I don't mind killing it...

Even without reading Qu'ran, I could have guessed. Because Muhammad was (according to the scripture) so white he was self-luminous (read: white as fuck).

Of course Shaytan would be a nigger.

More information on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxOM4GrqElw

Tim Pool is a dunce on economics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bbdT0X8sL0

Tim Pool being a dunce on eminent domain as well: https://youtu.be/0VFtbR1fmgg?t=507
Thinking that when facing an invasion, you could eminent domain to build a wall. Like you can build a wall **WHILE BEING ATTACKED?**
(Also, isn't USA already invaded by illegal aliens? Meaning condition is already fulfilled.)

His second example isn't just dumb (like the first one) but outright shows how dangerous Tim's ideas are.

He literally talks about eminent domain being justified if government was to seize **ALL MEANS OF PRODUCTION** (i.e establish communism).

So eminent domain is OK when communism. Yeah.

Somalia.

Yeah, a good example indeed.

Somalia is a hellhole. Somalis were the primary source of economic leeches to arrive to Finland prior to war refugees from Iraq, then Maroccan "Syrians" during recent years.

Somalia has been a hellhole even before war in Iraq. If it's now growing faster than others, it's because it's national produce was close to absolute zero for a great long time, with warlords implementing anarchocapitalism on the populace.

Somalis are receiving tons of globalist welfare. Money, food, building projects. (Not that it helps. Arguably it hurts the local markets.)

@Ranko The video you posted ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uc6QxD2_yQw ) is a good example of pro-feminist analysis of media produced mostly by pro-feminists (read: hollywood).

He can point out rape jokes against males is toxic masculinity because directors are mostly male (especially directors who include male-on-male rape jokes), ignoring that they are also feminists (because they come from Hollywood). Also, later in the commentary, he switches victimhood of prisonrape away from men, to "transwomen", i.e when men are victimized, it's still misogyny (even though in reality straight men get raped more brutally than bitch boys who partake in feminine role voluntarily).

The reviewer does however promise a follow-up of tropes about female predators, but considering how much in-line with feminist viewpoint the first part was, I'm curious how hell tackle the other half... of if he'll tackle it at all and used "handled in another video" as an excuse to not touch it as all, since "dealing separately" is feminist codeword for not dealing with it at all.

I wouldn't necessarily call prison rape jokes inherently toxic either, considering comedy can be the only way to deal with tragedy, be it for the teller or the audience. And prison rape jokes using falsely accused as the one in threat of being raped can be critique rather than approval of prison rape phenomenon. I cannot really comment on how ubiquitous people who have been raped in jail is among general male populace is, but I do know that USA has the highest prison population per capita, combined with high population in general, leading to millions of active inmates in addition to all the ones who served their time...

...and that USA is one of the places where male-on-male rape is seen as part of the justice system (where as in other second and third world countries, prison guard brutality replaces it).

And prison guard brutality would probably be closer to being actual justice, as they'd be motivated in brutalizing the trouble makers for making their job harder. The system where the troublemakers rape and punish the weak, is inverse of justice. The worst of punished don't get extra punishment from being raped: the get reward by getting to rape people.

So basically, congrats: North Korea has more justice than USA.

**WHAT! It was that Jonathan MacIntosh all the time?** No wonder everything felt like pushing the blame away from Hollywood, and onto evil comedians, as well as pushing male victimization away and onto "transwomen". Also, no actual critique of female predator will come, unless MacIntosh will call out as these portrayals in the media being false as *real women don't rape*.

Also noteworthy that he has viewerbase half of Sargon, despite being just a sidekick of Sarkeesian, and 97% approval rating on the video. Meanwhile "feminism is dead, anti-feminists are cringe" say majority of anti-feminists themselves.

Yeah. You can tout all the feminist talking points (just avoiding or reducing number of callouts to "feminism", "misogyny" or "toxic masculinity" directly) and probably around 97% would agree with it.

Except that they whilst abandoning equality under the law for equity of outcome, they aren't consistent on even that. Otherwise they would not just demand female draft but demand equalization of combat deaths. And they would force women to die at work, etc.

> implies that women should be executed to obtain equal outcome

You cannot have the cake and eat it too, AOC. Women need to face the execution squad if you want equal outcome.

Life expectancy gap need to be corrected if under equality of outcome model.

I'm quite depressed with the state of mainstream "pro-freespeech" and "pro-journalism" organizations. In Anglosphere, there was ACLU turning against free expression after having already defended KKK in the past (yet now probably cares more about transfeelings than free speech of not-even-serious shitlords), and pro-journalists calling for censorship.

From my perspective, I didn't know if to laugh or to fume with anger when Suuri Journalistipalkinto 2018 (Great Journalism Prize 2018) candidates were announced. They are in four categories: Year's Hit Story, Year's Journalist Activism, Year's Book, Year's Journalist
Each category with three nominees.

Year's Hit Story contained most variance and least bias, although even it contained one entry under #MeToo, and it was a nontroversy/manhunt of Finnish movie and theater industry. They didn't even find out actual sexual harassment so they connected being a harm director to work with as worthy of #MeToo. A total witch hunt.

Year's Journalistic Activism contained all non-sense entries and was the category that got me the most angry:
- the activists protesting agaisnt Trump-Putin summit in Helsinki because Trump is supposedly against freespeech (surprizingly not much to say about Putin actually being against it, funny enough)
- "critical reading of media" project that visited schools all over Finland... obviously about harms of believing what ALTERNATIVE media says and not about what MSM says
- "Protecting responsible journalists and condemning Fake News" with recipient beign the state of Finland itself. And by protecting "responsible" journalists means, standing AGAINST alternative media, prohibiting it's publication freedom and pushing hatespeech charges.

Year's Book contained three entries, two of which were explicitly feminist. Year's Journalist category I don't know the history of nominees well enough to even comment on.

Oh. I was aware of that article but I didn't read it completely or with enough thought to notice that they not only want to equate fictional characters to real humans, but also nudity to pornography.

Meanwhile "free speech extremists" flee away from defending it because they want to choose a better hill to die on.

Hmmm... Louis le Vau doesn't let down, he makes commentary on it beginning from around 6 minute mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GxU25h5aUQ

Apparently to the left, Trump didn't win because the left had gone apeshit crazy. Trump won because the left didn't go apeshit crazy **ENOUGH**. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jS-sxJFn6O0

...and I only watched the first minute of it. I know where he's going with it.

"Shut the fuck up! Centrism, LOL!" -the leftwing 2019

They still don't understand about electoral collage and the fact that they need to win the swing states.... not get supermajority of Commifornia, New York city, Seattle and Portland.

Leftist logic is basically: because the leftwing was not *left enough*, swing voters chose to vote rightwing.

Yeah. Abolish electoral college to get their socialism finally impelemented.

Import more welfare recipients to ensure majority support continues.

Continuing with the video, it does appear there's more to the NYTimes "journo" being idiot. Not thinking that further left is the solution is actually the only thing she's correct about (even though that's the first left thinks she's **wrong** about). Calling Tulsi an Assad sycophant is ridiculous, as calling Trump an Assad lover. The MSM just loves to call anyone against perpetual warfare to be a Russian pupper, Assad/Putin lover, etc.

Yeah. Imagine being so sociopathic you promote warfare to get to report on it. That's **LITERALLY** being a James Bond villain.

And I do mean, literally literrally, not Millenial "liderally".

I don't remember which Bond movie it was but one of the villains perpetrated false flag attacks to get USA and Russia into a nuclear war... just for news headlines. That's what MSM is doing *in real world*.

It's just sad that unlike in Bond movies, you cannot have MI6 send an operative and put 9mm through the brain of journos who want to spark WW3.

(That's a cute snek avatar, btw. I need to find a high-res version of it to make it into wallpaper.)

@ʇooNʇooN *"i'd argue that tim's lack of indoctrination from higher education has meant that he's more able to inform himself and avoid the biases that are taught to people who go through the degree mill"*
...and despite that, he still managed to become a feminist anarchocommunist via skate boarding culture and listening to punk music.

Even though he has lately (although slowly) backed away from such nonsense.

He still uses "redlining" argument for "institutional racism", etc. nonsense. What about lead pipes, lead paint and the good old slavery. How can niggers have high IQ because of slavery?

Yeah, you don't need to go to university to become "progressive". Niggers manage to do it just fine.

Sure, they don't become all the way progressive. Just "gibs me dats" while beating up gays like rednecks do (in their imagination).

Niggers are the true rednecks.

I don't refer to blacks as niggers. I refer to some category of people as niggers.

Niggers are disproportionally black, tho.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XMdT2cF-ZM --- The first 20 minutes of this is golden. It's some Antifa type arguing with a broadcaster who has sympathy with Peterson's message. Guess which side goes insane? Not difficult. This isn't that one in a million case of a valid counter-example to what is the norm.

It's pretty entertaining.

@RekItRalph And does that data tell me the race of the perpetrator?

Just showing "there's lots of hate crimes against gays" does not prove your point.

@RekItRalph And blacks are 20% of hate crime perpetrators. Do you know how much blacks make out of total population?

@Bookworm Bingo.

Blacks commit almost twice as many per hate crimes per capita as whites. And that's even with the fact that 48% of racial hatecrimes are anti-black where as anti-white makes 17%. (Though this is probably a statistical lie, and refusal to acknowledge that "reverse racism" even exists. Since if you remove "hate crime" and just ask if blacks kill more whites than white kill blacks, it's no longer whitey oppressing darkies anymore.)

The registered hatecrimes by blacks are thus more likely against gays since they refuse to acknowledge anti-white hate.

@RekItRalph Except there is.

For example, when police station is given an order not to register race of perpetrator, you can be damn sure there's a political motivation behind it.

Faggot.

You wouldn't accept a proof if it hit you in the forehead. I ain't going to bother.

Ok, prove me that hate crimes even exist.

That's not proof.

The same FBI stats also show that blacks are insanely more violent than whitey. And blacks kill whites more than whites do blacks. They also show that police is more likely to shoot a white suspect than a black one, if you adjust them to rate of interactions they have with their subjects (i.e adjust it to per capita of criminals/suspects).

@RekItRalph They do? But why are I so often hearing lefties denying it?

There wasn't supposed to be efforts from the left attempting to suppress the truth, you said.

@RekItRalph They are not?

@RekItRalph Ignoring your hypothetical leftwing friends who are totally honest about nigger beasts and their murderous tendencies, what left-wing pundits admit the bestial nature of niggers?

Because I'm pretty sure I cannot have Colbert, Stewart, Don Lemon, Young Turks, Kulinski, Jimmy Dore, David Pakman, etc. admit that blacks deservet to get shot and should be shot more if the society was less racist.

Instead they call for BLM because they think blacks are shot disproportionately by police... and by that "too much" rather than "too little".

Which is why the left doesn't support sensible police reform but *racialized* police reform.

Heck, nowadays they even talk more about racial bias in drug war, rather than finding drug war itself to be wrong.

Everything needs to be race-baited.

Well, I think racial policies are pretty radical.

Yeah, I still don't know how @RekItRalph thinks he has proven white rednecks are the primary sources of anti-gay violence.

Whites make @RekItRalph Whites make up 72% of population and commit only 50% hate (acknowledged) hatecrimes.

And I think that 50% is overrated, considering society thinks you cannot be racist toward whites.

If society acknowledged whites as potential victim class, it would increase perpetration of blacks and hispanics against whites, thus decrease whites' percentage as perpetrators.

Most of the hatecrimes after all are racial.

@RekItRalph It has to do with anti-gay hate crimes because when it comes to perpetrators, they are lumped into single figures.

@RekItRalph Whites commit 50% of hate crimes but what percentage do they commit of the **anti-gay** hatecrimes?

@RekItRalph "African
Americans were the next highest racial group perpetrating
sexual orientation-motivated hate crimes at 18 percent."

**THANK YOU FOR PROVING MY POINT!**

You were calling out my "bullshit" when I said niggers are the primary culprits of beating up faggots.

Of course the harm. but so do one-legged midget transsexual Hispanics.

I never said rednecks never hurt a faggot.

I'm just saying that they are the primary perpetrator in *imaginations of leftwingers*.

The only reason they even reach 46% of anti-LGBT attacks is just because they make up 72% of population.

Yet the redneck is still the target of left's mockery for being backwards and bigoted.

If left had any principles, they should hate niggers.

It's a funny debate style. Create exaggerated strawmen of other people's arguments. Demand "proof". Say "don't care".

You would not accept proof, you idiot. And respond to this by "don't care" and you admit it.

That too. Also lefties never lie, change or withhold truth.

A lefty would never deny blacks committing the most crimes. Supposedly.

A lefty would never claim blacks are targeted by cops unjustly and murdered in cold blood just because "driving while black" or such nonsense. Lefties would never do so. "Prove it!" "Don't care!" "Prove it!" "Don't care!"

Do I need to link The Young Turks to you?