Texas shooter’s ‘RWDS’ patch linked to far-right extremists

It's a really bad pysop. Even on Twitter people are just calling oit the FBI and CIA as sloppy.
Like this dude is a total brown guy mexicano ONLY posted on a Russian site and is a White supremist?

They knew all this about this guy, yet we're still waiting for the Trans Manifesto? Lmfao, you can't make this up.

Truth is, they're sloppy because the young 20-something activist they hired are not only inexperienced, but lacking any real vision but the usual buzzwords.

Now they're just preying on our communities to push a message.

However, more importantly, the OP is biased and ideologically slanted, therefore these facts probably won't resonate among the left. Why should it? Better a patsy no one cares about with all the right buzzwords shooting randomly, than the trans shooter targeting Christians.

originally posted by: Arnie123
It's a really bad pysop. Even on Twitter people are just calling oit the FBI and CIA as sloppy.
Like this dude is a total brown guy mexicano ONLY posted on a Russian site and is a White supremist?

They knew all this about this guy, yet we're still waiting for the Trans Manifesto? Lmfao, you can't make this up.

Truth is, they're sloppy because the young 20-something activist they hired are not only inexperienced, but lacking any real vision but the usual buzzwords.

However, more importantly, the OP is biased and ideologically slanted, therefore these facts probably won't resonate among the left. Why should it? Better a patsy no one cares about with all the right buzzwords shooting randomly, than the trans shooter targeting Christians.

Oh, so on Twitter "they"'re calling out the FBI and CIA as sloppy, so it must be so, huh? Because everything "they" say on Twitter is true... Do you read and think about what you write???

I agree with you regarding the withholding of the "Trans Manifesto" being a double standard, but claiming that either of these shootings is some psyop is a bit of a stretch.

Furthermore, claiming that the OP is biased and ideologically slanted is just plain not the case. The person discussed what has been said by the news media regarding this event, and then asked the reasonable question regarding whether or not Hispanic white supremacy is actually a thing (which, as it turns out, it is). How is that being slanted in one's views? Claiming this person's view was slanted is really telling of your own biases.

Then I'm not sure what to make of the rest of what you wrote after that, about the facts not resonating with the left. The left is against all of these mass shootings, and wants better gun control laws to stem this epidemic of them. There was a great deal of attention focused on the Nashville shooting. Sure, not so much regarding the gender identity of the shooter or the religion of the victims, but then it generally isn't the case with these mass shootings. But why is the gender identity of this particular shooter so much more important than the gender of all the other mass shooters, who are overwhelmingly heterosexual males, and most often caucasian. And it appears a lot of these shootings -- not all of them, mind you -- are by right-wing and sometimes racist people, not by lefties. Yet I don't see anything of this mentioned by the folk who like to cherry pick and make a big deal out of the odd mass shooting done by someone who doesn't match the usual suspects' M.O.

As for the trans-male shooter who killed people at the Christian school, my understanding is that he/she went there as a student previously. Other shooters have also gone to their old schools to go out in a blaze of gory glory. But hey, since you brought up this angle, I'm curious: did you weigh in on the shooting to death of nine Christians at a black church in Charleston, SC in June, 2015? Or because the shooter in this case only shot them because they were black, not because they were Christians, was it no big deal?

If you are mainly outraged when a trans person shoots some Christians, and don't care about all the other shootings, overwhelmingly done by heterosexual males, often with a racist bent, against victims of all walks of life and ages, then you're the one with the unsavory ideology and a biased view of such incidents.

originally posted by: Lumenari
RWDS is just a LARP that the CIA has set up.

I would have thought you would know that as a CIA role-player.

Is the guy above you part of the LARP?

a reply to: Mahogany

Ummm... what?


So, his parents need a translator (assume they only speak spanish) and he is not a white guy?

Isn't that group "Whites Only" that want to actually kill people like him and his parents?

How does that work?

Weren't most of his victims little white girls?

I mean, crazy people are crazy but this doesn't make logical sense. What am I missing? Did they expand their membership to Hispanics now?

a reply to: infolurker

Yeah, living in Texas my whole life and knowing the culture, not to mention, being HISPANIC myself.

I can see these things from my own experienced lens. I know tons of similar individuals, most of the extended familiese leave with each other and speak only spanish.
Lower income stratification.

It's like I said, Pysop. That, or they're just using this "opportunity" to overshadow the Trans shooter.

Either or, these are sick people in the shadows.

a reply to: MrInquisitive

The left doesn't want Gun Control, they want to ban them. Period.

Secondly, your pendantic wall of text did nothing.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Mahogany

If the time comes where we need to take our country back by force, no identifying patches will be allowed. Because those whom the FBI label as "right wing extremists" will be the heroes who get rid of top-level radical officials...those who ruined America.

Uh huh... sure.

sorry dupe

The Farce is really strong with this one.

originally posted by: Arnie123
a reply to: MrInquisitive

The left doesn't want Gun Control, they want to ban them. Period.

Secondly, your pendantic wall of text did nothing.

I'm on the left, and I want sensible gun control, which in my case does including banning assault rifles. I'm not for banning all firearms, so your claim is false. Never mind that most state legislatures nor Congress would never go for a complete firearm ban. That's a straw man argument if there ever was one.

As for your refusal to engage with me regarding my direct responses to your post, which I laid out in paragraph form, i.e. it wasn't a wall of text, that's on you not me. I directed some very specific questions to you, which you chose not to answer. Evidently they went way, way past the comfort zone of your cognitive dissonance.

I even agreed with you on one point, but apparently that went past you as well. Can't even acknowledge some level of agreement on an issue, huh?

Psyop this, psyop that, and sick people in the shadows, yet you complain about "activists" using buzzwords??? And "they" said this that and the other thing on Twitter about certain alphabet agencies involvement, so it must be true. Really compelling stuff there as well.

And you seem to be stereotyping all Hispanic people in Texas as one monolithic, low-income, mainly Spanish-speaking group in another post of yours, and feel justified in doing so because you are evidently Hispanic as well. Man alive, I wouldn't ever dream of doing so to my own demographic group.

How's that for being less pedantic? But I really, truly would like you to respond to the pentultimate paragraph in my previous post, as that gets to the heart of the matter.

originally posted by: ElGoobero

Are you implying that right wingers are all white?

originally posted by: tovenar
The state of Texas —by popular outcry from Hispanic voters— views white as a race and Hispanic as an ethnicity. So, “Hispanic of white race, Hispanic of black race, Hispanic of any race, Native American Hispanic are categories you can choose on govt paperwork including census.

It goes to the racial/ethnic categories of the conquistadors. Criollo and mixto are 2 important Spanish language labels in Latin America. Google them. They have cognates in Texas rural culture.

Tejanos are hispanics that were in Texas before the republic 1836-1848.

“I didn’t jump the border— the border jumped me!”

Yes many of our medical forms have that choice as well.

There is a box for "White Non Hispanic" and "White Hispanic".

I saw a Ben Shapiro clip recently talking about how it's useful for any attack linked with white supremacy to be broadcast and deconstructed on national TV but if you have a transgender assailant nobody wants to talk about it.

m.youtube.com...

a reply to: starfoxxx

Crisis actors.

COINTELPRO Psyops 😎

All just so prim proper and perfect 😎

Most all "hate groups" are created by deep gov operations 😎

That's what I think 🏆

a reply to: MrInquisitive

First someone says this.

I'm on the left, and I want sensible gun control, which in my case does including banning assault rifles.

Then they open a can of cognitive dissonance with this.

And you seem to be stereotyping all Hispanic people in Texas as one monolithic, low-income, mainly Spanish-speaking group in another post of yours, and feel justified in doing so because you are evidently Hispanic as well.

'Sensible' would begin with reading existing laws such as the 1968 Gun Control Act, and The 1993 BradyHandgun Prevention Act that specifically state 'NUTCASES' are verboten from owning firearms.

And yet ALL the gun control in the world does nothing to stop those from killing people-That's against the law & and THEY'RE NUTZ.

I want those on the left to stop speaking out of their #'s and actually read existing laws since it's the SENSIBLE thing to do.

PS the act of calling for senisble gun control paints ALL gun owners/would be gun owners as a monolithic mass shooter just waiting to happen.

Also.

There IS NO SUCH THING as an 'assualt weapon'.

It's a made up term by anti gunners during the 90s because in the 80s THEY BANNED MACHINE GUNS.

The BACKGROUND check didn't become a thing until the Brady Bill and finally instituted in 1998.

The FBI( those HACKS) have done such an awesome job since it's creation.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: MrInquisitive

First someone says this.

I'm on the left, and I want sensible gun control, which in my case does including banning assault rifles.

Then they open a can of cognitive dissonance with this.

And you seem to be stereotyping all Hispanic people in Texas as one monolithic, low-income, mainly Spanish-speaking group in another post of yours, and feel justified in doing so because you are evidently Hispanic as well.

'Sensible' would begin with reading existing laws such as the 1968 Gun Control Act, and The 1993 BradyHandgun Prevention Act that specifically state 'NUTCASES' are verboten from owning firearms.

And yet ALL the gun control in the world does nothing to stop those from killing people-That's against the law & and THEY'RE NUTZ.

I want those on the left to stop speaking out of their #'s and actually read existing laws since it's the SENSIBLE thing to do.

PS the act of calling for senisble gun control paints ALL gun owners/would be gun owners as a monolithic mass shooter just waiting to happen.

How is what I said cognitive dissonance? I was speaking for myself as someone on the left. I was not speaking for the entire left, whereas the person I was addressing sure seemed to be stereotyping everyone in his demographic, i.e. characterizing all of them as being of one mind in a matter, which I made clear I would never think of doing. You seriously can't see the difference between the two lines of thinking?

As for firearm semantics, I used the term "assault rifle", not "assault weapon". And according to the dictionary, it is a rapid fire, magazine-fed automatic rifle designed for infantry use. Obviously, in common parlance it refers to magazine-fed semi-automatic rifles, which however can be modified (illegally) to auto-fire. The big problem with these semi-auto rifles are their still relatively high rates of fire and large magazines, which make them very lethal in mass shooting situations.

I agree with you that the current gun-control laws aren't enforced well enough, but removing the above mentioned semi-automatic rifles from the market place would preclude nut jobs who aren't known to be nut jobs from obtaining them (for the most part). And as a lot of these mass shootings involve young (under 21) shooters who can legally purchase such weapons at age 18, it would even make sense to up the age for purchasing such weapons to those 21 and above.

a reply to: MrInquisitive

As for firearm semantics, I used the term "assault rifle", not "assault weapon". And according to the dictionary, it is a rapid fire, magazine-fed automatic rifle designed for infantry use. Obviously, in common parlance it refers to magazine-fed semi-automatic rifles, which however can be modified (illegally) to auto-fire. The big problem with these semi-auto rifles are their still relatively high rates of fire and large magazines, which make them very lethal in mass shooting situations.

'According to the dictionary'.

Just Fracking stop.

I agree with you that the current gun-control laws aren't enforced well enough, but removing the above mentioned semi-automatic rifles from the market place would preclude nut jobs who aren't known to be nut jobs from obtaining them (for the most part).

You agree with something i never said. That's par for the course.

ALL gun control is unconstitutional as we do not get our rights from the state.

So we're now at the point in the narrative that this guy was set up, a psyop and not some nutcase who let political ideologies go to his head?

Just trying to keep score here