(05-11-2017 01:22 AM)atlant Wrote:  Supporting Israel is the only logical conclusion if you want to fight against the cancer that is Islam.

Yes, and vice versa

(05-11-2017 01:22 AM)atlant Wrote:  Supporting Israel is the only logical conclusion if you want to fight against the cancer that is Islam.

This is why some of my right-leaning buddies support Israel, which makes perfect sense. Islam can't be allowed to win, and I'm totally sympathetic to that argument. But the Israel VS Palestine conflict is more of a political struggle than a religious one. Ignoring biblical prophecy, Israel - as much as Jews desperately needed a homeland after WW2 - had no right to partition someone's land and subjugate the people within. If they had done that to the state and people of Connecticut, turning a quarter of it into a densely-populated open-air prison, and continued to do so in defiance of UN resolutions and international law, would be it justifiable?

(05-11-2017 06:26 AM)griffinmill Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 01:22 AM)atlant Wrote:  Supporting Israel is the only logical conclusion if you want to fight against the cancer that is Islam.

This is why some of my right-leaning buddies support Israel, which makes perfect sense. Islam can't be allowed to win, and I'm totally sympathetic to that argument. But the Israel VS Palestine conflict is more of a political struggle than a religious one. Ignoring biblical prophecy, Israel - as much as Jews desperately needed a homeland after WW2 - had no right to partition someone's land and subjugate the people within. If they had done that to the state and people of Connecticut, turning a quarter of it into a densely-populated open-air prison, and continued to do so in defiance of UN resolutions and international law, would be it justifiable?

Yeah - right, but what right did Muslims had in conquering the entire Middle East, wiping out age-old cultures and religions of Persia, killing untold millions and converting the predominantly Christian and Jewish Middle East to Islam? The land of Judea is mentioned dozens of times in the Jewish scriptures and the entire area was utterly unimportant to Muslims for centuries. Before Jews moved there and re-invigorated the area, the whole place was just a bunch of dry goats on arid fields. It regained some valor after Jews started to re-settle there in the 19th century and that attracted the overwhelming majority of the Arab "Palestinians". Essentially most of them were equivalent to current day economic migrants to Germany.

Yes - there was a brief period of Islamic schism where the Al-Aqsa mosque was treated like Mecca by some Muslims in the Western part, but that was only due to inability to travel to Mecca.

I am not excusing the Jewish elite, their meddling, the globalist machinations of their top, I am even not buying good parts of the Holocoust, but let us make this clear:

Jewish Israel has far greater legitimacy than many other Muslim conquests. It was more a reconquest of old territories of theirs. Judea was old even before the Romans conquered that area hundreds of years before Mohammed. Sure - globalists use that location as a battering ram against the Muslim Middle East, but the country has a true legitimate claim. As far as I am concerned it is tantamount of the Spanish taking back Andalusia. That place was also 600 years in the hands of Muslims, should we give them back Hungary, Greece, Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro as well? What right did the Greek have for retaking their homeland? Better should be giving that to the Ottoman slaveholders.

Fuck that. That evil cult of Islam will be banned anyway sooner or later - better sooner.

And on another note - Muslims born in Israel and Israeli citizens have 10 times the chances and lifestyle opportunities vs Jews and Christians living in Muslim countries. Some are even politicians and are sitting in the parliament. The Palestinian conflict does have a religious undertone and it could have been resolved easily enough - there were multiple attempts of giving Palestine even greater territories and acceptance as a nation state, but in all cases they refused, because they wanted way more - they wanted dominion over the entire country. Just as Muslims demand that Andalusia is returned to them at once. That evil cult created by a psychopath and mass-murderer should have been wiped out a long time ago.

But no reason to divert the thread from Milo.

(05-11-2017 06:24 AM)Lika Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 01:22 AM)atlant Wrote:  Supporting Israel is the only logical conclusion if you want to fight against the cancer that is Islam.

Yes, and vice versa

Right, it's not an either or proposition.

I'd far rather see a a fortress America (and Europe) that didn't give a fuck about either.

(05-11-2017 07:43 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  snip

I agree that Islam is a fascist ideology that needs to be eradicated, but do the current inhabitants of a stretch of land ever have any right to continue living there autonomously considering a historical or biblical claim can be made by another religious or racial group upon almost any geographical strip?

(05-11-2017 10:54 AM)griffinmill Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 07:43 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  snip

I agree that Islam is a fascist ideology that needs to be eradicated, but do the current inhabitants of a stretch of land ever have any right to continue living there autonomously considering a historical or biblical claim can be made by another religious or racial group upon almost any geographical strip?

True and if the Samoans suddenly turn super-efficient, somehow become technologically and economically so advanced that they can reconquer New Zealand, then the Whites living there would have to deal with it.

In the world you have to carve out your own. If you have the strength, then so be it. What if Persian Zoroastrans returned and attempted to retake Iran from the Ayatollahs and throw out Islam out of their homeland thus renaming it Persia again? If they have the power to do it and their numbers are strong enough, then I don't see reason to interfere in their conflict.

The Jewish people had help from the globalists for sure, but the reason why it succeeded was due to their own economic and intellectual strength. If they did not have a rather efficient strong population, then they would have been retaken decades ago. And Israel runs at 40% capacity anyway, because there are so many fucking marxists still there with their idiotic communist ideas.

Who knows in the future the old native Swedes may want to retake part of Sweden in the Caliphate of Swedistan - I would rather support their claim, but that is me.

The world belongs to the strong and that is why I would not overly blame Muslims for going on conquests everywhere. They did what they did, but don't give me this bullshit of being oppressed now because the West and Israel has become much stronger than them due to technological advancement. At least we don't go and conquer them all converting them to Christianity. I am certain if the roles were reversed then Europe would be all gone and one big Ottoman/Caliphate empire.

(05-11-2017 11:35 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 10:54 AM)griffinmill Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 07:43 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  snip

I agree that Islam is a fascist ideology that needs to be eradicated, but do the current inhabitants of a stretch of land ever have any right to continue living there autonomously considering a historical or biblical claim can be made by another religious or racial group upon almost any geographical strip?

True and if the Samoans suddenly turn super-efficient, somehow become technologically and economically so advanced that they can reconquer New Zealand, then the Whites living there would have to deal with it.

In the world you have to carve out your own. If you have the strength, then so be it. What if Persian Zoroastrans returned and attempted to retake Iran from the Ayatollahs and throw out Islam out of their homeland thus renaming it Persia again? If they have the power to do it and their numbers are strong enough, then I don't see reason to interfere in their conflict.

The Jewish people had help from the globalists for sure, but the reason why it succeeded was due to their own economic and intellectual strength. If they did not have a rather efficient strong population, then they would have been retaken decades ago. And Israel runs at 40% capacity anyway, because there are so many fucking marxists still there with their idiotic communist ideas.

Who knows in the future the old native Swedes may want to retake part of Sweden in the Caliphate of Swedistan - I would rather support their claim, but that is me.

The world belongs to the strong and that is why I would not overly blame Muslims for going on conquests everywhere. They did what they did, but don't give me this bullshit of being oppressed now because the West and Israel has become much stronger than them due to technological advancement. At least we don't go and conquer them all converting them to Christianity. I am certain if the roles were reversed then Europe would be all gone and one big Ottoman/Caliphate empire.

You're obviously a very sincere guy, and very educated on the subject. I have to confess I don't know enough historically to be able to debate with you with any degree of sophistication! But I will say this - I spent the first 20 years of my life in Apartheid South Africa, and when those racial policies were in existence, under colonial white rule, the country was a beacon on the continent of Africa. It has been circling the drain since the country was returned to tribal African leadership. They can't even keep the electricity pumping for 24 hours at a time.

So, I'm very much conflicted; I realise that if the Palestinians had their run of the place it would be simply a dusty, primitive place pumping out nothing but religious fundamentalism.

Let's move discussion of the religion of peace into the migrant thread and keep this on Milo, as Zel recommended.

(05-11-2017 12:03 PM)griffinmill Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 11:35 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 10:54 AM)griffinmill Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 07:43 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  snip

I agree that Islam is a fascist ideology that needs to be eradicated, but do the current inhabitants of a stretch of land ever have any right to continue living there autonomously considering a historical or biblical claim can be made by another religious or racial group upon almost any geographical strip?

True and if the Samoans suddenly turn super-efficient, somehow become technologically and economically so advanced that they can reconquer New Zealand, then the Whites living there would have to deal with it.

In the world you have to carve out your own. If you have the strength, then so be it. What if Persian Zoroastrans returned and attempted to retake Iran from the Ayatollahs and throw out Islam out of their homeland thus renaming it Persia again? If they have the power to do it and their numbers are strong enough, then I don't see reason to interfere in their conflict.

The Jewish people had help from the globalists for sure, but the reason why it succeeded was due to their own economic and intellectual strength. If they did not have a rather efficient strong population, then they would have been retaken decades ago. And Israel runs at 40% capacity anyway, because there are so many fucking marxists still there with their idiotic communist ideas.

Who knows in the future the old native Swedes may want to retake part of Sweden in the Caliphate of Swedistan - I would rather support their claim, but that is me.

The world belongs to the strong and that is why I would not overly blame Muslims for going on conquests everywhere. They did what they did, but don't give me this bullshit of being oppressed now because the West and Israel has become much stronger than them due to technological advancement. At least we don't go and conquer them all converting them to Christianity. I am certain if the roles were reversed then Europe would be all gone and one big Ottoman/Caliphate empire.

You're obviously a very sincere guy, and very educated on the subject. I have to confess I don't know enough historically to be able to debate with you with any degree of sophistication! But I will say this - I spent the first 20 years of my life in Apartheid South Africa, and when those racial policies were in existence, under colonial white rule, the country was a beacon on the continent of Africa. It has been circling the drain since the country was returned to tribal African leadership. They can't even keep the electricity pumping for 24 hours at a time.

So, I'm very much conflicted; I realise that if the Palestinians had their run of the place it would be simply a dusty, primitive place pumping out nothing but religious fundamentalism.

Palestine was a multi-confessional place before the Zionists took over, with a sizable Christian population, as well as a local, well-integrated Jewish minority (same for Lebanon and Syria). The image you have of them as islamic fanatics is mostly propaganda, and a lot of political manipulation that was done as the cold war against communism was being replaced by the WOT/war against radical islam. It's a well established fact for instance that Israel founded Hamas, or that it supports ISIS.

A lot of the founding myths of the state Israel and the basic zionist propaganda have been deeply internalized through a century of propaganda, like the idea that Palestine, which sits at the lower end of the Fertile Crescent, was a desert before those bright zionists sailed in from Minsk or Cleveland to turn it into an eden, or that this land was uninhabited before they got there. Or that Ashkenazis are originally from Palestine...

Quote:The Jewish people had help from the globalists for sure, but the reason why it succeeded was due to their own economic and intellectual strength. If they did not have a rather efficient strong population, then they would have been retaken decades ago

They succeeded largely by manipulating Western public opinion and totally subverting/dominating the political process. They stuck American taxpayers with a $6 trillion tag and thousands of military casualties to destroy their neighbors so that they can completely dominate their region. And if you want to go further back and look into the history of WW1 for example (or WW2 for that matter, though the truth there is harder to access on a cognitive level), you will find a much bigger blood and treasure price tag that zionist founding fathers like the Rothschilds and their tribe leaders have imposed on the West.

(05-12-2017 11:25 AM)Teedub Wrote:  Let's move discussion of the religion of peace into the migrant thread and keep this on Milo, as Zel recommended.

Fair enough.

I didn't know that Milo was a hardcore zionist, just saw the vid of him with Galloway on the previous page. This goes a long way in explaining why a pedo goofball like him can get $12 million to start his own little media empire.

If I was a professional, conservative writer who didn't have a publishing deal, I would probably approach Milo because he looks like someone who would stay on top of his business, be professional about it, and follow through with his plans and promises.

(05-12-2017 01:04 PM)911 Wrote:  I didn't know that Milo was a hardcore zionist ... This goes a long way in explaining why a pedo goofball like him can get $12 million to start his own little media empire.

Isn't it more likely that Milo gets attention and support because he's effective at pushing the left's buttons, being a hard-working, fast-talking, flamboyant, acerbic attention whore?

(05-12-2017 03:06 PM)ElFlaco Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 01:04 PM)911 Wrote:  I didn't know that Milo was a hardcore zionist ... This goes a long way in explaining why a pedo goofball like him can get $12 million to start his own little media empire.

Isn't it more likely that Milo gets attention and support because he's effective at pushing the left's buttons, being a hard-working, fast-talking, flamboyant, acerbic attention whore?

There is a tendency from the general public to think that celebrities got their status by being hard-working righteous pundits/actors/singers, as opposed to them being aligned with the agenda of those who are in control of the media.

Milo Yiannopoulos got his notoriety by being a Breitbart senior editor. He wouldn't have made it there if he didn't push their zionist editorial line, because defending Israel is one of the main reasons Breitbart was founded, if not the main reason.



Not to say that they don't do good work, but deep down they are driven by this agenda, just like The Rebel and many other well-funded alt-right outlets, including (to a lesser extent) Infowars.

I'd be really shocked if those that are fronting Yiannopoulos $12 million aren't working for the same agenda as Breitbart above.

(05-12-2017 01:04 PM)911 Wrote:  This goes a long way in explaining why a pedo goofball like him can get $12 million to start his own little media empire.

Calling him a paedophile is pushing the left's agenda of silencing him. You can disagree with him, and what he said was a bad choice of words, but he's not a paedophile. If anything, he's a victim of hebephilic abuse himself.

(05-11-2017 01:22 AM)atlant Wrote:  Supporting Israel is the only logical conclusion if you want to fight against the cancer that is Islam.

I'd agree, but aren't Israel and Saudi allies? I know I'm contradicting myself since I said we shouldn't derail the thread.

(05-12-2017 05:36 PM)911 Wrote:  Milo Yiannopoulos got his notoriety by being a Breitbart senior editor.

Is that true? Milo built his brand on multiple channels: twitter, TV debates, YouTube, college speeches. I'd never even heard of Breitbart when Milo came on the scene.

Who paid his salary, his travel expenses and production costs. And before he had his youtube channel, he was already a fixture on British TV. You might have discovered him through Youtube, but he didn't get there organically, he is a professional pundit.

(05-13-2017 07:38 AM)Teedub Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 01:22 AM)atlant Wrote:  Supporting Israel is the only logical conclusion if you want to fight against the cancer that is Islam.

I'd agree, but aren't Israel and Saudi allies?

Pretty much. Israel and its Saudi allies have fed that cancer in order to dismantle secular regimes like Syria's Assad. This cancer is their weaponized tool.

And that's just the local angle for Israel, the bigger globalist goal being to destroy countries like Syria in order to flood Europe with refugees that will dilute European cultures.

(05-13-2017 07:36 AM)Teedub Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 01:04 PM)911 Wrote:  This goes a long way in explaining why a pedo goofball like him can get $12 million to start his own little media empire.

Calling him a paedophile is pushing the left's agenda of silencing him. You can disagree with him, and what he said was a bad choice of words, but he's not a paedophile. If anything, he's a victim of hebephilic abuse himself.

Milo is not a victim of "hebephilic" abuse. He comes from circles where pedophilia is common and where sex with older men as a boy was practically a rite of passage. He said he aggressively sought out sex with adults as a child (4min mark in vid below) and that this was a great thing. This is not the kind of behavior we want to condone or normalize.





He said that as a child, sex with adults was just great. How is this not an apology for pedophilia?

The guy is damaged goods. Granted he's been on the right side politically but he is toxic.

(05-13-2017 12:14 PM)911 Wrote:  He said that as a child, sex with adults was just great. How is this not an apology for pedophilia?

The guy is damaged goods. Granted he's been on the right side politically but he is toxic.

If he were on the left, he would been given a complete pass by the media, and they would have said that he is a traumatized victim trying to normalize his abuse, or blaming himself, or suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.

I have no idea whether or not this is true, by the way. I don't know whether or not Milo is trying to put a positive spin on something traumatic that happened to him, or whether he actually approves of sex between underage teens and adults, or whether he was just being flippant and camp in a common gay nihilistic way.

Any of these possibilities could be true.

I would say though, that since he has never said that he wants to have sex with underage people, or that he plans to in the future, that there just isn't sufficient evidence to say that he is an apologist for pedophiles.

His attitude could very well be the attempt of a victim to put a bright face on experiences from his past, as a show of strength, sad as that may appear, as in, it happened to me and I'm fine with it. It could be an attempt at normalcy signaling.

He might also have been just showing off, like, look at all the fancy parties I go to and all the crazy things I have seen, and aren't I grown up for not giving a shit about any of it?

Anyway. It is a pretty mucky situation, and none of it makes Milo look good; I agree that it makes him look damaged and suspect. For all his verbal dexterity and humor and cleverness, he is a squirrelly character.

I thought that when I saw him live on his college tour and think it now. I have the sense that there is this person, this true Milo, shrinking away from public view, hiding behind the big MILO the stage and the internet. Some people are compelling because they are so comfortable with themselves that they have a natural charisma, and others are so uncomfortable with themselves that they create a false persona that is larger than life. I would put him in the second camp.

I just don't think it can be reduced to a simple apology for pedophilia without more proof.

Proof from the poof.

^Whether he's a pedophile or not can be debated...

His faggotry can not.

I do find it amusing that a forum that doesn't allow gays into it's membership has so many fanboys for this guy. Let's be real. He was a useful troll at best. Now that he's gotten caught up in this pedo nonsense, he's a liability.

His zionist backers can pump as many millions into his sunken ship as they want. He's not going to recover from this.

(03-04-2017 03:15 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  The Establishment Right and the The Establishment Left are two sides of the same coin.

Milo shouldn't have been talking about Pizzagate. Possibly that this was what spurred him into action. Milo is well-connected enough that they might have gotten nervous about him starting to reveal various details.

Also the crisis management was wrong. He should have never resigned from Breitbart at least this time around. You never give in to the cuckservatives or the radical left. You double down and publish a headline at Breitbart: "It's official - Milo is not a pedophile and he is not going to get fired!"

We truly have to learn our right responses to those attacks. The left protects their own even if they have done and said far worse things than Milo. We should do the same, but again the crisis was managed badly - both by Milo and by Breitbart. Double down and fire back is the only way.

He mentioned on the Joe Reagan show he saw people from Hollywood in some acts with children that would be considered illegal, he even mention X-Men director Bryan Singer involved into this, this is not the first time Singer is rumored to be involved into some strange with with kids.

(03-24-2017 03:33 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  Nice vid on the scandal by a semi-hot now-conservative ex-SJW.

Also new data just in:



Molly O'Malia



.... actual age at the time of the pics being taken was 14 years old.



I will spare you the WB questions for a girl who is that well developed and the clearest example of a 10 one could get.

And look at that US jailbait girl play the innocent damsel in distress when a rapper contacts her:



Yeah - I am sooooo innocent your honor:



A 14yo girl is essentially mentally a 16-17yo boy. Sure - women don't become more mature than 16, which is the male equivalent of 26, but hey - it is how nature had created them.

Either way - this pedophilia scandal of Milo is bullshit. We will see whether Milo can come back.

We have now the last two generations, but specially the last one Gen Z raised with food full of hormones growth, there are studies showing kids reaching puberty soon and sooner, girls getting their periods early than previews generation, this girl could go into a nightclub and most likely she will no be asked to show ID.

(05-13-2017 12:14 PM)911 Wrote:  Milo is not a victim of "hebephilic" abuse.

He was engaging in sexual acts as a young teen (not a prepubescent child, hence hebephilic rather than paedophilic) with a priest, how is that not abuse? Even if it was consensual, it was an abuse of power by the adult. I've seen all the Joe Rogan clips etc, and I agree with debeguiled's take on it all.

(05-13-2017 01:05 PM)Kratomite Wrote:  I do find it amusing that a forum that doesn't allow gays into it's membership has so many fanboys for this guy.

You've been here two minutes, lurk a little while longer and post in other threads etc before making remarks against the membership. I've seen this kind of stuff time and time again, and the person always ends up getting banned pretty quickly.

She's an outlier though, doesn't look like the average 14yo girl.

Here's X-Men director Bryan Singer:



https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/tag/bryan-singer

Well we'll see

(05-13-2017 02:13 PM)Teedub Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:05 PM)Kratomite Wrote:  I do find it amusing that a forum that doesn't allow gays into it's membership has so many fanboys for this guy.

You've been here two minutes, lurk a little while longer and post in other threads etc before making remarks against the membership. I've seen this kind of stuff time and time again, and the person always ends up getting banned pretty quickly.

I just stated a couple facts, man. This forum doesn't allow gay members. Most 'red pill' guys see homosexuality for what is...deviant behavior.

Yet with Milo apparently it's ok because he likes to troll common enemies.

If Milo were actually genuine, and not a publicity hound, I could perhaps sympathize. But it's pretty obvious he has no principles. And I'm not surprised that he's trolled himself into oblivion.