(07-13-2016 07:58 PM)frenchcorporation Wrote:  

(07-13-2016 07:52 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

(07-13-2016 07:42 PM)frenchcorporation Wrote:  Disclaimer: take this with a pinch of salt. and if it's already been posted I apologise

Apparently one of the officers shot dead was a neonazi/white supremacist in the traditional sense: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn...53276.html

Quote:A few friends and acquaintances of mine did the legwork and discovered that slain Dallas police officer Lorne Ahrens was a proud, open white supremacist. His ring finger bore an Iron Cross tattoo, his Facebook cover photo was a massive Thor’s Hammer symbol, and his left arm was emblazoned with a “crusaders’ shield,” common to those right-wing Christians who believe that Christianity is engaged in a centuries-long war with Islam. His Facebook likes included pages which bore similar iconography—more Iron Crosses and a Confederate flag or two.

And this matters why?

The shooter said he wanted to kill white people especially cops, the shooting happened at a BLM rally, and BLM believe the police force has a problem with racism.

So with that in mind, one of the policemen involved in this shooting, potentially having link to neo-nazi groups etc, is relevant to the discussion

No, it's not relevant unless the officer in question was abusing his authority. Someone having "questionable" personal political beliefs should not be considered a justifiable reason to have violence inflicted on them.

That Huffington Post piece is pure slander in the worst way imaginable. It's implying that having objectionable political beliefs means that you somehow deserve to get murdered. Their entire smoking gun is based on a few tattoos.

The police chief of San Jose is an outright La Raza sympathizer. Does he "deserve" to get murdered as well?

(07-13-2016 07:42 PM)frenchcorporation Wrote:  Disclaimer: take this with a pinch of salt. and if it's already been posted I apologise

Apparently one of the officers shot dead was a neonazi/white supremacist in the traditional sense: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn...53276.html

Quote:A few friends and acquaintances of mine did the legwork and discovered that slain Dallas police officer Lorne Ahrens was a proud, open white supremacist. His ring finger bore an Iron Cross tattoo, his Facebook cover photo was a massive Thor’s Hammer symbol, and his left arm was emblazoned with a “crusaders’ shield,” common to those right-wing Christians who believe that Christianity is engaged in a centuries-long war with Islam. His Facebook likes included pages which bore similar iconography—more Iron Crosses and a Confederate flag or two.

This is your conclusion, or are you simply repeating the conclusion of the Huffington Post writer?

The iron cross, the Moljnir, and the crusaders cross are all deeply rooted in European history and unjustly maligned by people who would deprive them of every symbol of their history.

The article speaks about a phantom white supremacy, but there are no mainstream news outlets who are not maligning the Right as White Supremacists. Whites are shitty at being supremacist if this is what they are. They can't even control a single MSM outlet. Who is maligning a dead cop, who was expressive of his heritage, as a supremacist? I'd hold that the dictator of the narrative is the successful supremacist, not the group who can't stop themselves from being incessantly maligned in the MSM.

My family fought in the crusades (known by a surname association with the crusades, not through any particular individual) and I won't ever let anyone dictate what that cross means.

Then there is this paragraph in the article:

Quote: It also underscores the logic behind Micah Johnson’s motives—assuming we believe what’s been reported of them to be true. In a year that’s seen nearly 200 Black people killed by police already, and when none of the officers are likely to ever be charged with a crime for doing so, Micah Johnson killed five police officers. And one of them was likely a full blown white supremacist. Perhaps unsurprisingly, if someone wants to target white supremacists, starting with cops is a good bet.

^^^ He just openly justified the homicide of cops.

There is a right and wrong side to what is shaping up, wholly crafted by these media snakes.

(07-13-2016 07:58 PM)frenchcorporation Wrote:  

(07-13-2016 07:52 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  

(07-13-2016 07:42 PM)frenchcorporation Wrote:  Disclaimer: take this with a pinch of salt. and if it's already been posted I apologise

Apparently one of the officers shot dead was a neonazi/white supremacist in the traditional sense: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn...53276.html

Quote:A few friends and acquaintances of mine did the legwork and discovered that slain Dallas police officer Lorne Ahrens was a proud, open white supremacist. His ring finger bore an Iron Cross tattoo, his Facebook cover photo was a massive Thor’s Hammer symbol, and his left arm was emblazoned with a “crusaders’ shield,” common to those right-wing Christians who believe that Christianity is engaged in a centuries-long war with Islam. His Facebook likes included pages which bore similar iconography—more Iron Crosses and a Confederate flag or two.

And this matters why?

The shooter said he wanted to kill white people especially cops, the shooting happened at a BLM rally, and BLM believe the police force has a problem with racism.

So with that in mind, one of the policemen involved in this shooting, potentially having link to neo-nazi groups etc, is relevant to the discussion

Or in all likelihood, it means the cop had taken to a form of Christian expression that reflects his status as a member of law enforcement.

Even if he put on white sheets and burned crosses on his evenings off, did he deserve to die?

(07-13-2016 08:08 PM)hydrogonian Wrote:  snip

I was quoting text from the article writer, that wasn't my conclusion/opinions at all

(07-13-2016 08:06 PM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  No, it's not relevant unless the officer in question was abusing his authority. Someone having "questionable" personal political beliefs should not be considered a justifiable reason to have violence inflicted on them.

That Huffington Post piece is pure slander in the worst way imaginable. It's implying that having objectionable political beliefs means that you somehow deserve to get murdered. Their entire smoking gun is based on a few tattoos.

The police chief of San Jose is an outright La Raza sympathizer. Does he "deserve" to get murdered as well?

I agree, I do not think having neo-nazi leaning etc is a justifiable reason at all. The writer does seem to be implying that heavily though.

(07-13-2016 08:10 PM)porscheguy Wrote:  Or in all likelihood, it means the cop had taken to a form of Christian expression that reflects his status as a member of law enforcement.

Even if he put on white sheets and burned crosses on his evenings off, did he deserve to die?

No he didnt deserve to die, what i posted what the opinions of the writer, not myself

(07-13-2016 08:06 PM)frenchcorporation Wrote:  If the huffington post article is accurate, I'm sure it will affect how people view the incident, as all the other ensuing information has

Sure it will. That's the point of it, in spite of there being no logic to the conclusion; either factually nor morally.

And the illogical conclusion both factual and moral, as the retard-level IQ masses infer whatever crazy nonsense that they will as a result, will stoke the fire higher.

There's nothing like punching the accelerator when you are careening toward a cliff.

But it was always obvious that this was the entire point of the media-invented racial frenzies beginning a couple of years ago. No one should be shocked that they are going to follow through with their plan to fracture society in two.

Ah it's notorious anti-white jew Jesse Benn at it again.

Each.And.Every.Time

Just can't help themselves.

I'm going to get a rune tattoo soon just to piss of these antifa phaggots.

(07-13-2016 08:06 PM)frenchcorporation Wrote:  

(07-13-2016 08:02 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  Sure, I understand perfectly that deceitful argument, that 5 cops should be killed because one guy had some tattoos.

What argument are YOU making here, try to think it through.

You are the first person I've seen posit that argument , I havent seen that argument made anywhere else. Like i said previously, I was providing relevant information.

If the huffington post article is accurate, I'm sure it will affect how people view the incident, as all the other ensuing information has

Huffington Post is a gossip outlet that is run by a bunch of liberal chicks with no real journalism background. They shouldn't be trusted.

(07-13-2016 08:22 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  Ah it's notorious anti-white jew Jesse Benn at it again.

Each.And.Every.Time

Just can't help themselves.

I'm going to get a rune tattoo soon just to piss of these antifa phaggots.

I don't see why it's relevant that he's a Jew, but he sure is one crazy fuck. Scroll down through his Twitter. It's largely him criticizing less extreme liberals for being unwilling to use violence to achieve their political ends.

Here are a couple downright scary things he's Retweeted:

https://twitter.com/jackherer20/status/7...0603488260

https://twitter.com/syndicalisms/status/...6649671680

Quote:In a year that’s seen nearly 200 Black people killed by police already

Where do they get the statistics for how many people killed by police so far this year? How many of other race's deaths have resulted from police interaction?

(07-13-2016 09:22 PM)spokepoker Wrote:  

Quote:In a year that’s seen nearly 200 Black people killed by police already

Where do they get the statistics for how many people killed by police so far this year? How many of other race's deaths have resulted from police interaction?

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-in...s-database

Thanks. So far 145 blacks killed this year, funny how they round up so far. Let's just throw on an extra 55 bodies, make it a nice even 200, nobody'll notice. More than double that whites killed, but that doesn't exist, so we can't talk about it.

(07-13-2016 09:21 PM)Delta Wrote:  

(07-13-2016 08:22 PM)nomadbrah Wrote:  Ah it's notorious anti-white jew Jesse Benn at it again.

Each.And.Every.Time

Just can't help themselves.

I'm going to get a rune tattoo soon just to piss of these antifa phaggots.

I don't see why it's relevant that he's a Jew, but he sure is one crazy fuck. Scroll down through his Twitter. It's largely him criticizing less extreme liberals for being unwilling to use violence to achieve their political ends.

Here are a couple downright scary things he's Retweeted:

https://twitter.com/jackherer20/status/7...0603488260

https://twitter.com/syndicalisms/status/...6649671680

The only way dear Jesse here is allowed to write the kind of violent racist crap he writes is because he is a jew and people need to wake up to the fact that so called 'white guilt' is most often jewish anti-white sentiment.

I'm starting to feel that one of these days picking up a book about European history, mythology or traditions is going to be a hate crime and label you as a dangerous nazi.

I'm sure the Dallas shooter was able to spot that Mjölnir pendant from his sniper's nest, and that's what drove him into a righteous homicidal fury. His original plan for that day was to hand out free ice cream to children, damn that white supremacy!

(07-13-2016 07:42 PM)frenchcorporation Wrote:  Disclaimer: take this with a pinch of salt. and if it's already been posted I apologise

Apparently one of the officers shot dead was a neonazi/white supremacist in the traditional sense: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn...53276.html

Quote:A few friends and acquaintances of mine did the legwork and discovered that slain Dallas police officer Lorne Ahrens was a proud, open white supremacist. His ring finger bore an Iron Cross tattoo, his Facebook cover photo was a massive Thor’s Hammer symbol, and his left arm was emblazoned with a “crusaders’ shield,” common to those right-wing Christians who believe that Christianity is engaged in a centuries-long war with Islam. His Facebook likes included pages which bore similar iconography—more Iron Crosses and a Confederate flag or two.

This information is as relevant as any information posted about the background real or imagined of any person killed by a police officer. We've seen a few posts aimed at "justifying" why a person was shot and killed by the police and most of it is a stretch or just bogus information put out by obscure sites masquerading as legitimate news outlets.

It's horrible that the officer was killed but if he was a white supremacist we should know that and more importantly the Dallas PD should (have) known about it.

(07-14-2016 12:50 AM)BassPlayaYo Wrote:  

(07-13-2016 07:42 PM)frenchcorporation Wrote:  Disclaimer: take this with a pinch of salt. and if it's already been posted I apologise

Apparently one of the officers shot dead was a neonazi/white supremacist in the traditional sense: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn...53276.html

Quote:A few friends and acquaintances of mine did the legwork and discovered that slain Dallas police officer Lorne Ahrens was a proud, open white supremacist. His ring finger bore an Iron Cross tattoo, his Facebook cover photo was a massive Thor’s Hammer symbol, and his left arm was emblazoned with a “crusaders’ shield,” common to those right-wing Christians who believe that Christianity is engaged in a centuries-long war with Islam. His Facebook likes included pages which bore similar iconography—more Iron Crosses and a Confederate flag or two.

This information is as relevant as any information posted about the background real or imagined of any person killed by a police officer. We've seen a few posts aimed at "justifying" why a person was shot and killed by the police and most of it is a stretch or just bogus information put out by obscure sites masquerading as legitimate news outlets.

It's horrible that the officer was killed but if he was a white supremacist we should know that and more importantly the Dallas PD should (have) known about it.

So now white people can't be Christian either?

(07-13-2016 07:42 PM)frenchcorporation Wrote:  Disclaimer: take this with a pinch of salt. and if it's already been posted I apologise

Apparently one of the officers shot dead was a neonazi/white supremacist in the traditional sense: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn...53276.html

Quote:A few friends and acquaintances of mine did the legwork and discovered that slain Dallas police officer Lorne Ahrens was a proud, open white supremacist. His ring finger bore an Iron Cross tattoo, his Facebook cover photo was a massive Thor’s Hammer symbol, and his left arm was emblazoned with a “crusaders’ shield,” common to those right-wing Christians who believe that Christianity is engaged in a centuries-long war with Islam. His Facebook likes included pages which bore similar iconography—more Iron Crosses and a Confederate flag or two.

Let's everybody quickly condemn this man for having tattoos and jpegs of historical white cultural emblems.

Historical white cultural emblems ™ although predating the Nazi regime were used by Nazis are therefore historical white cultural emblems(Ntm) which is to say Nazi-trademark.

It therefore follows that anyone displaying historical white cultural emblems(Ntm) has Nazi sympathies, and this in no way should be seen a pathetic attempt to draw heat off of racial hate groups like BLM and the Black Panthers.

And just in case it wasn't blatantly clear, I'm being sarcastic.

(07-13-2016 08:37 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  The proof is in the details. It's not one cause. Ever. It's a combination of factors and none of them have to do with intelligence. Maybe religions (Mayan, Shinto, or Ancient Easter Island Beliefs), but never intelligence.

Africa is just too diverse to just collect into a pot of, these humans are racially incapable of building or doing things intelligently. Men like Shaka Zulu are in the small group of military geniuses. Ramses II was savvy in his own right as well against the Sea Peoples at times.

That pastor's anger I understand he wants his people to be responsible, but his premise is just too far off the mark.

Whether you count the Egyptian and North African civilizations to Africa is a matter of debate. Some Pharaoes were indeed black - they managed to take the reigns of their empire for generations, but North Africa was a lot more white 2000 years ago. We also know that.





Nice discussion with an IQ researcher who is not PC. However I don't agree with him in all aspects - his assumptions about higher IQs being derived from cold climate and hunting is in my opinion bullshit. Also he claims that it is created via random evolution. The Eskimos don't fit his views, so he says that their population was too small. Also the Chinese in the hot southern climates don't fit his definition either. Also the West African sub-saharan hunters don't fit his evolutionary theories - there was no easy fruit there for a long time - those tribes mostly hunted.

But I tell you what the two dominating factors are:

1. Toxin free nutrition and water - especially during pregnancy - sometimes starting 2 months before impregnation. That part is known to science now and that is why we get all those toxins to lower IQs deliberately (fluoride, toxic food ingredients, too small doses of vits for pregnant women, vaccines etc.). That part alone can raise IQs by 5-10 points for each generation.

2. K-selection in a sound patriarchy: Matriarchy is shit, because women when given free reign may select the strongest and fastest, but not the smartest bloke. In China only the smart and rich reproduced - that is why they don't feel the massive male surplus - the poor simply don't get married and don't have children. It was the same in Europe - before Christianity as well as after Christianity. The Jews brought this process to the max with almost deliberate k-selected breeding raising their IQs within 700 years to the highest of any tribe in the world.

But as you correctly put it Travelerkai - IQs were not the main determinant of the rising growth of civilization - cultural attitudes, political and economic system, religion, freedom, broad education etc. - those helped the rise of Western civilization. Europe had likely woefully inadequate IQs in the Middle Ages as well as until the 15th century. China as well as Eastern European Jewish tribes had much higher IQs then, since their food was infinitely superior to the Europeans' (Hunting was restricted to the aristocracy, a mini-ice age was on the way etc.). Still - Europe managed to rise above all others because they had the right combination of factors.

But let us not fool ourselves here - in the global economy IQs are now important together with the right attitudes and best massive k-selection. Personally for example if I was given full reproductive powers over any tribe, then I could easily steer that tribe to a massively improved IQ over a few generations. The rules are simple really - support stable families, healthy patriarchy, money and perks for anyone above a certain IQ even if you are not rich, added taxes for anyone who reproduces above 1 at sub-par levels. I can guarantee you that within 100 years the average IQ of for example black America could be at Ashkenazi Jewish levels. The Jews did it not that consciously directed - with science and good selection you could boost that process and attain the same goals in 1/10th of the time.

Now - all of that should not concern any man individually. You recognize the weaknesses of your tribe, count yourself lucky to be smarter than them and plan your life accordingly.

No matter where your racial tribe finds itself on the totem pole - it can either rise or fall when applying the factors I mentioned above. The globalists are working against an evolution and prefer us to be dumb, angry, confused and indoctrinated. This does not make it easier, but sooner or later I am sure that most of humanity will have IQs well above 110+ on average - all races.


P.S:
(As a quick reminder - personally I believe in reincarnation, so in my opinion we are born once black, white, Indian, Jewish etc. to get the full life experiences that shape us individually. But in each life we have to do the most out of it. Also when you have my viewpoint on eternal life, then it's practically impossible to be truly racist - but I guess to the leftists I still am - heh. But those viewpoints are not the secular scientific ones, so this is just my personal religious/spiritual bent on things that should have no bearing on what we can observe from a detached viewpoint on the issue at hand.)

In addition I realized that what we are doing here now is the formation of a supra-racial neomasculine tribe - taken to a higher level it would be nightmare of the globalists, but we will see what happens.

(07-14-2016 02:52 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  In addition I realized that what we are doing here now is the formation of a supra-racial neomasculine tribe - taken to a higher level it would be nightmare of the globalists, but we will see what happens.

I just realized that it's very likely that the outrage over the ROK meetups was ordered from above. They simply cannot allow a bunch of intelligent alternatively thinking Red Pill men to meet up. If we were a bunch of nuckleheads talking about BLM or Neonazism or sports, then we would be left in peace. But such a group meeting periodically and discussing what really matters? The globalists probably shuddered at that. They correctly assumed that if the ROK meetups started to grow and neomasculine men started to meet up regularly - coming from all walks of life and racial backgrounds united under one banner of similar thinking - no we can't have that!

Just a thought ... if I were a globalist, then I would certainly send my SJWs, feminists and the full power of the media against them so that they don't even meet up once. I guess they succeeded in their attempts.

(07-13-2016 07:42 PM)frenchcorporation Wrote:  Disclaimer: take this with a pinch of salt. and if it's already been posted I apologise

Apparently one of the officers shot dead was a neonazi/white supremacist in the traditional sense: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn...53276.html

Quote:A few friends and acquaintances of mine did the legwork and discovered that slain Dallas police officer Lorne Ahrens was a proud, open white supremacist. His ring finger bore an Iron Cross tattoo, his Facebook cover photo was a massive Thor’s Hammer symbol, and his left arm was emblazoned with a “crusaders’ shield,” common to those right-wing Christians who believe that Christianity is engaged in a centuries-long war with Islam. His Facebook likes included pages which bore similar iconography—more Iron Crosses and a Confederate flag or two.

Only Talmudic Jews could think a Christian cross is racist.

(07-14-2016 02:52 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

(07-13-2016 08:37 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  The proof is in the details. It's not one cause. Ever. It's a combination of factors and none of them have to do with intelligence. Maybe religions (Mayan, Shinto, or Ancient Easter Island Beliefs), but never intelligence.

Africa is just too diverse to just collect into a pot of, these humans are racially incapable of building or doing things intelligently. Men like Shaka Zulu are in the small group of military geniuses. Ramses II was savvy in his own right as well against the Sea Peoples at times.

That pastor's anger I understand he wants his people to be responsible, but his premise is just too far off the mark.

Whether you count the Egyptian and North African civilizations to Africa is a matter of debate. Some Pharaoes were indeed black - they managed to take the reigns of their empire for generations, but North Africa was a lot more white 2000 years ago. We also know that.





Nice discussion with an IQ researcher who is not PC. However I don't agree with him in all aspects - his assumptions about higher IQs being derived from cold climate and hunting is in my opinion bullshit. Also he claims that it is created via random evolution. The Eskimos don't fit his views, so he says that their population was too small. Also the Chinese in the hot southern climates don't fit his definition either. Also the West African sub-saharan hunters don't fit his evolutionary theories - there was no easy fruit there for a long time - those tribes mostly hunted.

The debate on intelligence between populations (not just races) has been well argued by such books as The 10000 Year Explosion and A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History. If you want to read Jared Diamond, at least read these, if you don't want to dive into more original research on population differences.

First of all, the Eskimo argument does not refute intelligence as a cold climate adaption. Eskimoes are basically beduins. They live in an extremely harsh but also extremely predictable environment. Beduins are known for great ressielence of character but not for great intelligence. Likewise with eskimoes, the ice desert behaves exactly the same, year after year after year, food is abundant too and it's the same food, year after year after year, seals and fish. The kind of front lobal intelligence associated with abstract though and creativity is not that important compared to resilience and patience.

Second, about the Chinese. What we call Chinese today are not the original peoples of all of China, they're a distinct rather recent people coming down south from the Yellow River where the earliest settlements are from around 7000bc where they live of fishing and rice farming. This is once again important - farming - is what the book The 10.000 Year Explosion is about, farming requires cooperation, planning, future-time orientation, generally traits associated with intelligence in animals. This Jiahu culture which cultivated rice probably then multiplied and spread on their genes.

Besides, there are plenty of crops in Africa to domesticate and in Northern America, the Northern native Americans had maize and beans, no difference from rice in Asia or Wheat in Europe. Wheat is in fact a lesser crop compared to maize and bean in nutritional value. There were also various goats and pigs in Africa which could have been domesticated. The original cow in Europe was not some docile animal either it was a huge beast the Aurochs, weighing in at 3000lbs during the ice age and more than 1500lbs afterwards standing the height of a fully grown man.

Then there's the 'but elephants ruined the crops' argument, which has some merit, why farm something in Africa when a pack of wild elephants show up and destroy a years work in 30 minutes. To that we can point to that both Native Americans and Indigneous Europeans made the Mammoth extinct largely through hunting.

What about predators? Well, Europe had the cave bear twice the size of the modern grizzly bear, not to mention sabre tooth tigers.

In fact, if you were to point to one single point of intelligence, it would probably be the hunt for mammoths - standing 4 meters (12 feet) and weighing 8 tons (16000 lbs). Try to imagine such a ferocious beast staring you down, dwarfing an African Elephant.

And yet, the early European and Eurasian (remember the split between European and Asian is only 45.000 years old), hunted them to extinsion during the ice ages with nothing but tools made of stone and not even the bow. Yes, that is going to apply some harsh evolutionary selection I think.

(07-14-2016 12:50 AM)BassPlayaYo Wrote:  This information is as relevant as any information posted about the background real or imagined of any person killed by a police officer.

You're wrong.

The symbols he was into have nothing to do with felonious behavior.

They're old and legitimate cultural symbols. In fact, they mostly point to religion, valor, 2000+ year old cultural heritage, and ethics.

He wasn't engaging in any other behavior but doing his job when killed, and so there is no relevance to his personal beliefs.

Cops who are heritage enthusiasts are not legitimate targets for psychos, any more than Black heritage or Jewish heritage enthusiasts are legitimate targets for anyone.

Quote:We've seen a few posts aimed at "justifying" why a person was shot and killed by the police and most of it is a stretch or just bogus information put out by obscure sites masquerading as legitimate news outlets.

Like what? Michael Brown Robbing a store just before he was killed? The thug-life poses of "victims" being made out to be Angelic future surgeons by the MSM?

These cultural affiliations have everything to do with their behavior when killed. That cop was quietly doing his job, period.

What's a "legitimate news site" these days, especially in regard to these matters?

Is that NBC who doctored the Trayvon Martin 911 tape?

Or is it every other MSM site who delivered selective facts across these cases, to include the present cases in the news, in order to stoke riots?

Quote:It's horrible that the officer was killed but if he was a white supremacist we should know that and more importantly the Dallas PD should (have) known about it.

First, what evidence do you have that he was a supremacist and not merely into his heritage or a nationalist?

Second, why do you "have to know about it"?

He was merely doing his job when killed. There is no other context for what he was doing when targeted. Therefore, your entitlement to dig into his past is invalid.

(07-13-2016 07:42 PM)frenchcorporation Wrote:  Disclaimer: take this with a pinch of salt. and if it's already been posted I apologise

Apparently one of the officers shot dead was a neonazi/white supremacist in the traditional sense: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn...53276.html

I wonder who could be behind this?



Author of:

Jesse Benn Wrote:…there’s an inherent value in forestalling Trump’s normalization. Violent resistance accomplishes this.

Impious Knave Wrote:a “crusaders’ shield,” common to those right-wing Christians who believe that Christianity is engaged in a centuries-long war with Islam

Come at me bro!