White supremacists urge trolling Clinton supporters to suicide

a reply to: spiritualzombie

I am so glad I do not live in any of the urban cesspools filled with such a highly concentrated group of useful idiot sheep willing to riot against a legally and democratically elected official, egged on by Soros and our criminal propaganda machine.

The narrative STILL continues, that Trump supporters are all racist and violent, even though we have clear evidence that the real violent racists are on the other side.

It's funny that you and MSM forgot to continue with the article:

Just be like “it’s the only way you can prove to the racists that Hillary was right all along.”

That clearly left out detail shows that it was a snarky joke. Pure nonsense.

a reply to: Winstonian

The narrative STILL continues, that Trump supporters are all racist and violent, even though we have clear evidence that the real violent racists are on the other side.

Because only one side can have violent racists? I admit that some people who oppose Trump can be violent. Are you prepared to admit that some people who support Trump are racist?

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Not really. The only way to really eradicate terrorism entirely is to kill them all.

Is that right? Is it humane? Is it good?

Nope. But killing a few terrorists breeds more terrorists. Leaving terrorists alone breeds more terrorists. So the only thing that gets rid of terrorism entirely? Killing them all. That's why the "war on terror" is perpetual and never-ending: the only way that war can be won is by employing methods most people don't find acceptable. Acknowledging that fact is neither banter nor some horrible thing for a person to do. Your average 20 year old lance corporal in the Marine Corps can explain to you how to defeat terrorism, and can also explain it's not feasible.

I know it's scary to some folks to be able to conceive of something like that and talk about it in abstract terms, but it is what it is.

Yes, it's hard to conceive of eliminating a group of violent nutjobs and all of their family members. Hitler did it, though. I understand that it breeds itself. But you can't just kill all the "living ones" and think terrorism will not exist anymore.

You know how the Jews feel? Yeah. The Nazis tried to kill them all and pretty much made a bit of a dent. But there are still jews, and it took DECADES for Germans and Jews to reach an equilibrium. For this all to start again but now it's European-Americans and Middle-Easterners......

really?

NO. Shamrock. Just. No.

You're equating a clinical discussion with a practical application.

They're two entirely different things, and the only way you can link the two is to play the Hitler card.

Why is this a thing with the left now? Protesting things you think might happen and trying to equate what you think might happen with things that actually did happen as justification for it, all while using things nobody has actually said as your talking points?

I knew before I ever deployed for my very first combat pump that we weren't going to "win" by killing some people but not others. I knew that the only way we could "win" would be to level the entire society and kill everybody. I also knew that wasn't going to happen, because you'd be hard pressed to find more than a handful of people in the military willing to murder women and children wholesale. You'll pardon me for not thinking myself Hitler's equal for grasping that concept.

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: charlyv

It's pretty well known fact that White Supremacists and KKK are Trump supporters.

And that sums up neatly the problem with you, your thread, and your entire way of thinking. For some reason, you're convinced that only once side can have anybody "bad" on it.

Probably because you're able to justify anything that happens on "your" side of things as being "necessary." Yet for some reason, Trump is the one getting the Hitler card played on him?

Comical.

And now watch as hundreds of ATS fanatics now claim that these people don't represent Trump voters, while also claiming that ALL Muslims are responsible for terrorism...

The difference, of course, is that Trump actively courted these hate groups, he pandered to them, he preached their words from the stage again and again and became THEIR Fuhrer.

They are all trying to pretend this didn't happen, they're all trying to ignore the reality the whole world has just watched, but they can't. They can scream about "liberal media lies" all they like, but they know Trump actually said and did the things reported. They cannot rewrite history and they cannot remove the clear connection Trump support has to the far-right, the racists, the rapists, the xenophobes, the homophobes, the ignorant scum of America he has legitimized.

No, you DO NOT GET to pretend you voted for a different man than the rest of the world just saw. You do not get to claim that you voted for something different. You do not have the luxury of cherry-picking the statements you like while pretending he never said some of the most disgusting, loathsome, ignorant things the world has seen since the rise of Nazism.

If you voted for him, you did so despite those loathsome things and you endorsed him. You have legitimized this and that makes you a deplorable, disgusting, ignorant fool who deserves all the pain and hardship you're now going to experience with the rest of America.

a reply to: Rocker2013

In fairness, Trump was so vague and self-contradictory he was essentially a tabula rasa for people to project their hopes and desires on. He will now surround himself with Washington insiders who will get him to sign the TPP, cut taxes for the rich, increase military spending....

a reply to: Rocker2013

Does that mean a vote for Clinton endorsed and legitimized pay-for-play politics and breaching national security as a matter of convenience and rigging the electoral process?

Or is that different?

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: charlyv

It's pretty well known fact that White Supremacists and KKK are Trump supporters.

And that sums up neatly the problem with you, your thread, and your entire way of thinking. For some reason, you're convinced that only once side can have anybody "bad" on it.

Probably because you're able to justify anything that happens on "your" side of things as being "necessary." Yet for some reason, Trump is the one getting the Hitler card played on him?

Comical.

for some reason????

1...when was the last time a presidential candidate called Mexicans who cross the border rapists and murderers?
2...when was the last time a presidential candidate publically made fun of disabled people?
3...when was the last time a presidential candidate called his opponent crooked, and needed to be put into prison, at every speaking engagement, month after month?
4...when was the last time a presidential candidate refused to show his tax filings or his business dealings abroad?
5...when was the last time a presidential candidate was praised by a former KGB agent?
6...when was the last time a presidential candidate was praised by the KKK?
7...when was the last time a presidential candidate who has businesses outside the U.S. refuse to put his business under a blind trust, and will let his own children run it while being president?

a reply to: jimmyx

Saying mean things and third parties saying nice things

versus

Actually doing something. Or not doing, as the case may be. However you want to frame being "reckless" with national security issues.

Why won't you answer my question instead of trying to turn it back around?

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Rocker2013

Does that mean a vote for Clinton endorsed and legitimized pay-for-play politics and breaching national security as a matter of convenience and rigging the electoral process?

Or is that different?

why are you even asking?......you wouldn't believe the answer anyway, so it's moot.

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Rocker2013

Does that mean a vote for Clinton endorsed and legitimized pay-for-play politics and breaching national security as a matter of convenience and rigging the electoral process?

Or is that different?

why are you even asking?......you wouldn't believe the answer anyway, so it's moot.

Lol k.

a reply to: Shamrock6

It's true. Your mind is incapable of comprehending the situation. It is a waste of time for anyone to reason with you.

So... just continue cheering for torture, racial profiling, Muslim bans, murder of innocent families, and silencing the media... just mean words. When you hear about deportations, cheer for the mean words that broke families. When you hear about racial profiling cheer for the mean words that are encouraging systemic racism.

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: Shamrock6

It's true. Your mind is incapable of comprehending the situation. It is a waste of time for anyone to reason with you.

So... just continue cheering for torture, racial profiling, Muslim bans, murder of innocent families, and silencing the media... just mean words. When you hear about deportations, cheer for the mean words that broke families. When you hear about racial profiling cheer for the mean words that are encouraging systemic racism.

What's true is you, and others like you, aren't capable of having a rational discussion and using actual facts, so you have to resort to name calling and personal attacks and strawmen and telling others they "just don't understand."

Oh, and not answering questions

One would think that by now, our experiences with the virtual communities would have trained us in the method of ignoring trolls. But no, clearly, giving them the attention they are looking for and thriving on is really putting them in their place. Haters gonna hate, and productive members of society gonna productive. Decide which side you are on and get to it.

a reply to: TzarChasm
I agree with you completely, as long as it is Daily Stormer’s publisher, Andrew Anglin that you are labelling a troll.

Rationalwiki - The Daily Stormer
The Daily Stormer was launched on July 4, 2013 as a sequel to Anglin's Total Fascism blog. However, while Total Fascism was far more in-depth, long-winded, and pseudo-intellectual, The Daily Stormer, modeled after Der Stürmer[wp] in Nazi Germany, uses shorter articles, more memes, and a more provocative style intended to appeal to a younger demographic. In short, Anglin seems to think that his readership is composed of man-children who have the attention spans of goldfish, and the success of The Daily Stormer versus Total Fascism seems to confirm this view. That pretty much says it all.

It is worth noting the mailing address given for site contributions points to a counseling center and Anglin's father, Greg, is known to run a Christian counseling center. In fact, the website itself was originally under Greg's name. One has to wonder what a Christian's views on the content of TDS would be.
...
Culture jamming

The SPLC has documented Anglin's involvement in and encouragement of culture jamming[wp] by making hyperbolic statements in fake online accounts as women and minorities.
...
Troll campaigns

TDS organises hate campaigns against people they dislike. TDS orchestrates what it calls the "Troll Army", which trolls people Anglin disagrees with.[63]

It is also interesting to note that some White Nationalists would agree that "it is hard not to conclude that Anglin is a paid shill and agent provocateur, whose purpose is simply to infest and discredit White nationalism".

a reply to: DJW001

I can admit that anyone can be racist, and that grouping people up into little "baskets" is exactly why Trump got elected.

Americans are sick of the overboard identity politics.

George Soros intends for us to all be at each others throats. This is social engineering at it's worst.

a reply to: Winstonian

George Soros intends for us to all be at each others throats.

Is that your understanding as a psychic?

Hilarious! Everyone in this thread that is brushing this issue off as nothing are doing the exact opposite in the thread about the protester who said people would have to die. That goes vice versa as well, it's like two cults trying to see who has the worst case of cognitive dissonance.

a reply to: pthena

Anyone who makes a hobby of spreading hate is a troll. Anyone who gets a kick out of stirring the pot is a troll. Anyone who thinks it is fun to provoke and incite for the sake of provocation and incitement is a troll. Anyone who uses these tactics to further their agenda is a troll. I wasn't being specific, I was making a broad statement about a broad sport.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Rocker2013

Does that mean a vote for Clinton endorsed and legitimized pay-for-play politics and breaching national security as a matter of convenience and rigging the electoral process?

Or is that different?

That's it, focus on that same one thing you guys obsess over, while ignoring that numerous REPUBLICANS have done exactly the same thing for years, and while ignoring that she was cleared.

Meanwhile, your little "protest vote" or your decision to vote for a disgusting orange cretin who did nothing but spew hate and bile from his podium is placing far-right politicians and Nazis into positions of power in your new government. You now have Nazis throwing salutes and screaming "Hail Trump!" while directly quoting Nazi propaganda, in German, in a government building in Washington:



But those emails! Right?