Translate

Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Nazi. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Nazi. Sort by date Show all posts

Monday, January 18, 2016

Why are white nationalists/supremacists, Neo-Nazis & fascists in the comments so often, theories, the ADL connection, a personal story & how to solve the problem. And are Neo-Nazis semi-controlled opposition or just useful idiots?

Note: this post is missing many videos that put things into context.

(You can get the above image at https://memegenerator.net/instance/72116355.)

For those of you who are deeply involved in the truth movement, you probably have seen a whole slew of Neo-Nazis, white nationalists/supremacists, & characters like that in the comments section of internet videos, social media posts, articles & so on & so forth. If you don't believe me, go to any noticed truth channel, & spend about 15 minutes or so just going through comments, and you should get the picture.

Most people wouldn't get too suspicious to see 1 every once & awhile. But, when you see the comments section of seemingly almost any political video about a controversial topic dotted with the activity of characters that I'm describing, don't you get even somewhat suspicious? 

To be honest, I have yet to find much real information to work on, and my current internet investigation skills are not very good. But, my 2 theories on why this phenomenon keeps happening are:
1: The people I'm describing are radicalized & fixated (especially with the scare of the white population declining combined with the cultural dumbness of Americans & the use of collectivism, a world problem, & dealing in absolutes, as clearly seen in the left/right paradigm, not that there aren't plenty of non-English speaking white supremacists/nationalists and Neo-Nazis), &
2: some to many are paid shills to discredit the truth movement, sometimes using multiple accounts.


I am willing to bet that there is a combination of both. Theory #1 does have at least some merit, & there is proof that Neo-Nazis have coordinated internet attacks. A couple of notable examples are shown in Neo-Nazi gave out internet abuse tips in a campaign against Luciana Berger & Fun With Stormfront. I can also show you a page where the attacks on StormCloudsGathering's video, Economic Collapse & The Rise of Fascist & Racist Elements started, but I do not want to link to it or mention its name because I didn't want to send traffic the poster's way. I also didn't want to bother putting up screenshots of the page because it is so big.

Theory #2 has actually happened in the past with the Anti-Defamation League:
Zionists tied to 'Nazi' organizing
Real Nazis, Or More Zionist Hoaxes?

Similarly, the FBI (and perhaps the CIA) has worked with Neo-Nazis before.
Andreas Strassmeir has been known to work with the FBI in relation to the Oklahoma City Bombing (https://duckduckgo.com/?q=CIA+FBI+Andreas+Strassmeir&atb=v33-5__).
Infamous Hal Turner has been known to be an FBI informant (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Turner#FBI_informant).

There was an FBI informant who has been known to organize at least 1 Neo-Nazi gathering: Meet the FBI Informant Who Organized Neo-Nazi Gathering Attended by Jo Cox Murder Suspect in 2000.



I'd also like to add that, as you can see here, the Israeli government has already been known to use internet trolls, which may explain some of the "I stand with Israel" type of content you see when doing the right searches. I also recommend watching the videos below and read Crime, Law Enforcement, And The Age Of Social Media.

I'm willing to bet that's just the tip of the iceberg. Perhaps more advanced & experienced people can investigate further. If you have any more information, please comment below.

Now, I do not intend to say that the things described in the bottom video are directly related to the issue this article addresses, but hopefully you'll get the idea of how things may be ran; the powers that be, or at least their intelligence agencies, may be at least part of the radicalization of Caucasians and the white nationalist/supremacist & Neo-Nazi movement. As you can read on Neo-Nazis troll Reddit to recruit ‘Alex Jones-reading kosher retards’, Neo-Nazis have, of course, used social media, image boards, & forums as recruiting tools, with Reddit being a major example. But I am highly doubtful that they can become so high profile like they are now just from that or the jealousy of some of the movement's members.

Before we continue, look at this: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLkYQwSCzfVRHFrk6NdJzTb-Hmus5_TDEk.

Now, why would the powers that be, or the intelligence agencies trying to control the world's average people run a scheme that not only opposes them, & creates more hatred for the Jewish people, & many of the powers that be are Jewish, but also, lead many of these people in a direction where the powers that be & Zionist influence are exposed further, like in the case of David Duke? Pretty much the closest to plausible reason that I could come up with is that the powers that be know that the truth movement is growing a bit stronger than what they are willing to tolerate, & to an extent where the powers that be are willing to take a few risks to discredit it. 
How many better ways are there to discredit a movement other than to depict it as egoistic race-fixated-&-obsessed white-only Hiterphiles?

This also explains why the types of people described in this article are so tribalistic and act so similarly.
For more details, look at https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLkYQwSCzfVRHdIEfTGrb7r8nbwJJ7Q1si and https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLkYQwSCzfVRGMS_oc0FRchMvOXTp4Tgma.

I admit that I have a personal story related to this: back in 2012 or 2013 when I joined the truth movement, introduced by Infowars, I didn't know 1/3 of what I know know, & followed in Infowars' footsteps closely. I soon also discovered StormCloudsGathering and followed in his footsteps. While in the truth movement, I saw people blaming the Jews all the time, & that really discouraged me from looking into the subject, thinking that blaming the Jews is mostly made-up nonsense made by Neo-Nazis.

But, in 2014, during Israel's conflict with Gaza, I started to discover how the Israeli government influenced the U.S. government, which started to pull me out of the old mentality that Jews aren't involved in the New World Order, helped along by StormCloudsGathering's video, "The Gaza Bombardment - What You're Not Being Told". 

I also started to listen to Anthony Lawson, & later, Ryan Dawson. 

I still listened to Infowars, but not just them and StormCloudsGathering anymore. In December of the same year, I found a video about some truth people, comparing Alex Jones, Michael Savage, David Duke, & William Pierce. It attacked the former 2, & supported the latter 2, & added Kevin MacDonald & Bob Whitaker as recommendations (not that I'll endorse their social views or currently use them as sources). 

I won't tell you the video's name or give a link because I don't want to send traffic its way, though it spurred me to listen to people who I never listened to before. 
I tried to listen to a few of William Pierce's works, but since I didn't hear him give sources, I didn't listen to him so much. 

But, I definitely listened to David Duke, though I did question his social views heavily. I also listened to Ryan Dawson & Anthony Lawson more and more in late 2014 & early 2015. 
Around this point, especially after seeing more & more anti-Zionists that did not hate the entire Jewish people, I was broken free from the notion that all anti-Zionists are also Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, antisemites, or overall unsavory characters. 
That's about it for my personal story.

"That some racist assholes advocate it for completely different reasons and motives does negate the very real suffering of Germans post-war. And same goes for Japan. You don't have to follow the emperor or be a Japanese supremacist to have sympathy for victims of atomic bombs. Why do people have to be either-or so polar?" - Ryan Dawson, from a comment he made on a video made by a white nationalist criticising him.
(Watch the above video until 6:29.)

Some people can call me a hypocrite for listing David Duke's content so much. But, I clearly make the disclaimer that I do NOT support all of his views and that everything should be questioned anyway.
Hitler wasn't a Zionist agent (he was anti-Jew in general), but the Haavara Agreement did help create Israel. Most of the Jews killed in the Holocaust were non-Zionists because many non-Zionist Jews stayed in Europe instead of going to Palestine.

Here are some comments made by Larken Rose from his video "What's So Bad About Nazis?":

"To all those deluded Hitler admirers, please stop implying that because Hitler spoke out against really bad stuff, he must have been good. Learn to THINK. If there are two serial killers having a fight, who do you root for? How about NEITHER? Hitler was a power-happy sociopathic authoritarian collectivist statist, fighting against OTHER power-happy sociopathic authoritarian collectivist statists. Choosing a side in any such battle makes you a dupe."



"I've seen it [a documentary]. It does a fine job of dispelling a lot of misinformation that was found in the "Allied" propaganda ... and then turns around and spews the same bullshit propaganda from the "Axis" side. It's just statist bullshit from the other direction, which isn't an improvement."



- Larken Rose.



A response I made to his 2nd comment:



"My only problem with the documentary as well is that it's so politicized (which makes historical revisionists look bad and, for average people, hard to listen to), and how it does not truly support freedom; only some concept of "unity" and "racial purity". As for "racial purity", yes, I believe that every ethnic group has a right to exist. But we can keep them in existence without big brother collectivist government that would alienate many people anyways."



In the end, look at what Hitler did to Europe. While Germany wasn't doing too badly for the social majority for a few years, the German government invaded both the Soviet Union & the rest of Europe instead of hunkering down & taking on dedicated, extra-hardened-up defensive positions, & in the end, not only did Germany get torn up them occupied by the allied powers, but also, half of Europe was re-occupied that the central banker owned allied powers & the other half was turned into a Communist hellhole for almost the rest of the century, which is a reason why their growth is so stunted.

I guess that historical revisionist Michael Hoffman II is right when he said:
"Hitler was a disaster for Germany. He took fully legitimate ideas about organic community and rootedness to the soil and twisted them into a modern counterfeit. In the name of fighting the Bolshevik police state, he created one of his own. In the name of military prowess, he rendered his people defenseless before the merciless devastation of RAF bombers of the British Empire. He crusaded against Communism and ended up Communizing half of Europe. Hitler is the pre-eminent failure and incompetent of this historical era."

(I got the above image from http://knowyourmeme.com/photos/1164559-alt-right.)
And the people that this article talks about are not even pro-freedom:



Now, how do we address this problem? As explained on Economic Collapse & The Rise of Fascist & Racist Elements, most of the people described are not convertible. What I advise that you do is to delete the comments of people who post hateful views about broad groups of race, religion, etc, and to avoid mentioning them. If you are unable to control the comments section of your posts, videos, and articles 100% of the time, then block the people that I described. An example of what I did is seen on https://plus.google.com/116561475917836019721/posts/FAwhALFzfi2.


As a bonus, I would recommend reading http://www.amerika.org/politics/a-tale-of-two-cities/. Now, the author doesn't yet have my current approval, but the points that they bring up sound good.


(Only read if you consider yourself a "White nationalist" or something in that manner)
I'm sure some audience members would be asking "How do we secure the future of European culture and the Caucasian race?". While I, of course, am not anywhere near a race/ethnic nationalist, I see their concern perfectly (just because we may be enemies doesn't mean that we can't see the same information). I have a plan to secure humanity's future, protect but I know that it's going to be controversial, and understandably so even though I'm quite careful: https://saynotodemocide1.blogspot.com/2015/10/securing-future-of-Caucasians-reducing.html.

Is the Glorification of Hitler Really Serving the Alternative Media?

And definitely be sure to read U.S. Garrison Militarism: BS "Peking Order", Blind Social Conformity is evil, since it's relatable to the dogmatic culture of the people that this article talks about.



Now, do you agree, disagree, or want to add more? Please say so in the comments!

Thank you for reading this article. Please follow me on Pinterest (https://www.pinterest.com/StopDemocide/), Google+ (https://plus.google.com/116561475917836019721/posts), and subscribe to my YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClWR5zBdxxnFGQ_kPFUDLkg/about), and please support the channels I support.

Sunday, November 4, 2018

Holocaust revisionism debunk challenge

Note: I may change the title for this. An article addressing both Zionists & the Alt-Right/Neo-Nazis/other people who hate Jews should be out in a few weeks.
This articles does NOT support/promote collective anti-Jewish hatred or any type of collective hatred for that matter. Rather, it is to shed light on content about the Holocaust that I feel that is not talked about enough, & if anything is incorrect or missing, hopefully someone will address it.

Some comments by Ryan Dawson:


"It is not promoting Holocaust denial. It is rejecting Holocaust exaggerations and nonsense. If someone said nukes and holograms were not used on 911, that would not be 911 denial. If someone said 2,900 people died from either fire or the buildings collapsing or the planes crashes themselves, but not from electric floors and not 20,000 people. That is not 911 denial. Saying Al Qaeda did not make human soap is not pro Al Qaeda. Its pro reality. Fact is 16 of the 22 camps did not have gas chambers. that is agreed upon by everyone. Of the remaining six two only have a couple sentences attributed to them as evidence and none of the 6 had physical evidence of gas chambers. Promoting dumb war propaganda as history will get people to throw the baby out with the bath water. Holocaust exaggerations are the main cause of Holocaust denial. There was a Holocaust. It was bad enough on its own. Starvation, shootings, disease, beatings and being worked to death. You dont need to add extraordinary bullshit to it like soap lampshade gas and ovens and 6 million. After Hiroshima and Nagasaki though the allies needed something huge and grotesque to out do that horror."
- The most Taboo topic

"Questioning the truth claims of the Holocaust is no more pro Hitler than opposing the war in Iraq would be Pro Saddam. Demanding real investigations into crimes of the allies likewise is no more anti-jewish than investigating potential war crimes in Iraq is anti-American. It is vital to know who really killed who and how, because to ignore the this total war mentality of the allies in WWII and to allow them pass off some of their own crimes onto their enemies only allows those who believe they can control the media to continue war crimes brought about by the ideology of total war. British and American forces purposely starved people as a tactic and as a result the militaries they were fighting, the civilians, and prisoners in those countries all starved, but in the reverse order."
Germar Rudolf on the Ethnic Cleansing of Germans Post WWII and his own persecusion.


"The American Empire is every bit as guilty of the same crimes that were done in the past which are so rightly demonized. I for one to not buy into the number of Six million or the gas chambers I think saying Zero is even crazier I do not believe in the other theatrical stuff about soap and lampshades etc. But there were labor camps people did starve and were worked to death! That is enough. However the allies were guilty of all the same things. My stance is not good vs evil but evil vs evil. That's the nature of GOVERNMENT it's wicked."
American Nazis? How are the empires different besides who lost?

"I do not want any pro-nazi or anti-jewish or zionist anti-arab/white/whatever BS in the comments. If it gets to be an emotional crap fest I will turn comments off completely. Act like rational adults and have a serious discussion."

Description of Could some of the Holocaust be exaggerated? Auto-vilification 2.

Me:
Let's say a bank robbery happens. The prosecutor claims that the robber stole $6,000,000, when the evidence shows that the robber stole only $500,000.
Am I denying that a robbery occurred if I simply question the numbers involved based on facts and evidence?

Are Revisionists Anti-Semitic?


Revisionism and the Promotion of Peace

The Crime of Politicizing the Holocaust

The Great Holocaust Trial

Holocaust why the numbers do matter:
https://youtu.be/H8NaKFw50-g

Holocaust Denial Videos:
https://web.archive.org/web/20120613232902/http://holocaustdenialvideos.com:80/

Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust




Ryan Dawson's videos against racism:

Fritz Berg vs Eric Hunt Debate:


Documentaries:

Links:

More than Taboo (1:32:24):

Buchenwald a Dumb Dumb Portrayal of Evil (Full Video) (2:21:37):


Talks:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sut Jhally will not be coming to LA (his letter to me):

"I’m certainly not anti Semitic nor do I push wild conspiracies. I do tell history from the point of view of the losing side. It does not make me agree with the losing sides. There are anti Zionist who are actually anti Semitic, there are always wolves in Sheep’s clothing. I am not one of those. All of my work has always been on my site as is my biography. I have not censored and hidden anything. You can look at all my guests on different topics. None of these people are hateful or promoting “the Illuminati runs the world” or anything like that. Its been consistently anti-war, in Syria, in Iraq, in Libya, in Ukraine, in Afghanistan, and yes even WWII and the Civil War the two “good wars” that I do not think were so good. No war is good.

First the confederacy https://youtu.be/tLlXC4WUUx0 please tell me what is so offensive about that? A quarter million Southerners died in that war and whole cities were burned to the ground. The main reason people fought was to defend their own property, not slaves or tariffs or taxes. You’ll never hear me defend barbaric practices. That war was coming long before 1860 and secession movements started after the Mexican War. Also Lincoln personally wrote to governors after the Corwin amendment which the North introduced and passed which constitutionally protected the institution of slavery. All the southern states had to do was stay in the union and ratify it. They seceded anyway, because that was never the primary reason for secession. It was tariffs, and that’s how the war started by SC firing on Fort Sumpter, where the export taxes were physically collected. That is a fact. It was also after Lincoln put a naval blockade on three of his own states to collect taxes. That’s why North Carolina seceded. Without NC, Virginia would have been surrounded and the war over in a few months, if it even began. Lincoln had also made mass arrests in Maryland with no due process, including judges he didn’t like and the army fired on and killed civilians Baltimore. It’s in their state song. Maryland my Maryland.
Secondly the flag
Below is the symbol for the Mississippi Freedom Party which was endorsed by Martin Luther King. The flag was a symbol of THE SOUTH not The racist south. Black homes were burned by Northern armies too… I hope this is not the first time you have heard or thought about this. The flag started becoming so racist around 1990 when Mtv and HBO made it so. I grew up with the flag in every form of culture from TV shows like Dukes of Hazards to Kid Rock concerts, to high school mascots. It was never a racist symbol. It’s the battle flag of Virginia and honors the dead. Yeah the Klan, which is like what a hundred people max, waves it around, they wave the American flag around too so what? That’s like saying BLM supports killing police because some extremist calling himself BLM shot some police. I defended the south after that idiot in SC shot people and I defended Black Lives Matter too after the same kind of incident.
Sierra Exif JPEG
Sierra Exif JPEG
freedomsummer2-300_sm 

This clear cut good vs evil reason for the civil war is what is a crass and conspiracy theory. It’s childishly ignorant of the complexities of the war. Calling the South racist (any more than the North) is on the same level of ignorance as thinking everyone in Japan does Karate. It’s a horrible stereotype that is not ground in reality in 2016. The South is the most racially integrated area on the US. Of course they have racial conflicts, that’s where most Blacks, Latinos, etc live. The South also had to restart in education and economically post Civil war because their major cities centers had been burned and looted. It really set things back for the people who lived there the overwhelming majority of which had nothing to do with the war. The reason for adding the stars and bars to state flags was not the civil right movement it was the centennial of the civil war. People of SC changed their flag and that is fine because it is their flag. It’s not up to people who do not live there.
WWII:
The US did not enter WWII to save the Jews. They didn’t care about any particular ethnic minorities. They had their own economic interest. They had their own post war propaganda too. Yes even America lies. The death toll done by the Axis has been played up and the death toll by the allies has been played down. There is no way in a city of 380k that Hiroshima’s instantaneous bombing killed only 100k people. The post war starvation in all the losing countries is also glossed over. The only thing separating Allied crimes from Axis crimes is the Holocaust. Otherwise its just like WWI a pointless war of imperialist fighting each other by sacrificing their poor. Both my grandparents were in that war one killing Nazis one killing Japanese. The one sent to Germany was also in the Korea War. His father was in WWI and his grand father was in the Civil War. He helped invent the submarine. And his ancestors were in the Revolutionary War. Betty Washington married into our family. A Dawson was chancellor of W&M when Thomas Jefferson went to school there. My mother’s dide was opposite all American Indians and a few pirates. I remember asking my surviving grandfather about WWII and Korea. I thought he was a hero. He said, “no, Ry by the time I was in Germany they were just starving. They used to send little girls to the kitchen begging for food, after the war.” Did you give them any?” No,” he hung his head. How about Korea? Weren’t use in a tank? Yes we had three tanks, but listen to me and don’t forget this. “There was no point or purpose of that war.” That’s all he would say about it. And later I found out he had pulled dead North Koreans out from where they had shelled them and looking at them and how young they were he just cursed the whole situation. My Native grandfather I never met but he was island hopping and burned Japanese to death with a flame thrower. He was shot through the leg but lived. Ironically I married a Japanese woman and had a child. I feel like I gave one life back.
Please don’t confuse Eric Hunt with Kyle Hunt. Kyle Hunt is racist white nationalist trash. Eric is a school teacher and historical revisionist. Yes he gets trashed on the internet again so what everyone does who talks about politics. He doesn’t deny the Holocaust. He just doesn’t think it was six million. No one studying it actually does. That ought to be good news. I am happy believe less people died and many of them made it out. Raul Hilberg placed the number at 5.5m people and that’s the highest it ever was. I had a different revisionist on right after, Dave Stein, saying Majdanek probably did have gas chambers and that though the gas disguised as showers was a war time myth that’s not a reason to dismiss gas chambers and that that spot had previously had them but they were destroyed. We have witnesses and confessions from these other camps. No one sane would deny it. We also had false claims about the western camps like Dachau which did not have gassing saying they did then later admitting they did not. It did have thousands of people worked to death and shot. They were also marched to the Tegernsee camp and killed over there. It’s important to point these things out and explain them because naysayers will point to evidence of labor camps which did exist and then say ah ha they were all like that. They were not. I’m the guy actually engaging these people instead of screaming racist and dropping the mic and walking away. That simply doesn’t work. I got Eric to admit on record millions were killed. I met Marc Gould who befriended Nazis and turned on them and put them in jail. He spoke at the Knesset and has one of the only two 100% voted they ever made which was to convict SS Lieutenant Colonel Bernhard who Marc had befriend. The press completely turned on him and attacked him because he released info about the Holocaust that Frank had records of showing names of people who had died with kill orders and stamps. It wasn’t the number they wanted and so he has been attacked. Now I know this guy. He’s Jewish and very proud of it, he has three daughters. I’ve met them. He doesn’t have a ill bone in his body. but google his name and look at what has been said about him. No one will defend these people, because it is easier to throw them under the bus and not get associated with it. I interviewed David Cole too who had the shit beat out of him by the JDL on Thanksgiving when he was walking home form the grocery store. He’s also Jewish. I have been to his home and seen his dying mother who was about 90lbs sleeping in the kitchen. He takes care of her. He and Hunt do not get along but both at some point in their life have reduced the numbers killed in the Holocaust and for that lost everything. It isn’t right. Even if both were wrong it’s not right.
I have a great number of videos defending Jewish people on my channels from the insane collectivism they must put up with. I have to make these from time to time because if you defend Palestine it must be because you hate jews.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tu70koRyU-g Israel vs Jews Learn the difference. And boycott Israel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3LYsfysaRg Blame the Jews not a Zionist crowd taken to the woodshed
https://youtu.be/S2L-IFqvr1E Me defending and attack from Adam Holland
That guy smeared me and the SPLC and ADL picked up his report and attacked me too. Shockingly the ADL removed it after I wrote to them so did the SPLC but later they put it back.
It’s also important to ask why one genocide towers above others the Congo, Bengal, Native Americans (which is my people) Vietnamese, Koreans, Iraqis etc. the US has killed millions post WWII. The reason they dont get the same weight is because WWIIs rescue story, though true, is the excuse for every war after it. And the more it is reduced the less of a weapon it is. I am standing up for justice. I do it in more unsafe circles. If you let people get away with saying human soap and skin lampshades or gas out of showers, then a large portion of people are going to reject the whole thing as false.
It’s no different than saying Bush did 911. It is a ridiculous statement. But that doesn’t mean there wasn’t any state sponsorship of the event or that it was not wrongly tied to Iraq because in both cased it was. I call it the shield of ridiculousness. You say something way out in left field and dismiss it with the only alternative being the official narrative, in order to hide the official narrative from more legit questions and opposing evidence. If you dont take the shield of ridiculousness away you can’t uncover crimes. Its like saying Hamas wants to push the Jews into the sea. Iran’s leader said he wanted to wipe Israel off the map, and babies on incubators. These are myths that broke or are breaking others are myths than did not. Sure I can be wrong about what I think is a myth and what isn’t but that’s the point of open dialog and discussion. I don’t shut anyone off no matter how black the sheep is. I even invited David Duke on so I could argue with him about racial determinism and show how stupid it is, he got wind of what I was going to do and backed out. He goes on news shows all the time and they dont call him out on WHY he is so wrong they just say he is and call him names. I would have picked his idiot philosophy apart.
I like Max. I met him twice. Not a big fan of his father, but I like Max. His film about African migrants is also on my site.

You might like my own film about Neocolonialism in Africa https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmP22Kanv3M
Max’s views about the Civil War however are based on prejudice and poor public school education. A liberal so wants to believe racism is behind everything bad that they accept that as an answer and stop looking at anything else. You made an anti southern comment on my show when I was interviewing you. I’m pretty certain you’ve never lived there. People from the south change their accent on purpose because there is so much acceptable prejudice toward it. They have to or they can’t get hired in some places. Hollywood constantly trashes the south and southern culture. People are made to feel ashamed just because of the chance location of their birth. Have you ever thought about how people from the south feel when you made anti-southern comments as if they are just matter of fact trivia?
I’m going to suffer greatly financially by you not coming. So I’m going to have to read your email over YouTube and defend my poisons. Everyone knows I’m not anti Semitic or racist. It just going to make you look like a typical reactionary Liberal professor. Being surrounded by students who are easy to boss isn’t healthy. it makes your head big. I understand though that you are a teacher and the cowardly thing to do is to protect yourself from being associated with people accused of nasty things instead of standing up for that person. I have never ever ever been racist or defended racist practices.
It’s really arrogant that you’d think I’d learn anything from your film that I didn’t already know. It’s a great film but don’t talk down to me. I started the BDS movement in 2001. We just didn’t call it BDS. No credit for that though. And I worked with the Presbyterian church on divesting the whole time. Look it up it predates 2005. We had the PSM at Duke back then and I worked with Diana Buttu. I have always stood up for the bullied even when it is the hardest like the Germans and Japanese, the South, the Communists, and no I am not a communist, even ISIS I understand it. Make no mistake I want them gone, but I still can understand why a young man after witnessing nothing but war and starvation would flock to the leader on the hill.
diana-me
I’ve been advocating Palestine rights openly my whole life back when you were too afraid to do it. You do not have to come screen your own movie over a difference in historical opinion if you don’t want. But don’t call me anti Semitic or a wild conspiracy theorist. Also I’m not pro confederacy. I very much like the US having all 50 states. Pointing out the real causes (plural) for the Civil War doesn’t mean I agree with the civil war on either side. The north also had slaves and killed Indians and later enslaved the Chinese. The 1860s were a very racist and sexist society all around the world. So was the 1940s.
I don’t dismiss great people over one thing like say Thomas Jefferson because he had slaves or Socrates because he had sex with boys or Einstein because he has sex with his cousin. I just point out the good and the bad. Most of us maybe all of us are gray onions not black or white. Most of History is too. The “bad guys” also had their reasons and beliefs. Even Zionist have their reasons. I don’t agree with them but I try to understand them. I’d hope you’d understand my position as a journalist for letting all people speak in free speech especially those with the least popular or even jail-able opinions. I Equally no, much more seek out opinion I agree with and give them the platform. The guess who spoke before you was a Republican state senator from Virginia (Richard Black) couldn’t be any more different on 99% of things. But he disagreed with the war in Syria and saw that the US was fostering terrorist groups covertly. He might have gotten mad that I had you on talking about Palestine. In fact, a lot of people would be. I do it anyway. If I wanted money or a bigger audience I would be a partisan hack and stick to safe issues. That is how I am, I let everyone speak and I let them get challenged too and you’re more than welcome to voice your opinion about the Civil War or WWII."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Holocaust Revisionism and Neo-Nazism:

"One of the most damaging, oft-repeated and false accusations leveled against Holocaust revisionism is that it is part of an extremist neo-Nazi movement, the ultimate purpose of which is to destroy democratic political systems and reintroduce Nazi totalitarianism. Expressing this widely held sentiment, a major opponent of Holocaust revisionism, Dr. Michael Shermer, described Holocaust revisionists as a "small but vocal group of anti-Semites, neo-Nazis, and political radicals who would like to see the return of National Socialism."[1] Shermer imputes to all revisionists a covert desire to restore the Third Reich, or bring on a Fourth. A cursory review of the evidence will easily demonstrate the falsity of this claim. 

Laird Wilcox, an expert on political extremism, estimated in 1989 that a minority (up to 25%) of Holocaust revisionists were Nazi apologists, which means of course that the vast majority (75%) at the time were not.[2] In the decade that followed Wilcox's estimate, revisionism has attracted a much wider audience which surely reduces this figure significantly. Holocaust revisionism's opponents like Shermer make it a point to ignore this important piece of evidence whenever they invoke the "revisionism-equals-Nazism" canard.

The father of Holocaust revisionism, Paul Rassinier, was a pacifist, former Communist and left-wing socialist who opposed the Nazis during WWII, and because of his activities in the French Resistance was interned by the Germans in Nazi concentration camps.[3] Indeed, this association of liberal and left wing intellectuals with Holocaust revisionism has continued in France to this day. The French-Jewish historian and bitter opponent of revisionism, Pierre Vidal-Naquet, has noted that at the core of revisionism in France is a left-wing , revolutionary group, La Vielle Taupe.[4]

The French revisionist scholar, Dr. Robert Faurisson, is a life-long apolitical liberal who never had any sympathies with Nazism. Another prominent, left-of-center French intellectual who is sympathetic to Holocaust revisionism is Serge Thion.

The famous French political philosopher, Roger Garaudy, is a former leftist Communist theoretician who converted to Islam. He is also a noted proponent of Holocaust revisionism in France.

One of the premier spokesmen for Holocaust revisionism in America is Bradley Smith. His present wife is of Mexican descent and his ex was Jewish. For numerous years prior to his involvement with revisionism he was a liberal free speech advocate who described himself as a Libertarian. Clearly, he hardly fits the mold for a neo-Nazi.

Prominent American revisionist author and activist Michael Hoffman II has expressed stringent criticism of Adolf Hitler and Nazism. He wrote:

"Hitler was a disaster for Germany. He took fully legitimate ideas about organic community and rootedness to the soil and twisted them into a modern counterfeit. In the name of fighting the Bolshevik police state, he created one of his own. In the name of military prowess, he rendered his people defenseless before the merciless devastation of RAF bombers of the British Empire. He crusaded against Communism and ended up Communizing half of Europe. Hitler is the pre-eminent failure and incompetent of this historical era."[5]

Regarding Nazism as a political system, Hoffman's judgment is equally harsh and accurately reflects the consensus of opinion among many revisionists who I have associated with:

"The Nazi system was suited to an ant-hill comprised of servants, lackeys and toadies automatically obeying 'supreme leaders' whose vision was corrupted by the mindless adulation they commanded. How I chuckle sardonically when I stand amid howling Jewish mobs and bands of know-nothing reporters as they accuse all revisionists of trying to 'revive Hitler' and having a 'secret agenda' of 'neo-Nazism.'"[6]
Clearly, this is hardly the talk of a "neo-Nazi."

The fact of the matter remains that Holocaust revisionists cannot be politically stereotyped, as they represent a wide range of political opinion, leftist, liberal, libertarian, centrist, conservative, rightist. There is indeed also a visible minority of neo-Nazis that consider themselves Holocaust revisionists, but the vast majority of revisionists cannot be categorized as such. Holocaust revisionism is an historical school of thought and not a political movement.

In their Denying History: Who Says the Holocaust Never Happened and Why do They Say It? , Michael Shermer and co-author Alex Grobman write: "Some Holocaust deniers, particularly those with extremist right-wing leanings, might gain greater acceptance if the crime (of the Holocaust) attached to fascism had never actually happened. Without the Holocaust perhaps fascism would be a more acceptable alternative to democracy."[7]

Long before the Holocaust legend, a majority of people in the Western democracies rejected totalitarian fascist movements, thus showing that fascism is not an acceptable alternative to democracy in the minds of most European peoples.

Stephen Roth, a former director of the Institute of Jewish Affairs (London), proceeds to explain why he believes that Holocaust revisionism is the most effective weapon in the "neo-Nazi" arsenal:

"If the crimes of the Nazis can be wiped off the record of history, if the Nazi regime can be whitewashed and made to appear as admittedly somewhat disciplinarian and tough on law and order but basically harmless and more efficient than our allegedly lax Western democracies with their growing disorder, their crimes, violence, and riots, then the neo-Nazis would have won a great victory. The system advocated by them would also look harmless and acceptable, and the ideological resistance to it, largely based on awareness of the horrors of the past, would be undermined, particularly among younger people who have no personal experience of Nazi rule."[8]

Should the revisionists succeed in convincing the peoples of the Western democracies that the "gas chambers" never existed, the vast majority would still harbor considerable resistance to the philosophy, political system, and policies implemented during the Third Reich. The National Socialists advocated a command state, with one-party control of society and censorship of the press. By contrast, inherent in the modern political culture of the West is acceptance of a multi-party state, independence of the press from overt political control, and a disdain for open regimentation.

Indeed, historian Francis Nicosia considers this an important factor in England's refusal to ally with National Socialist Germany during the 1930s. He points out that there was a fundamental irreconcilability between the National Socialist and English political philosophies and systems.[9]

Furthermore, the populations of the democracies, particularly America, seem fixed in the belief that a certain quota of disorder and dishonor, from riots and street crime to political and economic corruption, is an acceptable price to pay for the maintenance of the democratic society.

If Holocaust revisionism is not a neo-Nazi movement, why do its opponents and critics continually label it as such?

What they are trying to accomplish, I believe, is very simple. If people end up believing that Holocaust revisionism is, in essence, a neo-Nazi movement, many will be convinced that due to this association that the principal tenets of revisionism are false and perhaps even evil. This is an ad hominem line of "reasoning" which is logically fallacious but very psychologically appealing to large segments of the population. The truth or falsity of a theory (such as Holocaust revisionism) is independent of the political leanings of its proponents. As the philosopher of science Karl Popper noted, it doesn't matter where hypotheses come from, only whether they explain the evidence they are based on, whether they are subject to disproof, and whether they can hold up to attempts to disprove them.[10]

In short, this "revisionism-equals-Nazism" accusation is simply an ideological battering ram utilized by revisionism's opponents to discredit and undermine Holocaust revisionism."

Saturday, March 19, 2016

Opening a can of bloodworms: In case you're making assumptions about me, read this before debating me on social media, plus my political identity & religious views. An open message to liberals & conservatives

Be sure to watch the entire playlist through. When you're done reading this article, summarize what you read in this post plus the videos shown (except for the videos of "Beyond Scared Straight", "Elmo shirt guy" or "Gunnery sergeant Hartman", which you don't need to watch) to me either by P.M. or on the post we're talking on.
(You only need to watch the 1st video up to 12:03.)

This post is made becuase I'm so sick and tired of people (mainly on Pinterest) making assumptions and accusations about me and/or my source people. Thus, I made this purely to deal with those types. I'll be specifically addressing typical liberals and typical conservatives later in the article.


Let's open up the can of worms, shall we (not literally, of course)? And these aren't just any worms; they're bloodworms, specifically the types that can bite (I think the genus depicted below of "Glycera").



Before you debate with me, you should agree to the following terms:

4: you will not make false accusations of me and/or my source people, nor will you use ad-hominem attacks against me and/or my source people. 

3: Subjective labels (ie zealot) are not welcome, nor are they mature. When you use objective labels, make sure you get them right. You can do this by listening to the actual person, instead of what the media says about them. I have aspergers, and you should be doing better than me.

2: you will stay and debate with me no matter what. You will not block or ignore me. The only excuse is time constraints. Failure to do this will have me take screenshots of our messages for a "woodshed" compare and contrast of the statements between me and you, which will be released to the public with or without your consent.
1: by reading this message, if you intend to debate with me, you waive your rights to remain silent; you do, however, have the right to debate. I retain all rights to take screenshots of the messages you send me and share them with the public. There's no turning back. Since I am NOT a law enforcement agent, this is perfectly legal.

If you identify as being a white nationalist, white supremacist, Neo-Nazi, fascist, if you like Hitler, or anything like that, read these: 
U.S. Garrison Militarism: BS "Peking Order", Blind Social Conformity is evil,
Securing the future of caucasians, reducing xenophobia & critiquing fear of Islamic takeover, 
A few questions to (race & idealogical) supremacists; the feasibility & practicality of race supremacy, 
Open message to fascists, neo-Nazis & white supremacists; how does your solution work?, 
Why are white nationalists/supremacists, Neo-Nazis & fascists in the comments so often, some theories, a personal story & how to solve the problem.

If you identify as libertarian, socially liberal AND fiscally conservative, paleoconservative, classical liberal, or cosmotarian, then you're not required to read this.


If you identify as voluntarist or anarchist, you only need to watch the video below.


If you identify as an anarcho-capitalist, you only need to watch the video below and the video that comes after it.



Before we move on, visit the links provided to gain  a better understanding as to why I'm talking to people like this.



To self-proclaimed liberals:
Watch this to get your motivation up:

Before we really get started, I am NOT advocating a violent overthrow of the current government, for reasons explained in So You Want to Topple the U.S. Government? and the next 10 videos in the playlist.

Mandatory watch for liberals (optional for conservatives): 
.
. Also, be sure to summarize what's said in the video. Watch it to gain a better understanding of the following. 

I know how much you value being "anti-racist". I know that hate (and collectivism) is a serious problem around the world, but you should not be fixated on that.

Let's take war, for instance. Are you serious about being anti-war? Or, are you just using it as a catchphrase when it's trendy? Quit trying to defend the leader of your herd (Sanders, or worse, Obama, Clinton, etc). People such as Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and even Bernie Sanders are ALL pro-war. Why are you defending them, and not REAL anti-war people, such as Ron Paul, Gary Johnson or maybe Bob Barr, or while not quite as good, Ralph Nader, Dennis Kucinich or Jill Stein (there goes the "lesser of 2 evils" argument)? 
If you can call my source people "racist" for maybe something the media said about them or even hold social views that I explicitly say that I don't agree with, then is it fair for me to call you a "war hawk" becuase you supported people who were actually pro-war?

When it comes to views on external issues (ie someone who is good as an information supplier but is not endorsed by me on social issue opinions), does it really matter? If so, then do you just accept literally ALL the words of a news anchor, or news writer WITHOUT question?

Along with this, what do you value more; loyalty to government, or true moral-ethical principles?

Would you trust a corporate and foreign lobby controlled government that not only, at best, negligently, or at worst, intentionally, murdered (remember Waco and Ruby Ridge) AND did involuntary experiments on its OWN people (Suspected Biological Weapon Test on Small-Town America (bacteria, not virus), Nazi style human experimentation by U.S. Government, Project MK-ULTRA: CIA Mind Control) (NOTHING you just saw was a conspiracy theory. Everything shown is backed up.), not counting the tens, if not, HUNDREDS of millions of people (many of them civilian non-combatants) killed from poorly done (or unnecessary) conflict interventions to poorly or unjustified (and illegal) wars of aggression? 


Also, what do you think is worse; treason, or the #1 killer in human history, democide, or death by government? According to Rudolph Joseph Rummel, an estimated 262 MILLION civilians were slaughtered by governments in the 20th century alone, about 6 times the amount of military personnel in all pre-21st century combined? What is your line in the sand regarding unjustified or poorly justified treason and legitimate, moral and ethical defensive action?
Government is a double-bladed sword; on one side, it can protect our rights, provide basic necessary services and, to an extent, help protect our safety. On the other side, it can also cause an incomprehensible amount of damage.

Sometimes, we have to use unorthodox tactics to achieve the greater good (lookup the term "Chaotic good"). I'm willing to risk getting threatened, intimidated, killed, kidnapped, tortured or otherwise harmed if it means I am doing something good for the human species. Heck, it's practically one of my few true life motivations (to make planet Earth a better place & the human species happier and have animals and nature being treated much better before I leave this place). What matters to me, an individual, doesn't matter quite as much as my species or planet. 

Remember great historical figures such as Ghandi? What if he was so intimidated by the British government and social standards that he got little to no progress done? Chances are, the British would rule over India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and so on and so forth to this day at worst, or, at best, held on longer. What if Malala Yousafzai shut up when the Taliban attacked her, and what would've happened to education opportunities for females? 
Plus, what if the troops fighting the Axis during World War 2 were too scared to fight? And the Axis got access to highly advanced technology, such as atomic weapons? Chances are, planet Earth would be a very different place to live. 

I know that everyone has their fears, and fear has kept us and our ancestors, and probably will keep our descendents alive. But, we should not be paralyzed or affected by it so badly that we can't do what is necessary. It is exactly why I want people to watch the video before reading for several reasons. The reasons are that, not only are many Americans aren't up to speed on this (especially those who identify themselves as "liberal" or "progressive", not that I intend to attack all of them), but also, perhaps by human nature & probably made worse by our culture, many are too lazy or even scared to use unorthodox tactics, even when THEIR lives & the lives of loved ones would directly depend on it. 

I definitely do NOT want "Wolves", which are those who prey on others. I don't really want sheep, the average who don't do much good. I want more than porcupines, those who will defend themselves and maybe a few others but will only defend others under rather strict condition. What I want, and believe we need, are sheepdogs, those who will protect others, and willing to put themselves at risk if necessary.

Doesn't this seem a bit ironic, since many of you advocate disarming civilians, but leave one of the most violent institutions in the entire world's history still armed past the teeth? Does that seem like putting the cart before the horse?


Back to how much you value being "anti-racist", don't trust the SPLC or ADL. Look at the 1st 16 videos in the playlist below. You do not need to summarize or even watch these, but you do need to watch these if you have the slightest grain of trust for either the SPLC or ADL.


And get your emotions under control. You don't like it when conservatives are egoistic, and most people don't like it when you're emotional. I have lots of experience debating people on the internet, and I know how to manipulate emotions. But, I often end up getting emotional responses without even trying to manipulate emotions!



Gee whiz. Talk about double standards!

None of these are rhetorical questions; they're real questions that I not only demand to be answered, but also, for you to ask yourself.


To self-proclaimed conservatives (mostly an edited excerpt of The broken/convoluted uses & definitions of "racist". You should also read Philosophy & social issues rant: Savage vs Civilized dichotomy, oversimplification, gray areas, collectivism, hypocrisy & double standards. You do not have to summarize either one of them, but it is a good idea to read them for the purpose of understanding this part of the article).

Also, if you're pro war in any way, shape, or form, watch the video below.


Before you say "I'm not pro war, I'm anti-terrorism", remember that that's like anti-gunners trying to say "Let's stop calling it gun control and start calling it massacre prevention". Just as strict weapon laws can actually cause massacres, believe it or not, it it the U.S. government's occupation of other countries and improperly getting involved in foreign affairs that is the cause of terrorism, which is supported by NATO, Israel and Saudi Arabia (look this up for yourself). Many of you are only anti-terrorism for white Christians, and many of you care less for non-Christians and/or people who are ethnically Arab.

If you do not directly hate all Muslims, you do not need to read this. If you hate Islam and/or disagree with the belifs and/or behaviors of Muslims without hating them directly, you also do not need to read this.

I know that a good amount of you who are reading this are not racists to the point that you would turn someone down or otherwise discriminate against them simply for their race. But, how about what their wearing, rather it be a Kufi or hijab (believe it or not, some Orthodox Christians wear hijabs, and there are Jewish sects who wear burqas, NOT that I advocate hijab or want people to wear face coverings in public)? 

Many of you dislike Muslims to the point where they would discriminate against them when they have not committed a crime yet. But, this does not end here; there are conservatives who ABSOLUTELY hate the guts of Muslims and Arabs (ESPECIALLY Palestinians), and treat Islam, Muslims, Palestine, Palestinian people and the Hamas government (and maybe ISIS) as one element. For some proof, go on the internet and look in the comments section of any political Israel-related content, like this for example. Many of these people have no clue that Arabs and Muslims who support Israel (and that there are Muslims who acted good to Jews and Christians, and are not Islamists like what ISIS or the Taliban has or whatever is in that case. Plus, not all Muslims share that many beliefs or have a similar mentality. I've addressed similar issues here, and StormCloudsGathering has touched upon a similar, related problem here), and that Jews are not perfect.
I know that a lot of stereotypical Christian-conservatives are going to say "How dare you love and support goatf***ing rag headed satanic-pedophile worshiping sand monkeys over god's chosen people!? (whew)".
I never said that I liked Jews any more or any less than Muslims; I am just saying that they are human, and I view them as that. Rather or not you agree with that, one thing is for sure; Jewish people can be just as loving, caring, and kind as Muslims or Arabs can be, but at the same time, can be every bit as hateful, heartless and cruel as Arabs or Muslims can be. Just becuase a particular group of people does not seem innocent to me and/or I disagree with the way they do things does not mean that I'll directly hate all of them.
Jews are humans, and thus, every bit as capable to steal without proper justification (ie survival/emergency), damage things when not necessary, rape, kill outside of defense of self and/or others and so on as any other group in the human species can. This is a fact of life; they are like everyone else, and like the rest of the human species, lack genes that create perfect humans. I have nothing against the entire Jewish people, even though i disagree with some of the things they often do, their beliefs, and even if I hate individuals, I do not hate entire groups. I even have at least 1 Jewish friend/ally on Pinterest, and support Jewish groups such as the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (http://www.jpfo.org/), Orthodox Jews united against Zionism (http://www.nkusa.org/), True Torah Jews (http://www.truetorahjews.org/), Jews against Islamophobia (http://www.jewsagainstislamophobia.org/?page_id=6), and even Jews against circumcision (http://jewsagainstcircumcision.org/). 

(To understand the following, read this.)
By your own logic, if you collectively hate all Muslims for a few things they have done, then you should be out hunting down Jews (including unarmed child and elder civilians), flamethrowing and machine gunning those you can't capture on sight, and taking those whom you do capture and gut them with chainsaws, all WITHOUT trial and in violation of the Declaration of Natural Rights.
But I know that you won't do that, becuase Jews are the "chosen" people according to the same book that allows cutting open pregnant women's stomachs plus bashing babies on rocks (Isaiah 13:15-18 I believe), ALLOWS slavery (Leviticus 25:44), KILLING KIDS for cursing at their parents (Leviticus 20:9), doesn't let women to teach or have authority over a man (2:12) just to get started. Also, if you really follow the Bible, you better forget about wearing mixed fabrics (Leviticus 19:19), getting tattoos (Leviticus 19:28), eating pork (Leviticus 19:27), eating shellfish (Leviticus 11:10-12), trimming hair on temples or beards (Leviticus 19:27), or having fortune tellers, fortune cookies or horoscopes (Leviticus 19:31). For some extra proof, watch a video called "Why there's no bible on my bookshelf" (below). Besides, books such as the Bible is ultra hard to understand, & I guarantee you that god would've made the Bible a lot easier to understand if he really wrote it.


You probably want to prohibit the practicing of Islam regardless of how respectful or not individuals are to the rights of others, yet many of you hypocritically demand that your beliefs are forced upon others, and as I said before, you may be about as bad as your enemy, and perhaps worse than your enemy's predecessors.
(I got this from http://m.9gag.com/gag/5817707.)

I'd like to add that it is a violation of natural rights to force prayer or religious study or to limit speech except in extreme cases (ie non-educational videos depicting real abuse). Anyone who has done real research about internet pornography doesn't have such one-sided views on the issue, and would probably see the way its presented on the site as bogus.


(None of these images belong to me. All belong to their original creators. The sites that they came from are linked above.)

Not to mention how you get P.O.'d over people from developing countries coming over to European Christian majority countries, yet don't talk about the actual root of the problem.


Again, talk about double standards!

While you're at it, get your ego under control. You don't like it when liberals are emotional, and most people don't like it when you're egoistic. Don't be like angry in-your-face Casey from Beyond Scared Straight.

(Watch this from 3:38 onward.)

Now, what IF I caught you committing violence against civilians (ie shooting up a Mosque)? Here's what I'll do to you assuming I'm able to do this;

1st, advise you of your Miranda rights, like this:

"Sir/mam, you have the right to remain silent. Anything this you say from now on CAN/MAY be used against you in the court of law. You have the right to privately talk to a legal team before questioning, and have them present with you during questioning. If you can't afford one on your own, I'll help you get one if you wish. You can decide at any time to exercise any of these rights and to not answer any question and to not make any statements. Do you have any questions, concerns, or other comments?"

2nd, While you're in the holding cell, I'll make sure that you have good food to eat and clean, safe water to drink (you may end up getting nutraloaf, but only if you act violently enough).

And 3rd, after your trial, I'll make sure that the punishment you receive does not exceed the crime you commit by a significant margin, nor is it cruel or unusual, particulary relative of the crime(s) you've been convicted of.

How many of these rights will you give to Muslims, Arabs, or those other people you hate? For the most part, I can only assume that you won't give them all of these rights.


To everybody; what you just read is just with me, and I'm actually quite nice when those interacting with me are being reasonable and practice good self-control. There are plenty of people out there who have the mentality of, if you disagree with them, they'll flip you off with both fingers and shout "**** U AND KISS MY ****". I am not one of them, which explains why I haven't really name called in this article.

(Got this from https://plus.google.com/u/0/113480986185539339296/posts/H8dqDKT6qbL.)

By now, many liberals would be crying their eyes out, screaming their vocal cords out and tearing their scalp from their skull, and conservatives are crashing their keyboard after getting their ego hurt worse than a violent gang member getting locked up in a pink cell.

And, liberal OR conservative, you're lucky that I didn't get someone like Deputy John Lyle to communicate with you. 
Or even worse, Gunnery Sergeant Hartman. Warning: harsh language in the video below.


(The video below is a bonus to represent typical liberals/conservatives coming into a debate against someone like me thinking that they're going to win using regular tactics, and coming out find out otherwise, just like misbehaving brats coming into a youth intervention program thinking that they're tough, and coming out finding out that they aren't quite as tough as they once thought. And no, I am not like the inmates or criminals, nor is this a threat or intended to be one.)

I wonder how many people will react like the Elmo shirt guy.
In his defense...
Or be like Triggly Puff...


Now, onto my political affiliation: I consider myself to be a socially mid left and fiscally right libertarian. If you disagree with libertarians, go watch Is Libertarianism really corporatism?, and Capitalism (the video below and the video that comes after it).

As for my religious belifs, I consider myself to be a weak-agnostic-atheist. Simply put, I personally lean towards not believing in god, yet won't say that others can't make contact with god.



Don't like me and/or this article? Please, go ahead and drop all of your thoughts in the comments section below. Let all of your emotion, hate, resentment, bitterness, ego, and so on and so forth flow into your comment. I would like to see how liberals and conservatives would react.

Do you like my "Read if you're making assumptions about me" post?