Crime ID state senate candidate tells Native American Candidate to go back to where she came from.

[oldshadow]

Well I guess she could have meant " take your ass back ro the res".

I don't think so but you never can tell.

 

[650lb Sumo]

The logical error based on your hypothesis is the dumb fuck saying go back to where you came forefathers are not from Idaho either. Stop simping for a dumb fuck and laugh at him like the rest of us.

I always remember how in the 90s these two 'Wow, Bro!' questions were going round:

Why did kamikaze pilots wear helmets?



Why do 24 hour stores have locks?



Of course the helmets and locks were/are for the usual reasons. There's no 'gotcha' there. The midwits thought this material was dynamite though.

Basically my post is commentary on the fact, that we've reached the boundary of Rationality with this incident and hit upon the still-unnamed new Western Religion. There's no logical reason why you can't tell another ethnic group to leave a piece of land. It's just forbidden if you're White, effectively because God said so, via the new Priest Class.

'God' is as yet amorphous and not personified in the new religion, although there might be inklings on the horizon, and the Priest Class are the media celebrities and university academics etc.

White racial consciousness is Anathema, equivalent to worshipping the Devil in the 16th century. It is a priori, ontologically evil. To even point this out is to invite hysterical persecution by the Inquisition (Antifa, Counter Terror police etc. at the higher end of the scale). Never mind question it, never mind oppose it.

The Devil = Hitler

The Ultimate Expression of Evil, similar to the Crucifixion in Christianity = the Holocaust

Action taken in the interests of the White Race against another race or races, or a White ethnic group against one or more Nonwhite ethnic groups = Witchcraft/Satanism

Recognising the White Race, or a White ethnic group etc., as such, with interests distinct from, or worse, counter to the interests of Nonwhites = Blasphemy

There are tangents available about whether the Native Americans were the first on the land, legends about tall redheads, Kennewick Man, Aborigines the Native Americans exterminated, which Native tribe moved in and took the land from which other tribe, the difference between being on the land in small numbers with primitive technology, and founding and building the USA etc. They tend to be explored as defences against the accusation of Sin, Whites committing aggression against Nonwhites, having accepted the premise that this is wrong.

Being from ethnic group A, and telling someone from ethnic group B to go back to ethnic homeland B, with the implication that this is ethnic homeland A, apart from the Heresy angle, isn't very nice, but I haven't said anything about whether it's morally right or wrong (in this case or ever). Supposedly ancient Roman soldiers were told to look at the stars Mizar and Alcor and asked how many stars they saw (one is small and faint). If they saw two they could be archers. Many people's vision wasn't good enough to separate them. Similarly, midwits can't separate logic from morality. I said that there's no logical error or contradiction, but as I mentioned above, to even point out that the Dogma exists is to invite attack.

 

[Limbo Pete]

I always remember how in the 90s these two 'Wow, Bro!' questions were going round:

Why did kamikaze pilots wear helmets?



Why do 24 hour stores have locks?



Of course the helmets and locks were/are for the usual reasons. There's no 'gotcha' there. The midwits thought this material was dynamite though.

Basically my post is commentary on the fact, that we've reached the boundary of Rationality with this incident and hit upon the still-unnamed new Western Religion. There's no logical reason why you can't tell another ethnic group to leave a piece of land. It's just forbidden if you're White, effectively because God said so, via the new Priest Class.

'God' is as yet amorphous and not personified in the new religion, although there might be inklings on the horizon, and the Priest Class are the media celebrities and university academics etc.

White racial consciousness is Anathema, equivalent to worshipping the Devil in the 16th century. It is, a priori, ontologically evil. To even point this out is to invite hysterical persecution by the Inquisition (Antifa, Counter Terror police etc. at the higher end of the scale). Never mind question it, never mind oppose it.

The Devil = Hitler

The Ultimate Expression of Evil, similar to the Crucifixion in Christianity = the Holocaust

Action taken in the interests of the White Race against another race or races, or a White ethnic group against one or more Nonwhite ethnic groups = Witchcraft/Satanism

Recognising the White Race, or a White ethnic group etc., as such, with interests distinct from, or worse, counter to the interests of Nonwhites = Blasphemy

There are tangents available about whether the Native Americans were the first on the land, legends about tall redheads, Kennewick Man, Aborigines the Native Americans exterminated, which Native tribe moved in and took the land from which other tribe, the difference between being on the land in small numbers with primitive technology, and founding and building the USA etc. They tend to be explored as defences against the accusation of Sin, Whites committing aggression against Nonwhites, having accepted the premise that this is wrong.

Being from ethnic group A, and telling someone from ethnic group B to go back to ethnic homeland B, with the implication that is ethnic homeland A, apart from the Heresy angle, isn't very nice, but I haven't said anything about whether it's morally right or wrong (in this case or ever). Supposedly ancient Roman soldiers were told to look at the stars Mizar and Alcor and asked how many stars they saw (one is small and faint). If they saw two they could be archers. Many people's vision wasn't good enough to separate them. Similarly, midwits can't separate logic from morality. I said that there's no logical error or contradiction, but as I mentioned above, to even point out that the Dogma exists is to invite attack.

 

[Rod1]

Similarly, midwits can't separate logic from morality. I said that there's no logical error or contradiction, but as I mentioned above, to even point out that the Dogma exists is to invite attack.

Dude trying to claim he isn't wrong because humans crossed the Behring Strait 14k years ago is beyond retarded.

But yeah, you are deranged and need your meds.

 

[Rod1]

That was not the appropriate way to handle that, disgraceful, but on the matter of policy, I share his irritation. Hate crime laws are profoundly stupid, and shouldn't exist. Either something is a crime, or it isn't. Intent should only be measured in terms of whether or not a crime was purposeful or premeditated as it is with homicide.

His frustration came from him being called out on saying that there is no discrimination in Idaho, he got pissed off when called out on that.

 

[Madmick]

His frustration came from him being called out on saying that there is no discrimination in Idaho, he got pissed off when called out on that.

Yes, but it said she criticized Idaho's weak hate crime laws as contributing to the problematic levels of discrimination she was alleging.

 

[Osculater]

The gubbermint owns everything in the West.

True

 

[Osculater]

Dude trying to claim he isn't wrong because humans crossed the Behring Strait 14k years ago is beyond retarded.

But yeah, you are deranged and need your meds.

Dat White fragility

 

[avenue94]

That was not the appropriate way to handle that, disgraceful, but on the matter of policy, I share his irritation. Hate crime laws are profoundly stupid, and shouldn't exist. Either something is a crime, or it isn't. Intent should only be measured in terms of whether or not a crime was purposeful or premeditated as it is with homicide.

I agree on hate law crimes but let's not pretend that intent isn't weighed beyond premeditation or purpose. IE laws for murder of peace officers, or all the personal stances that go into sentencing for a murder depending on the victim.

 

[filthybliss]

I always remember how in the 90s these two 'Wow, Bro!' questions were going round:

Why did kamikaze pilots wear helmets?



Why do 24 hour stores have locks?



Of course the helmets and locks were/are for the usual reasons. There's no 'gotcha' there. The midwits thought this material was dynamite though.

Basically my post is commentary on the fact, that we've reached the boundary of Rationality with this incident and hit upon the still-unnamed new Western Religion. There's no logical reason why you can't tell another ethnic group to leave a piece of land. It's just forbidden if you're White, effectively because God said so, via the new Priest Class.

'God' is as yet amorphous and not personified in the new religion, although there might be inklings on the horizon, and the Priest Class are the media celebrities and university academics etc.

White racial consciousness is Anathema, equivalent to worshipping the Devil in the 16th century. It is, a priori, ontologically evil. To even point this out is to invite hysterical persecution by the Inquisition (Antifa, Counter Terror police etc. at the higher end of the scale). Never mind question it, never mind oppose it.

The Devil = Hitler

The Ultimate Expression of Evil, similar to the Crucifixion in Christianity = the Holocaust

Action taken in the interests of the White Race against another race or races, or a White ethnic group against one or more Nonwhite ethnic groups = Witchcraft/Satanism

Recognising the White Race, or a White ethnic group etc., as such, with interests distinct from, or worse, counter to the interests of Nonwhites = Blasphemy

There are tangents available about whether the Native Americans were the first on the land, legends about tall redheads, Kennewick Man, Aborigines the Native Americans exterminated, which Native tribe moved in and took the land from which other tribe, the difference between being on the land in small numbers with primitive technology, and founding and building the USA etc. They tend to be explored as defences against the accusation of Sin, Whites committing aggression against Nonwhites, having accepted the premise that this is wrong.

Being from ethnic group A, and telling someone from ethnic group B to go back to ethnic homeland B, with the implication that is ethnic homeland A, apart from the Heresy angle, isn't very nice, but I haven't said anything about whether it's morally right or wrong (in this case or ever). Supposedly ancient Roman soldiers were told to look at the stars Mizar and Alcor and asked how many stars they saw (one is small and faint). If they saw two they could be archers. Many people's vision wasn't good enough to separate them. Similarly, midwits can't separate logic from morality. I said that there's no logical error or contradiction, but as I mentioned above, to even point out that the Dogma exists is to invite attack.

This is the most pseudointellectual wall of word vomit ever.

 

[Belaya Smert]

Back to The Rez 2024

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

Pretty sure he meant the kitchen.

 

[Rod1]

Yes, but it said she criticized Idaho's weak hate crime laws as contributing to the problematic levels of discrimination she was alleging.

She also pointed out how Idaho was the birthplace of America's largest seditious white supremacy terrorist organizations and how a lot of people still have sympathies for them.

To my understanding hate crime are laws used as enhancements to put dangerous people away for longer than needed when its demonstrated they are very likely to reoffend.

There is always going to be pros and cons to enhancement laws so arguing against them becomes its own topic, but leads me to believe its not what really made him mad.

 

[Rod1]

I agree on hate law crimes but let's not pretend that intent isn't weighed beyond premeditation or purpose. IE laws for murder of peace officers, or all the personal stances that go into sentencing for a murder depending on the victim.

This, somehow hate laws triggers people for much for some reason, even people who would otherwise agree with other enhancement laws.

 

[Limbo Pete]

She also pointed out how Idaho was the birthplace of America's largest seditious white supremacy terrorist organizations and how a lot of people still have sympathies for them.

To my understanding hate crime are laws used as enhancements to put dangerous people away for longer than needed when its demonstrated they are very likely to reoffend.

There is always going to be pros and cons to enhancement laws so arguing against them becomes its own topic, but leads me to believe its not what really made him mad.

The invention of hate crime laws was used to move prejudice-motivated crimes (race, etc) out of local jurisdictions that would refuse to prosecute/run them through with jury nullification. It was a particularly big deal in the Jim Crow south

 

[650lb Sumo]

The gubbermint owns everything in the West.

Mountain, desert and tundra

/

Dude trying to claim he isn't wrong because humans crossed the Behring Strait 14k years ago is beyond retarded.

But yeah, you are deranged and need your meds.

Dat White fragility

This is the most pseudointellectual wall of word vomit ever.

 

[Deorum]

True

It's around 640 million acres in total, and nearly 40% of that became public land during Theodore Roosevelt's presidency alone.

"It is vandalism to wantonly destroy or permit the destruction of what is beautiful in nature, whether it be a cliff, a forest, or a species of mammal or bird. Here in the United States we turn our rivers and streams into sewers and dumping-grounds, we pollute the air, we destroy forests, and exterminate fishes, birds and mammals -- not to speak of vulgarizing charming landscapes with hideous advertisements. Here is your country. Cherish these natural wonders, cherish the natural resources, cherish the history and romance as a sacred heritage for your children and your children's children. Do not let selfish men or greedy interests skin your country of its beauty, its riches, or its romance."

 

[Osculater]

Mountain, desert and tundra

/

 

[Osculater]

It's around 640 million acres in total, and nearly 40% of that became public land during Theodore Roosevelt's presidency alone.

"It is vandalism to wantonly destroy or permit the destruction of what is beautiful in nature, whether it be a cliff, a forest, or a species of mammal or bird. Here in the United States we turn our rivers and streams into sewers and dumping-grounds, we pollute the air, we destroy forests, and exterminate fishes, birds and mammals -- not to speak of vulgarizing charming landscapes with hideous advertisements. Here is your country. Cherish these natural wonders, cherish the natural resources, cherish the history and romance as a sacred heritage for your children and your children's children. Do not let selfish men or greedy interests skin your country of its beauty, its riches, or its romance."

I think the natives were doing just fine with the land before teh government took over and kicked everyone one out

 

[Rod1]

Dat White fragility

We are all Africans.