Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 89

Thread: Dayton & El Paso Mass Shootings

  1. #11
    Senior Member velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    9 Hours Ago @ 06:26 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    45
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    4,872
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,150
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,265
    Thanked in
    535 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Astragoth View Post
    Yeah funny how they seem to have these prepared essays all waiting all hitting all the media narratives.
    Here's the 8chan thread on the incident, probably gets shoad soon, like the original post (archived) some hours before the shooting.
    https://8ch.net/pol/res/13561409.html
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to velvet For This Useful Post:


  3. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Last Online
    1 Hour Ago @ 02:54 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Gender
    Religion
    Hitlerism
    Posts
    329
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    66
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    100
    Thanked in
    71 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    Paragraph 3:




    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-possible-hate

    Something smells fishy here.
    I haven't yet checked up on the usual false flag theorists, but I agree. The lack of resistance speaks volumes, contradicting his fatalistic claims of expecting to be a martyr. Just like the previous incident.

    Once again, no mention of the Jewish question. Manifestos are always risky business. "Fellow Americans" His definition of "American" is vague. At this point, it's better to think of Americans as one unified race. In the case of assimilated Europeans, they are nomads. In the case of assimilated Germans, they are no longer German.

    If people who come out openly as former Nazis and admit their mistakes to the press get the ignore treatment (I have the impression that they're not so much really interested in hearing them out as they are in pushing their own narrative), why do the radical ones think they'll be heard?

    His reasons for opposing race mixing leaves much room to be desired. Only about two sentences on the subject before he rails on about diversity. That he stresses immigration over race mixing is significant; he is a full-fledged reactionary if not a subversive.

    I recently read that Goethe vehemently rejected all violent and forceful means of revolution. He believed it would do more harm than good in the long run. He said it was better to commit an injustice than tolerate disorder; this was a view similar to Hitler's IMO, about maintaining the balance between idealists and criminals and the restoration of order for the whole of social life, even if it meant using underhanded means. Was Goethe a pacifist? This view actually stemmed from his view of nature and it's certain that the voice of the blood was with him in his protest against the hasty emancipation of Jews.

  4. #13
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Finnish Swede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Finnish Swede
    Ancestry
    Father: Swedish, Mother Finnish Swede
    Subrace
    Sub-Nordid - Nordid - Baltid mix
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Finland Swede Community Finland Swede Community
    Location
    Ostrobothnia
    Gender
    Age
    21
    Zodiac Sign
    Pisces
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    No specific ideology
    Religion
    Lutheran
    Posts
    1,657
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    365
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,388
    Thanked in
    1,321 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Astragoth View Post
    Politicians prefer unarmed subjects. We have the right to bear arms here to protect us from tyranny.
    It's just that they haven't been used yet. At least for the most part.
    I'm well aware that rights to own a gun is the most important ''right'' to many Americans.
    For us those are 1.) free election, 2.) free school/education system, 3.) free healthy care system.

    But how about limits it a bit? At least that person (who tries to buy a one)...

    1.) should prove that he/she is mentally healthy person (and not one kind of walking time bomb)? Short interview with doctors?
    2.) has no earlier criminal records behind (and I don't mean over speeds penalties or parkings penalties now).

    Plus individual persons would not be allowed to sell their guns further (gun being someway marked to you).
    Only shops would sell guns.

    Plus plus nation would destroy all ''illegal guns'' they would face/catch (maybe some states do that? ... no idea)

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Finnish Swede For This Useful Post:


  6. #14
    Senior Member Herr Rentz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Last Online
    5 Hours Ago @ 10:47 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Emmingen, Baden-Württemburg
    Subrace
    Don't know
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    Baden-Wuerttemberg Baden-Wuerttemberg
    Location
    US
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Taurus
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Retail Sales Management
    Politics
    Nationalsozialist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    622
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    406
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    646
    Thanked in
    320 Posts
    Free, free, free. That's what the Democrats/Socialists in our Government promise. And just who pays for 'free'? Free isn't free. The rest of us pay for those freebies.
    American by birth, made of parts from Emmingen, Baden-Württemberg.

    Der Familie Rentz seit 1535 - Meine Ehre heißt Treue

    Das Leben ist zu kurz, um billiges Bier zu trinken!


  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Herr Rentz For This Useful Post:


  8. #15
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Finnish Swede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Finnish Swede
    Ancestry
    Father: Swedish, Mother Finnish Swede
    Subrace
    Sub-Nordid - Nordid - Baltid mix
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Finland Swede Community Finland Swede Community
    Location
    Ostrobothnia
    Gender
    Age
    21
    Zodiac Sign
    Pisces
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    No specific ideology
    Religion
    Lutheran
    Posts
    1,657
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    365
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,388
    Thanked in
    1,321 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Herr Rentz View Post
    Free, free, free. That's what the Democrats/Socialists in our Government promise. And just who pays for 'free'? Free isn't free. The rest of us pay for those freebies.
    Even free election? Multi political parties (and multi candidates for presidents etc .... for whole citizens/people to choose)? I know ... nation (= tax payers) pays/costs even free elections ... and worse would be without (organized ones like in Russia, Chine etc.)

    Ok, lets put others ... systems created & money used ways ... getting more vs total costs.

    But the issue was more about the gun laws...

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Finnish Swede For This Useful Post:


  10. #16
    Proffessional Hickerbilly
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    SpearBrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American of German decent
    Ancestry
    Bavaria/Switzerland
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Central
    Gender
    Age
    53
    Zodiac Sign
    Libra
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Kunstschmiede
    Politics
    Self-Reliance
    Religion
    Asatru
    Posts
    4,581
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,794
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,310
    Thanked in
    608 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Finnish Swede View Post
    I'm well aware that rights to own a gun is the most important ''right'' to many Americans.
    For us those are 1.) free election, 2.) free school/education system, 3.) free healthy care system.
    The right to bear arms is not the most important right, free speech is. The Second Amendment ( right to bears ) is important only in the fact that it gives people the ability to protect people from our government when they try take away our other rights.

    But how about limits it a bit? At least that person (who tries to buy a one)...

    1.) should prove that he/she is mentally healthy person (and not one kind of walking time bomb)? Short interview with doctors?
    2.) has no earlier criminal records behind (and I don't mean over speeds penalties or parkings penalties now).

    Plus individual persons would not be allowed to sell their guns further (gun being someway marked to you).
    Only shops would sell guns.
    The Second Amendment of the US Constitution reads as follows:
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    The two parts that I put in bold should explain why guns and gun sales should not be restricted. A few days ago I posted why I am pissed off in a thread about going to see a doctor at the veterans hospital and the questions they ask prior to seeing doctor. Now with the Affordable Care Act (Obama care), you have to answer questions like "do you feel like harming yourself and others". These questions are put in place for no reason other than to disarm as many people as they can. You have to seriously ask yourself "why does my government want to disarm it's people?", when statistics have proven time and time again that areas with less gun restrictions have less crime, The only answer is the government is afraid, no very afraid of the people rising up against it.


    Plus plus nation would destroy all ''illegal guns'' they would face/catch (maybe some states do that? ... no idea)
    Most states they leave that up to the judge in a court case. Besides, there should be no "illegal" guns as to the last four word of the amendment.
    Life is like a fire hydrant- sometimes you help people put out their fires, but most of the time you just get peed on by every dog in the neighborhood.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to SpearBrave For This Useful Post:


  12. #17
    Senior Member Astragoth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Last Online
    13 Minutes Ago @ 03:47 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    New York New York
    Gender
    Posts
    802
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    833
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    795
    Thanked in
    430 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Finnish Swede View Post
    I'm well aware that rights to own a gun is the most important ''right'' to many Americans.
    For us those are 1.) free election, 2.) free school/education system, 3.) free healthy care system.

    But how about limits it a bit? At least that person (who tries to buy a one)...

    1.) should prove that he/she is mentally healthy person (and not one kind of walking time bomb)? Short interview with doctors?
    2.) has no earlier criminal records behind (and I don't mean over speeds penalties or parkings penalties now).

    Plus individual persons would not be allowed to sell their guns further (gun being someway marked to you).
    Only shops would sell guns.

    Plus plus nation would destroy all ''illegal guns'' they would face/catch (maybe some states do that? ... no idea)
    When you remove the non white areas of America the crime rate is about that of Belgium. America doesn't have a gun crime problem. It has a black problem.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Astragoth For This Useful Post:


  14. #18
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Finnish Swede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Finnish Swede
    Ancestry
    Father: Swedish, Mother Finnish Swede
    Subrace
    Sub-Nordid - Nordid - Baltid mix
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Finland Swede Community Finland Swede Community
    Location
    Ostrobothnia
    Gender
    Age
    21
    Zodiac Sign
    Pisces
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    No specific ideology
    Religion
    Lutheran
    Posts
    1,657
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    365
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,388
    Thanked in
    1,321 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SpearBrave View Post

    The Second Amendment of the US Constitution reads as follows:


    The two parts that I put in bold should explain why guns and gun sales should not be restricted. A few days ago I posted why I am pissed off in a thread about going to see a doctor at the veterans hospital and the questions they ask prior to seeing doctor. Now with the Affordable Care Act (Obama care), you have to answer questions like "do you feel like harming yourself and others". These questions are put in place for no reason other than to disarm as many people as they can. You have to seriously ask yourself "why does my government want to disarm it's people?", when statistics have proven time and time again that areas with less gun restrictions have less crime, The only answer is the government is afraid, no very afraid of the people rising up against it.


    The right to bear arms is not the most important right, free speech is. The Second Amendment ( right to bears ) is important only in the fact that it gives people the ability to protect people from our government when they try take away our other rights.

    But how about limits it a bit? At least that person (who tries to buy a one)...

    1.) should prove that he/she is mentally healthy person (and not one kind of walking time bomb)? Short interview with doctors?
    2.) has no earlier criminal records behind (and I don't mean over speeds penalties or parkings penalties now).

    Plus individual persons would not be allowed to sell their guns further (gun being someway marked to you).
    Only shops would sell guns.


    Most states they leave that up to the judge in a court case. Besides, there should be no "illegal" guns as to the last four word of the amendment.
    Do you think that you could fight against your system/leaders (military, polices, national guards ... what ever you have) with individual peoples weapons? USA military is strongest in the world. I'm afraid .... the only real question would be: Would your own trained soldiers agreed to fight (use force) against your own people .... if your leaders would ask that one day ... or not. Nope, I'm afraid ... the civil weapons have no role on that kind of game.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Finnish Swede For This Useful Post:


  16. #19
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Finnish Swede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Finnish Swede
    Ancestry
    Father: Swedish, Mother Finnish Swede
    Subrace
    Sub-Nordid - Nordid - Baltid mix
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Finland Swede Community Finland Swede Community
    Location
    Ostrobothnia
    Gender
    Age
    21
    Zodiac Sign
    Pisces
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    No specific ideology
    Religion
    Lutheran
    Posts
    1,657
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    365
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,388
    Thanked in
    1,321 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Astragoth View Post
    When you remove the non white areas of America the crime rate is about that of Belgium. America doesn't have a gun crime problem. It has a black problem.
    Probable so ... but can you (= USA as a country) do that? Being totally realistic now? As it has become worse and worse ... and soon (maybe already today?) you will not have enough numbers to do that either ... even if you would want that.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Finnish Swede For This Useful Post:


  18. #20
    Proffessional Hickerbilly
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    SpearBrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American of German decent
    Ancestry
    Bavaria/Switzerland
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Central
    Gender
    Age
    53
    Zodiac Sign
    Libra
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Kunstschmiede
    Politics
    Self-Reliance
    Religion
    Asatru
    Posts
    4,581
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,794
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,310
    Thanked in
    608 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Finnish Swede View Post
    Do you think that you could fight against your systems/leaders (military, polices, national guards) with individual peoples weapons? USA military is strongest in the world. I'm afraid .... the only real a question would be: Would your own trained soldiers agreed to fight (use force) against your own people .... if your leaders would ask that one day ... or not. I'm afraid, civil weapons have not much role on that kind of game ...
    We are starting to veer off topic, but I think it's still relevant. I have to answer this in two parts as it is a two part question.

    The first part about citizens with small arms vs the military/police/government. If you look at history over 60 years every time the US military has been engaged in conflict it is individuals with small arms that bogged down the US military machine, particularly in Vietnam and Afghanistan. Never underestimate what one man can do with a loaded rifle, besides there are hundreds of thousands if not millions armed and trained combat veterans like me willing to train others. As a Soldier/Guerrilla fighter the number one rule to remember is your enemy always provides you with everything needed to defeat them.

    The second part about US soldiers and police defecting and joining sides with armed revolt I think it depends on who is revolting. If it is people wanting to restore our rules of law and order then I think many would defect, especially police and frontline combat troops. If it is the leftist trying to disrupt our laws and force their views on us, then no the police and military would not defect.
    Life is like a fire hydrant- sometimes you help people put out their fires, but most of the time you just get peed on by every dog in the neighborhood.

  19. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to SpearBrave For This Useful Post:


Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •