12 Dallas cops shot by sniper, 5 dead, during BLM protest

Teutatis

Pelican
Gold Member
I'm starting to feel that one of these days picking up a book about European history, mythology or traditions is going to be a hate crime and label you as a dangerous nazi.
 
I'm sure the Dallas shooter was able to spot that Mjölnir pendant from his sniper's nest, and that's what drove him into a righteous homicidal fury. His original plan for that day was to hand out free ice cream to children, damn that white supremacy!
 

BassPlayaYo

Kingfisher
frenchcorporation said:
Disclaimer: take this with a pinch of salt. and if it's already been posted I apologise

Apparently one of the officers shot dead was a neonazi/white supremacist in the traditional sense: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn/slain-dallas-cop-mightve_b_10953276.html

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

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

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

JacksonRev

Kingfisher
Gold Member
BassPlayaYo said:
frenchcorporation said:
Disclaimer: take this with a pinch of salt. and if it's already been posted I apologise

Apparently one of the officers shot dead was a neonazi/white supremacist in the traditional sense: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn/slain-dallas-cop-mightve_b_10953276.html

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

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

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

So now white people can't be Christian either?
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
frenchcorporation said:
Disclaimer: take this with a pinch of salt. and if it's already been posted I apologise

Apparently one of the officers shot dead was a neonazi/white supremacist in the traditional sense: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn/slain-dallas-cop-mightve_b_10953276.html

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

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

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

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

And just in case it wasn't blatantly clear, I'm being sarcastic.
 
TravelerKai said:
The proof is in the details. It's not one cause. Ever. It's a combination of factors and none of them have to do with intelligence. Maybe religions (Mayan, Shinto, or Ancient Easter Island Beliefs), but never intelligence.

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

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

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


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

But I tell you what the two dominating factors are:

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

Samseau

Owl
Orthodox
Gold Member
frenchcorporation said:
Disclaimer: take this with a pinch of salt. and if it's already been posted I apologise

Apparently one of the officers shot dead was a neonazi/white supremacist in the traditional sense: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn/slain-dallas-cop-mightve_b_10953276.html

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

Only Talmudic Jews could think a Christian cross is racist.
 
Zelcorpion said:
TravelerKai said:
The proof is in the details. It's not one cause. Ever. It's a combination of factors and none of them have to do with intelligence. Maybe religions (Mayan, Shinto, or Ancient Easter Island Beliefs), but never intelligence.

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

hydrogonian

Ostrich
Gold Member
BassPlayaYo said:
This information is as relevant as any information posted about the background real or imagined of any person killed by a police officer.

You're wrong.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Is that NBC who doctored the Trayvon Martin 911 tape?

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

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

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

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

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

iop890

Peacock
Gold Member
frenchcorporation said:
Disclaimer: take this with a pinch of salt. and if it's already been posted I apologise

Apparently one of the officers shot dead was a neonazi/white supremacist in the traditional sense: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-benn/slain-dallas-cop-mightve_b_10953276.html

I wonder who could be behind this?

7db1a35617.jpg


Author of:
7dc18d7df6.jpg

Jesse Benn said:
…there’s an inherent value in forestalling Trump’s normalization. Violent resistance accomplishes this.
7daba19e7e.png


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

Come at me bro!

7d8a606282.png
7d911b06f4.gif
 

Vienna

Kingfisher
Gold Member
Have you guys seen this?

New shooting (not cop-related) involving three men was streamed on Facebook Live in the past day. Happened in Norfolk, Virginia.

Shooting at 5:36:

Two reportedly stable while one is still in critical condition.

***

This is becoming a thing. People won't need reality TV anymore; just tune into Facebook Live and let their algorithms calculate where shit is going down...

"Tonight on Facebook Live: Things are heating up in Rio de Janeiro. Current user data indicates that local gangs are battling it out with police in one of the most densely populated favelas in the city. Join 2.5 millions friends and watch the carnage unfold in 5 different streams."

"Trending in your interests: Police shooting in New York (ongoing). Click here to watch..."

"Zuckerberg on controversial Facebook Live feature: 'We do not generate our content, our users do. Facebook can not be hold liable for the actions of its users.' The tech oligarch later dodged questions on ads being displayed during recent violent incidents that were streamed on Facebook Live..."
 

BassPlayaYo

Kingfisher
hydrogonian said:
You're wrong.

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

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

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

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

I didn't mention anything about "felonious behavior" nor am I saying that his "affiliation" was justification for his death. We have seen in this thread and other threads where a murder victim's "affiliation" is thrown out there in an attempt to "justify" or provide "insight" into why they were murdered.


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

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

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

Is that NBC who doctored the Trayvon Martin 911 tape?

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

Here you prove my point, Michael Brown wasn't stopped by the officer because of a robbery. The robbery information came after he was shot and killed, this and other "criminal" activity ascribed to him was used to justify his killing in the media.

Cultural affiliations have everything to do a persons behavior when killed? Are the exceptions police officers that are also White supremacist/nationalist?

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

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

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

I said "IF"...

Any time an innocent "civilian" is killed their past is always examined in an attempt to justify their death, we see that happen many times in this thread again with bogus information from bogus news outlets.

I'm not digging into the officers past. I didn't introduce this information into this thread.
 

hydrogonian

Ostrich
Gold Member
BassPlayaYo said:
I didn't mention anything about "felonious behavior" nor am I saying that his "affiliation" was justification for his death. We have seen in this thread and other threads where a murder victim's "affiliation" is thrown out there in an attempt to "justify" or provide "insight" into why they were murdered.

You said:

This information is as relevant as any information posted about the background real or imagined of any person killed by a police officer.

I said:

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

Information about associations are only relevant when such associations speak to to the behavior that led up to the perp's or victim's death.

In the case of the officer, his interest in European heritage has nothing to do with his behavior, in doing his job, at the time of his death. Yet, you claim that his association with Euro heritage symbols is relevant.

In doing so, you attempt to create a parallel between how the Right wing news treats suspects such as Michael Brown and how such associations will be treated by the right wing news for the officer. In actuality, no relevant parallel analogy can be made.

The officer's associations have nothing to do with his behavior when he was killed.

In contrast, thuggish behavior or associations, in the past, speak to the perp Michael Brown's behavior when he was attempting to wrestle for the officer's gun and what he was doing in general when he was fatally shot.

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

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

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

Is that NBC who doctored the Trayvon Martin 911 tape?

Or is it every other MSM site who delivered selective facts across these cases, to include the present cases in the news, in order to stoke riots?
Here you prove my point,
I don't prove your point.

Michael Brown wasn't stopped by the officer because of a robbery.
He had just come from a robbery. He was acting in accordance with his overall felonious behavior in attacking the officer. The robbery is relevant because it illustrates his violent behavior that the officer attested to, that led up to his death. It also speaks to why he might have chose to wrestle for the officer's gun. Even if the officer did not know that the robbery suspect was M. Brown, M Brown did not know that the officer did not know.

And if the USA gets in the habit of defending robbery felons for actions committed on the day of the robbery, because the officer supposedly did not know they were the suspect (questionable), then we are in trouble as a nation.

The robbery information came after he was shot and killed, this and other "criminal" activity ascribed to him was used to justify his killing in the media.

He was a violent, felon thug who tried to kill a police officer and deserved his lead poisoning.

Are the exceptions police officers that are also White supremacist/nationalist?

Your logic ability is failing you. First, supremacist and nationalist are not equal concepts. If it were true, then by your logic every Black and Jewish nationalist deserves to die.

Second, correcting for your syntax that leaves me questioning what point you are trying to make, I'll assume that you mean to imply that you believe that a possible White nationalist affiliation is grounds for a public murder of a police officer, and it follows of anyone else in spite of them not engaging in any behavior but standing there and doing there job.

I don't believe that I need to rebut you any further on this point due to the obviously ridiculous logic.

Any time an innocent "civilian" is killed their past is always examined in an attempt to justify their death, we see that happen many times in this thread again with bogus information from bogus news outlets.

"Innocent" is a matter of opinion.

And I'll remind you that most news outlets were in the habit of omitting facts to spin a pro-victim/perp narrative on the basis of race.

Omitting facts proves de facto journalistic illegitimacy. Reporting facts, even if they rub you the wrong way, is not illegitimate.

Spinning conjecture as illegitimate conclusions based those facts is, but I also remind you that M. Brown, to keep with the analogy at hand, had wrestled for the officer's gun while the officer killed in this instance was just standing there and doing his job.

There is simply no valid parallel to be drawn between digging into this officer's past and noting that M/ Brown had just robbed a store.
 

Teutatis

Pelican
Gold Member
Any kid that growing up has had an interest in European mythologies, European history, fantasy literature, secret societies and even heavy metal has had a ton of that type imagery in his possession, I know I did and still do some.

Hope no BLMer comes after me and shoots me down for having the audacity of being interested in European culture as that obviously makes me a nazi.
 

Teutatis

Pelican
Gold Member
hydrogonian said:
BassPlayaYo said:
Are the exceptions police officers that are also White supremacist/nationalist?

Your logic ability is failing you. First, supremacist and nationalist are not equal concepts. If it were true, then by your logic every Black and Jewish nationalist deserves to die.

Second, correcting for your syntax that leaves me questioning what point you are trying to make, I'll assume that you mean to imply that you believe that a possible White nationalist affiliation is grounds for a public murder of a police officer, and it follows of anyone else in spite of them not engaging in any behavior but standing there and doing there job.

I don't believe that I need to rebut you any further on this point due to the obviously ridiculous logic.

Exactly right, besides, there is no way the shooter could have known that the Officer was or wasn't a white nationalist, but even if the officer was, and even if the shooter knew, it's still not a reason to shoot him down.
Maybe BassPlaya thinks that it is a good enough justification though, please correct me if I'm wrong.
What about the other officers, what is the excuse for those?
 

Kona

Crow
Gold Member
Wouldnt white supremecy tattoos and a similar social media profile make this cops credibility as a witness extremely questionable?

Wouldn't a police department have rules against that kind of thing?

Do you guys really believe that that guy was just really into Norse mythology?

I'm not saying at all that he deserved to die, but if he was some kind of open white supremacist he should not be a cop.

Aloha!
 

BassPlayaYo

Kingfisher
Teutatis said:
Exactly right, besides, there is no way the shooter could have known that the Officer was or wasn't a white nationalist, but even if the officer was, and even if the shooter knew, it's still not a reason to shoot him down.
Maybe BassPlaya thinks that it is a good enough justification though, please correct me if I'm wrong.
What about the other officers, what is the excuse for those?

You are wrong, you should read what I wrote.
 
Top