Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

Terror Attacks and Active Shooter Events Thread


Donward

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect said:

Shooting in an El Paso mall. 

 

My take? A distraction for a drug running operation occurring that day as well.

 

Must be a slow news day, that kind of shit is a fairly common occurrence.

And yes, usually drug/Gang related.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Ulric said:

 

Antifa false flag?

 

Writing a BS manifesto is easy enough, but that's not the most likely scenario.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/07/30/report-andy-ngo-antifa-siege-el-paso-texas-resistance/

 

Bullshit source and shit. Probably just a few random tweets at the core of it. Like I said, whispers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/4/2019 at 7:00 AM, Meplat said:

If true, expect it to be quickly memory holed.

 

Not Antifa, but sure that the lefty media got a second wind when they knew that both shooters were white.

But it indeed got quickly memory holed when information of both shooters regarding their 'progressiveness' appeared, only the words 'white nationalist' still echo.

 

The Ohio shooter though has fondness for Antifa, also considers the guy who attacked the ICE detention center a martyr.

 

14 hours ago, Ramlaen said:

These two shooting embody the meaning of 'both sides' .

 

I really didn't see anything Republican related.If i understood right, the 'both sides' meaning.

 

14 hours ago, Priory_of_Sion said:

Still no clear political motive for this guy, unlike past lefty shooters like the Congressional Baseball & Dallas shooters. 

 

El Paso one, is a white nationalist socialist, universal income but first removing some other millions of people first, environmental terrorism, confederacy of territories with at least 1 territory for each race.

No wonder there's a back peddle on that, plus ignoring and calling that manifesto a fake, "progressive" history just spills out of it.

 

14 hours ago, Priory_of_Sion said:

Dallas shooters.

 

That bomb disposal robot though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pascal said:

 

El Paso one, is a white nationalist socialist, universal income but first removing some other millions of people first, environmental terrorism, confederacy of territories with at least 1 territory for each race.

No wonder there's a back peddle on that, plus ignoring and calling that manifesto a fake, "progressive" history just spills out of it.

 

Didn't know that ethnic cleansing was considered progressive, but ok. This is just a repackaged Lebensraum for a 21st century audience. UBI also isn't just a lefty idea unless you're calling folks like Milton Friedman or Charles Murray progressive socialists. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Priory_of_Sion said:

Didn't know that ethnic cleansing was considered progressive, but ok. This is just a repackaged Lebensraum for a 21st century audience. UBI also isn't just a lefty idea unless you're calling folks like Milton Friedman or Charles Murray progressive socialists. 

 

I'm happy to call the guy "alt-right" or "reactionary". A lot of his ideas were straight out of the reactionary blogosphere's playbook.

The Dayton guy was clearly a leftist socialist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

 

I'm happy to call the guy "alt-right" or "reactionary". A lot of his ideas were straight out of the reactionary blogosphere's playbook.

The Dayton guy was clearly a leftist socialist.

Yes, agreed. I think the point of contention is that the Dayton shooting despite his love for socialism doesn't seem to be politically motivated unless the bar he attacked was known to be the local Republican(or etc) hang out or that the bar was his mental interpretation of capitalist hegemony or some shit like that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Priory_of_Sion said:

Didn't know that ethnic cleansing was considered progressive, but ok. This is just a repackaged Lebensraum for a 21st century audience. UBI also isn't just a lefty idea unless you're calling folks like Milton Friedman or Charles Murray progressive socialists. 

Forgot to add to the list, universal healthcare.

 

Well if ethnic cleansing doesn't sound 'progressive', lets change ethnic with social class, as in social class cleansing, sounds even more 'progressive'.

If that doesn't sound 'progressive' lets add ecologist,environmentalist,animal welfare tendencies to the pot, pretty 'progressive'.

Deportation and incarceration by ethnicity, pretty 'progressive'.

 

More on 'progressiveness'.

The Secret History of a Mutual Admiration Society

 

3 hours ago, Priory_of_Sion said:

UBI also isn't just a lefty idea unless you're calling folks like Milton Friedman or Charles Murray progressive socialists. 

 

Charles Murray's Law though, as in welfare programs cannot be successful and should be removed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Priory_of_Sion said:

Yes, agreed. I think the point of contention is that the Dayton shooting despite his love for socialism doesn't seem to be politically motivated unless the bar he attacked was known to be the local Republican(or etc) hang out or that the bar was his mental interpretation of capitalist hegemony or some shit like that

 

It seems very counterproductive to try to "pin" these attacks on one or more political groups. I don't think either the mainstream right or left wing are rushing to own either of them. So then we're down to talking root causes, and if the point of labeling a terrorist as left-wing is to try to imply there's something about left-wing ideology that makes its adherents very likely to kill people, well we've got lots of examples of right-wingers killing people so that kinda falls flat regardless of how you dice it.

Rabbit holes aren't helpful here. Redefining right or left or digging up archaic definitions that no longer have meaning in the public space just obfuscate the issue. Not only that, but they distract from the obvious root cause of these shootings: Mental derangement caused by a perceived lack of prospects, incentives, or status in society on the part of (usually young) men. With only one or two exceptions, every shooter has been male, and likewise with only one or two exceptions every shooter has been perceived to be low-status. Either young, poor, socially awkward, rejected by women, or a cocktail mix of the above.

The problem is with men. The problem is as old as time. Humans are animals and men as a sex are a particular variety of them that are prone to violence. If I were a feminist, I would take this in some kind of man-hating direction, but that's stupid and that attitude has actually led to a lot of these problems. In many ways young men are treated as second class citizens in a way that young women are not. This has not escaped them, even if it's considered impolite to talk about. Throw in the delegitimization of traditional monogamy, the direct competition of women and men in the workforce and in education (where women are winning, obviously), and at the fringes of cognitive normalcy you're going to find people that will take this barbaric route. Contrary to the idiotic psychological theories of the 20th Century, violence comes very easily to young men, and though these atrocious acts make little sense in modern society, they seem to highlight what's really going on here when considered in an evo-psych context. In the Bible, you have Samson killing an entire Phillistine army with a jawbone of an ass. Of course you do. That's the fantasy these people are indulging. They have projected their problems to everyone around them, see enemies everywhere, and have in their heads undertaken a heroic destructor role. "Murder is heroic", a la Plinkett. 

We've dealt with this male nature before. But we decided in the 20th Century that men were not actually intrinsically violent, and that they would just go quietly along with the liberation of society and the undoing of previously rigid social mores. Well, most did. Some shot up schools, though.

Fixing this will require more than our politicians can deliver, I think. We, culturally, will need to either reconcile postmodern liberalism with more classical techniques for managing the male population, or we will need to reject postmodern liberalism altogether. That has some distasteful implications. I doubt we'll figure it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...