Tuesday, March 22, 2005
Minnesota Shooting
UPDATE: Looking at the source data, this pinhead was posting on a forum that had big banner links to shit like this:
These are also the shitbirds that Google considers a legitimate news source.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will leave hard analysis and search for bias to others who are more adept than I at that sort of thing.
My question:
How can you be an Indian and a Nazi at the same time?
Or does nothing carry any meaning into the modern age?
I occasionally frequent Aryan sites, as well as Islamo-facist sites, Christian Identity sites; all of the strange and fascinating crap that is out there on the internet.
Additionally, I have actually read Mein Kampf; twice.
I'm sure there are people who would argue that this does not qualify me to respond to the die-hard, but at least it's an introduction into the vibrant enthralling culture that is white-supremacism (for those of you with no sense of sarcasm, that was tongue in cheek.)
I may be mistaken, but I think as far as Hitler's definition goes, dark skinned people, like Native Americans, qualified as "mud people." For those of you not familiar with the term, these are races that humanity would be better served by ridding itself of.
I saw a couple of photographs of the "alleged shooter" or "suspect" (I'm still trying to maintain my Reuters objectivity), and none of them showed him to be a towering blue-eyed, blonde-haired specimin of the Uber-race.
He wore a black trenchcoat and kept to himself. He was a Nativist. He said as much. How do we jump from that to Neo-Nazi?
Throughout the coverage the most confounding thing I've seen (outside of the Bradys bringing up the AWB, which is fucking ridiculous) is the fact that this kid was so confused, he thought that, regardless of his race or the color of his skin, he could be a Nazi. That is an philosophy that has never had race quotas.
If the current stock of children are this ignorant...well I'm scared anyway.
These are also the shitbirds that Google considers a legitimate news source.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will leave hard analysis and search for bias to others who are more adept than I at that sort of thing.
My question:
How can you be an Indian and a Nazi at the same time?
Or does nothing carry any meaning into the modern age?
I occasionally frequent Aryan sites, as well as Islamo-facist sites, Christian Identity sites; all of the strange and fascinating crap that is out there on the internet.
Additionally, I have actually read Mein Kampf; twice.
I'm sure there are people who would argue that this does not qualify me to respond to the die-hard, but at least it's an introduction into the vibrant enthralling culture that is white-supremacism (for those of you with no sense of sarcasm, that was tongue in cheek.)
I may be mistaken, but I think as far as Hitler's definition goes, dark skinned people, like Native Americans, qualified as "mud people." For those of you not familiar with the term, these are races that humanity would be better served by ridding itself of.
I saw a couple of photographs of the "alleged shooter" or "suspect" (I'm still trying to maintain my Reuters objectivity), and none of them showed him to be a towering blue-eyed, blonde-haired specimin of the Uber-race.
He wore a black trenchcoat and kept to himself. He was a Nativist. He said as much. How do we jump from that to Neo-Nazi?
Throughout the coverage the most confounding thing I've seen (outside of the Bradys bringing up the AWB, which is fucking ridiculous) is the fact that this kid was so confused, he thought that, regardless of his race or the color of his skin, he could be a Nazi. That is an philosophy that has never had race quotas.
If the current stock of children are this ignorant...well I'm scared anyway.
