax.
And, no, I am not Jewish; I would have thought that absolutely obvious by my posts. I was raised Roman Catholic but now realize what a load of old horseradish all religion is (although your opposition to Jews is not just Judaism but the people itself). I am an agnostic at worst and an atheist at best.
-
Haha, obvious antisemite is obvious. Using your language. You didn't even have the decency to admit that you think the holocaust is a hoax.
I actually haven't researched the Holocaust yet, so I can't say anything either way. And I prefer to think of myself as counter-semetic.
And, no, I am not Jewish; I would have thought that absolutely obvious by my posts. I was raised Roman Catholic but now realize what a load of old horseradish all religion is (although your opposition to Jews is not just Judaism but the people itself). I am an agnostic at worst and an atheist at best.
There, isn't that better? How easy was that?
My opposition is mostly to them not policing their assholes the same way we do ours. If one of our people murders someone, we kick that person out. One of theirs murders someone, they close ranks and start crying about the Holocaust.
Case in point: Jewish Rabbi's bodyguard driving drunk, kills 1 boy and injures his sister when he runs a redlight.
http://www.nytimes.com/1991/08/21/nyregion/a-boy-s-death-ignites-clashes-in-crown-heights.html?pagewanted=all
There's a really great play by a black lady about it. Forgot what it's called. She's an amazing actor and play-write.
-
As easy as exposing your antisemitism :P
I actually haven't researched the Holocaust yet, so I can't say anything either way.
I don't believe that cop out for a second.
Also, don't bother editing your posts (I see you have a habit of it) - I back up all arguments like this.
-
As easy as exposing your antisemitism :P
C O U N T E R - S E M I T I S M
I don't believe that cop out for a second.
I seriously haven't researched it exhaustively. All I have to go on is what other guys in my circle say, and while I trust them I always research it myself.
Also, don't bother editing your posts (I see you have a habit of it) - I back up all arguments like this.
All of my edits are grammar, punctuation, dead-meme links, or additive. I wouldn't do that to you, man. Arguments are sacred. /autism
-
http://forums.qhimm.com/index.php?action=profile;u=9177;area=showposts;start=50
Come, now. You've deleted tons.
-
Yeah, that was due to some kid who wanted to dox me. I banned him from my forums (and later deleted my forums and all my hacking info) because he wouldn't leave me alone.
It's a long story.
-
It's a long story.
It's a long nose.
-
It's a long nose.
This was before I became race-aware. He was Ukranian, but he was a degenerate NEET loser. I don't think he was Jewish, so no long nose.
-
I meant this guy:
(http://cartoonbros.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Pinocchio-1.jpg)
-
Ah, that makes more sense.
But yeah, totally not going to give you his contact info to verify it. I hate that little fuck.
EDIT
On the subject of counter-semitism:
https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/06/28/its-time-for-the-elites-to-rise-up-against-ignorant-masses-trump-2016-brexit/
It’s Time for the Elites to Rise Up Against the Ignorant Masses
By James Traub
Ivory Tower Intrigues
The pseudo-meritocracy of the Ivy League.
By James Traub
http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2005/10/ivory_tower_intrigues.html
t turns out, ironically enough from the point of view of my family trajectory, that the admissions systems at the Big Three were built expressly to keep out people like my father—smart, driven Jewish kids from gigantic New York City public high schools.
tl;dr
We can't let European people have democracy if they don't vote how we want!
-
I am not a racist and don't think of myself as "anti-black", I'm "counter-black". There's a difference, I promise. (sarcasm)
-
I am not a racist and don't think of myself as "anti-black", I'm "counter-black". There's a difference, I promise. (sarcasm)
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/table-43
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-43
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/43tabledatadecoverviewpdf
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/table-43
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-43
Five years of FBI crime statistics indicate that they commit about 28% of all crimes, despite being about 12.5% of the US population.
I guess facts are racist, mane.
-
That's a false equivalency to what he said. He wasn't making any argument for or against black people or black crime.
-
I guess facts are racist, mane.
I was just having a bit of fun. ;D
It may seem contradictory that I have a problem with Islam and not with other religious groups or or people of another ethnicity, but I have sound reasoning I think. The difference is not only that Islam has such a high murder rate compared to any other religion in modern times, but also because in the teachings of Muhammad himself it is okay to murder others for various reasons. It is a fairly easy root cause analysis of the violence Islam commits on a daily basis.
High murder rates in a particular culture must be linked to something tangible, like a violent doctrine they follow or something. At that point, I can agree that there is an issue with said group. However, the color of your skin has always been and always will be irrelevant to the sane and logical person.
I don't deny that there are high murder rates among black Americans in America (because there definitely is), but I would not say black people are inherently violent like Islam is. There is definitely something in the culture of black people in high crime areas that is causing the behavior (I suspect it has something to do with the government, welfare in particular, in addition to an irrational tradition of not integrating into "white" society stemming from a rational fear of racists pre-civil rights movement).
-
It may seem contradictory that I have a problem with Islam and not with other religious groups or or people of another ethnicity, but I have sound reasoning I think. The difference is not only that Islam has such a high murder rate compared to any other religion in modern times, but also because in the teachings of Muhammad himself it is okay to murder others for various reasons. It is a fairly easy root cause analysis of the violence Islam commits on a daily basis.
High murder rates in a particular culture must be linked to something tangible, like a violent doctrine they follow or something. At that point, I can agree that there is an issue with said group. However, the color of your skin has always been and always will be irrelevant to the sane and logical person.
I don't deny that there are high murder rates among black Americans in America (because there definitely is), but I would not say black people are inherently violent like Islam is. There is definitely something in the culture of black people in high crime areas that is causing the behavior (I suspect it has something to do with the government, welfare in particular, in addition to an irrational tradition of not integrating into "white" society stemming from a rational fear of racists pre-civil rights movement).
This is not about skin color (though skin color is a correlating factor since it follows a similar evolutionary path as other traits in response to certain evolutionary pressures, which will be explained soon). It is about intelligence and behavior, both of which are highly heritable.
Behavior is highly heritable and can change quickly over several generations. To support this I submit the Russian fox breeding experiments.
http://cbsu.tc.cornell.edu/ccgr/behaviour/history.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Domesticated_Red_Fox
Consider the environment in which Europeans (and to a similar degree north-east Asians) evolved. There are mountain ranges which separate north-central Europe from the Mediterranean. In an ice age, these mountains would be covered in glaciers and impassable. Thus any populations north of them in lower elevations would be genetically isolated from much of the rest of Europe, Asia, and Africa.
One characteristic of European winters during the last ice age was winters which could sometimes last up to 6 months long. This had a eugenic effect. It killed off the dumbest individuals (especially the dumbest men), and it forced people to cooperate to survive. Those who couldn't cooperate would jeopardize the survival of the family, tribe, or clan, and would presumably be killed by their relatives.
Homo Sapiens also interbred with the local Neanderthals, who had slightly larger brain cavities than our species and had been in the environment longer than we had (which means they were likely to have alleles that enabled them to survive in that environment, such as increased intelligence).
In time you ended up with a localized subspecies that was more intelligent than their ancestors and more socially cohesive. You can still see this social cohesion in how quickly white people ostracize those who violate their collective norms, whether they are liberal or conservative. Before anyone argues, liberals and conservatives have very different norms and what counts as violation will vary between them.
In Africa food is abundant and there were never extreme winters as there were in Europe and large parts of Asia. With no evolutionary pressure to kill the least intelligent and essentially unlimited food (to the hunter-gatherer, that is), survival became a matter of competing with other individuals to reproduce as quickly and as much as possible. You can compare this to the reproduction strategy that a resource-limited (warmth, food, light) population in Europe was forced to evolve, where children were valued and the murder of a child was a capital offense in pre-Christian times.
In Africa, to reproduce the most you must compete, and to compete effectively you must be violent. There are numerous histories of tribes conquering other tribes, where they exterminated the men and enslaved the women and children. The Zulu invaded and exterminated tribes in what is now South Africa within the last 400 years, so this has been going on for tens of thousands of years.
This seems to be the same case in other areas. In the Americas the Aztecs practiced mass human sacrifice, but the tribes to the north of the Rio Grande - where water and arable land was scarce, and they had to be intelligent and socially cohesive to survive - would routinely defeat Aztec invaders from what is now Mexico. Unfortunately the native Americans suffered from weak immune systems as they were isolated from the rest of the world, and introduction of things like tuberculous (which came from migrating seals (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNHKDJzgqJg), of all things) and other pathogens exterminated much of the population north of the Rio Grande... though that's not to say that they were all nice guys and noble savages.
Behavior is heritable. People of African ancestry commit a disproportionate amount of crimes because they evolved in an environment where violence was a successful reproductive strategy, and because there was little selection pressure against low intelligence. Does this mean they are subhuman and that they lack emotions and should be exterminated? Of course not. It simply means that they can't function in a society where following the rules, displaying low time-preference, and regularly making rational and informed decisions is taken for granted.
What you do from there is up to you. Do you want to change your entire society to accommodate them? Do you want to repatriate them to Africa? Do you want to embark on a eugenics program to weed out the dumbest among them (pay them $300 to be sterilized, because anyone dumb enough to do that is probably not someone you want to reproduce), while rewarding the most intelligent to reproduce (subsidized housing, subsidized education, basically what we already offer African Americans)?
Like I said, this isn't about skin color. It's about intelligence and behavior. I've never had a problem with African Americans who have average IQs above about 95, which is roughly the minimum to function in modern society.
The problem with Muslims is the incentive structure their religion imposes on them, and the genetic consequences of those incentives.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4196914/
Estimating the Inbreeding Depression on Cognitive Behavior: A Population Based Study of Child Cohort, by Mohd Fareed and Mohammed Afzal. Marriage between first cousins causes about a 13 point drop in IQ. Note that cousin marriage is allowed in Islam.
I don't have time to continue effortposting, so here is my current up-to-date collection of hatefacts. The latest batch isn't annotated yet, peruse at your discretion.
http://pastebin.com/tpH7NEr0
-
For someone who "doesn't know if the holocaust actually happened", you seem to "know" a lot about primitive humans before civilization. :-P
The key difference between you and I seems to be that you believe genetics have the predominant role in human behavior, and I argue that not only are humans spontaneous in their behavior (much more than any animal ever will be), but also that culture and tradition has a much greater impact than genetics do.
For instance, men have more testosterone than women so they tend to be more violent. This would seem to be an observation that would lend credence to your argument. So then what should women do to force men to behave more peacefully?
The problem I have is that I have an abnormal amount of testosterone compared to most men (I looked like a yeti since like 6th grade), and yet I am one of the least violent people I know. Humans still have the cognitive ability to refuse to act on animalistic urges and tendencies (yes, even those with very low IQ's).
I admire the effort you put into your posts, and I commend you for being civil while discussing issues that could easily become heated and emotional. That being said, your viewpoints are definitely racist even if they are not meant to inflict harm on other races, just with the justification that you believe evolution and modern science support you. And in a way they do, but I think you have lost sight of the fact that humans are NOT animals, and so using studies of animals to understand human behavior is insufficient.
Humans have so much more to them than animals do that no scientist alive today or that has ever been alive can fully comprehend. If you keep trying to categorize people by their evolutionary history, your models will always be demonstratively lacking. Humans will always surprise you with their unpredictability. I guarantee it.
-
I'd argue genetics is the biggest factor - but definitely upbringing is also a huge contributor. We know for a fact that Africans have an average IQ of around 70-80 - and so you can easily infer from that the reasons for so many of the problems on that continent. And IQ is largely genetic. It's a proven fact that men and women and different races have massive differences caused by genetics. Just looking at men and women's brains shows we are wired differently - and no matter what you do in life, that will stay true.
It's the reason men are better at sport, for example, than women. Especially at the top levels. Not just speed, stamina, strength - but spacial awareness and reaction time. We are not born equally from human to human, let alone race to race, or gender to gender.
-
I don't deny that there are genetic differences between all peoples, including the sexes. I just don't believe all behavior can be attributed (some can, obviously) to the way our brains are wired, or even the things we learn through upbringing.
Humans are currently unpredictable through modern scientific methods. The secret to human existence is the secret to life itself, and if scientists could quantify it we would already have fully cognitive androids to replace human beings all together. So the best compromise I can say is that we don't fully know (yet).
To understand my stance on the matter we'd have to get into randomness and how I don't believe it is real. That if one could know all the variables in the universe at every given moment, we could predict everything. It's just our lack of perspective and understanding that gives the illusion of randomness.
Now where science obviously cannot prove and thus I have no evidence to argue, is that I believe humans are the only known creatures in the known universe that ARE truly random. I believe genetics, culture, environment, etc. can influence a person's behavior, but not account for all of it. If you knew all the variables in the universe I believe you could predict human behavior 99.9% of the time or maybe more, but never fully 100% for everyone. I believe that artificial and natural are relevant terms despite the fact that technically humans ARE part of nature and therefore any course of action we take could be considered "natural" (the best argument against environmentalists, really), but in reality it is obvious that there is a difference. Somehow humans CAN manipulate the variables in the universe in ways that other animals simply can't, and whether we evolved to this point, were created to be like this, or some other third unrevealed option, I believe humanity is a unique species of animal and valuable in this way.
It may just be a rationalization for my own existence, that I'm not just some organic machine stuck on a rock floating in a vast endless void, but I reject the notion of fate entirely and have hope that every human being has the potential to be more than the sum of their parts and choose to do what's right, regardless of genetics, culture, or upbringing.
-
For someone who "doesn't know if the holocaust actually happened", you seem to "know" a lot about primitive humans before civilization. :-P
It is a crime in many places to deny or even question that the Holocaust happened, the degree to which it happened, or the culpability of the perpetrators. That alone - the quelling of objective research - is enough to make me want to learn more about it.
Beyond that, there is plenty of peer-reviewed research on population genetics, population migrations, and the genetic components of intelligence and behavior.
The key difference between you and I seems to be that you believe genetics have the predominant role in human behavior, and I argue that not only are humans spontaneous in their behavior (much more than any animal ever will be), but also that culture and tradition has a much greater impact than genetics do.
The research says otherwise.
For instance, men have more testosterone than women so they tend to be more violent. This would seem to be an observation that would lend credence to your argument. So then what should women do to force men to behave more peacefully?
Men commit most of the violent crime and they usually have much higher testosterone levels, so yes that makes sense. I don't think that women actually want men to behave peacefully, they seem to prefer violent men in my experience.
The problem I have is that I have an abnormal amount of testosterone compared to most men (I looked like a yeti since like 6th grade), and yet I am one of the least violent people I know. Humans still have the cognitive ability to refuse to act on animalistic urges and tendencies (yes, even those with very low IQ's).
Unless you have been tested for hormone levels this isn't necessarily true. Africans have the highest testosterone levels in humans, yet they are not very hairy unless they are mixed with Europeans. The biochemical pathway for increased hair growth isn't that simple. While testosterone is definitely a variable for both hair growth and violence, it's not the only one. Others for hair growth could be testosterone sensitivity of hair producing cells, and the number of hair producing cells. Other variables for violence are intelligence.
I admire the effort you put into your posts, and I commend you for being civil while discussing issues that could easily become heated and emotional. That being said, your viewpoints are definitely racist even if they are not meant to inflict harm on other races, just with the justification that you believe evolution and modern science support you. And in a way they do, but I think you have lost sight of the fact that humans are NOT animals, and so using studies of animals to understand human behavior is insufficient.
Humans are 100% animals. I'm an atheist, that won't work on me.
Besides that, do you seriously expect that the biological mechanisms that influence behavior would change that much between the time when the common ancestor of foxes and humans diverged? Why does everyone believe, contrary to all evidence that I share with them, that biological evolution stops below the neck? We are not special. We are simply hairless tool-using apes, so why does everyone insist that they are not like other mammals?
The term racist is not a valid argument. It is an emotional argument meant to shut down discussion. Considering that ethnic Africans suffer just as much as we do in the current system, you'd think that liberals would be willing to disregard crimethink to find a way to make them function in our society; but apparently mouthing the party line is more important than bringing about actual, material improvements to the lives of the poorest and least-fit people in our world today.
Humans have so much more to them than animals do that no scientist alive today or that has ever been alive can fully comprehend. If you keep trying to categorize people by their evolutionary history, your models will always be demonstratively lacking. Humans will always surprise you with their unpredictability. I guarantee it.
If you had read my collection of hatefacts you would have found much to dissuade you from these untested beliefs.
http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth/publications/database/5164
No evidence of racial discrimination in criminal justice processing: Results from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health.
When controlled for IQ and self-reported past history of violence there is no evidence of racial discrimination by justice system.
In other words, three people with the same IQ and same self-reported past histories of violence (or the same levels of violence, if such a thing can be measured) have the same outcomes in the US criminal justice system. Since ethnic Africans make up a disproportionate amount of the US prison population (and the prison populations in most other countries that have significant populations of ethnic Africans), this means that ethnic Africans are more likely to have low IQs and to do violent things.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3455741
Serum testosterone levels in healthy young ethnic African and ethnic European men, by Ross et al.
Ethnic African men have 10% - 15% higher testosterone than ethnic European men. Note that this was a study to test a hypothesis that ethnic African men have higher levels of prostate cancer because they have higher levels of testosterone, so it's unlikely to be tainted by bias as it was done to address an entirely unrelated problem.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3575604
Saliva testosterone and criminal violence in young adult prison inmates. More violent inmates and inmates rated as tougher by other inmates have higher levels of testosterone.
This is another study which confirms that violence and being physically intimidating is strongly correlated with testosterone.
https://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf
Thirty Years Of Research On Race Differences In Cognitive Ability.
This is a survey of dozens of research papers (which are themselves built on other research papers) - I think about 60 or 80 papers, which demonstrates a number of things. Namely that while childhood IQ is dependent mostly on environment, adult IQ is dependent mostly on inherited variables (genes).
Notable takeaways are that after about age 12 (and even more so after about age 18), intelligence is determined mostly by genes; and that Africans, Europeans, and Asians are biologically very different from each other in many ways. Asians are the most intelligent, have the largest brains, are the fastest, and develop the slowest. Africans are their opposites, and Europeans are in between.
https://i.sli.mg/ZntLlE.png
(https://i.sli.mg/ZntLlE.png)
http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v20/n1/full/mp2014105a.html
Genetics and intelligence differences: five special findings, by R Plomin and I J Deary. Replicates what several other papers demonstrate - IQ is at least 80% heritable.
http://pritchardlab.stanford.edu/publications/pdfs/RosenbergEtAl02.pdf
Humans can be genetically categorized into five racial groups, corresponding to traditional races.
http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf
Genetic analysis "supports the traditional racial groups classification."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15508000
"Human genetic variation is geographically structured" and corresponds with race.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15625622
Race can be determined via genetics with certainty for >99.8% of individuals.
http://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-10-oral-bacteria-fingerprint-mouth.html
Oral bacteria can be used to determine race.
http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(15)00671-5
Race can be determined via brain scans.
http://www.ln.edu.hk/philoso/staff/sesardic/Race2.pdf
Common-sense racial categories have biological meaning.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12061787/Intelligence-genes-discovered-by-scientists.html
Human intelligence up to 75% inheritible
http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v16/n10/abs/mp201185a.html
Human intelligence is highly heritable.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289608000305
Scientific consensus is that IQ tests are not racially biased.
http://www.jbhe.com/features/49_college_admissions-test.html
Very poor Whites are comparably intelligent to very wealthy blacks.
http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1994egalitarianfiction.pdf
Privately, intelligence experts hold more hereditarian views than they express in public.
http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1977-07996-001
Black children raised in White households have similar IQs to black children in black households.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912003741
The average African IQ is estimated at 79.
http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1997mainstream.pdf
The average African-American IQ is 85, compared to the average White IQ of 100.
http://www.jbhe.com/features/49_college_admissions-test.html
The white-black gap in SAT scores, a proxy for IQ, is increasing.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB115040765329081636
Genes for large brains, linked to high IQ, are common everywhere except Africa.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/10/news/la-heb-genetic-study-intelligence-20110809
Intelligence has at least a 40-50% genetic basis.
http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf
IQ scores are the best predictor of success in Western society.
http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf
IQ is 75% heritable among Whites.
I'd argue genetics is the biggest factor - but definitely upbringing is also a huge contributor. We know for a fact that Africans have an average IQ of around 70-80 - and so you can easily infer from that the reasons for so many of the problems on that continent. And IQ is largely genetic. It's a proven fact that men and women and different races have massive differences caused by genetics. Just looking at men and women's brains shows we are wired differently - and no matter what you do in life, that will stay true.
It's the reason men are better at sport, for example, than women. Especially at the top levels. Not just speed, stamina, strength - but spacial awareness and reaction time. We are not born equally from human to human, let alone race to race, or gender to gender.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/12/california-transgender-woman-plays-college-basketball/
A 52 year old trans woman is playing in college basketball. She clearly has the bone structure of a man. She has had something like 35 years of male hormones affecting her brain structure, bone structure, eyesight, muscularity, and who knows what else. Yet, according to liberals, it is perfectly acceptable for her to play against college aged women in a competitive sport.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Sexes_%28tennis%29#1998:_Karsten_Braasch_vs._the_Williams_sisters
A slightly buzzed male smoker beat the Williams sisters in a 2 on 1 tennis match.
I don't deny that there are genetic differences between all peoples, including the sexes. I just don't believe all behavior can be attributed (some can, obviously) to the way our brains are wired, or even the things we learn through upbringing.
Humans are currently unpredictable through modern scientific methods. The secret to human existence is the secret to life itself, and if scientists could quantify it we would already have fully cognitive androids to replace human beings all together. So the best compromise I can say is that we don't fully know (yet).
Nonsense. You don't need to understand everything about a system to figure out how parts of it works.
To understand my stance on the matter we'd have to get into randomness and how I don't believe it is real. That if one could know all the variables in the universe at every given moment, we could predict everything. It's just our lack of perspective and understanding that gives the illusion of randomness.
I think it's funny how liberals deconstruct the concept of knowledge when confronted with evidence that their beliefs have no basis in reality.
Now where science obviously cannot prove and thus I have no evidence to argue, is that I believe humans are the only known creatures in the known universe that ARE truly random. I believe genetics, culture, environment, etc. can influence a person's behavior, but not account for all of it. If you knew all the variables in the universe I believe you could predict human behavior 99.9% of the time or maybe more, but never fully 100% for everyone. I believe that artificial and natural are relevant terms despite the fact that technically humans ARE part of nature and therefore any course of action we take could be considered "natural" (the best argument against environmentalists, really), but in reality it is obvious that there is a difference. Somehow humans CAN manipulate the variables in the universe in ways that other animals simply can't, and whether we evolved to this point, were created to be like this, or some other third unrevealed option, I believe humanity is a unique species of animal and valuable in this way.
It may just be a rationalization for my own existence, that I'm not just some organic machine stuck on a rock floating in a vast endless void, but I reject the notion of fate entirely and have hope that every human being has the potential to be more than the sum of their parts and choose to do what's right, regardless of genetics, culture, or upbringing.
Tactical nihilism, also known as the propensity of progressives to deconstruct reality when it conflicts with their belief system.
-
Build Wall makes some good points, that being said I'll probably vote Hillary since it's obvious from my real life experience, from history and from this forum thread that people are still too comfortable as our societies are slowly rotting away from the same people who always try to rot our societies. Unfortunately things needs to get worse before they can get better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeMZGGQ0ERk&index=1&list=LL1bkXHE_h_wD8cHnpU7p3nw
-
That being said with other original post - it is important everyone is treated as a human (and every animal treated with respect too) AND that we have equal opportunities. That does not mean what the feminists mean - as in "positive discrimination" - which is sexist by definition.
-
Build Wall makes some good points, that being said I'll probably vote Hillary since it's obvious from my real life experience, from history and from this forum thread that people are still too comfortable as our societies are slowly rotting away from the same people who always try to rot our societies. Unfortunately things needs to get worse before they can get better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeMZGGQ0ERk&index=1&list=LL1bkXHE_h_wD8cHnpU7p3nw
Yuri is my idol!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3qkf3bajd4
An accelerationist, I take it? Electing Hillary would accelerate the decline, which is actually my goal (besides making others aware of the obstacles we face), but the absolute best red pill to the general public and the fastest acceleration would be if Trump won the election but was somehow prevented from taking office. Doubly so if this was some sort of soft-power play, or if he was arrested by Obama. Unlikely, but it would be a huge coup for us.
Trump winning is nice, but it's ultimately a secondary goal. The primary goal is to crash the system.
That being said with other original post - it is important everyone is treated as a human (and every animal treated with respect too) AND that we have equal opportunities. That does not mean what the feminists mean - as in "positive discrimination" - which is sexist by definition.
Treating each other, other animals, and the environment with respect is something which only ethnic Europeans care about, unfortunately. Look at what China did to their own nation.
-
Hey look, Farage just quit.
-
Hey look, Farage just quit.
He played his part :) Can't blame him for wanting his own life now.
-
This thread has gotten more racist than I can in good conscience allow to continue. So I won't.