Here are my thoughts on the subject : Sorry if some of these arguments/thoughts were already pointed out I stopped reading around page 40.
Few notes though:
1) I am not right wing. (Nor am I left wing) 2. Most of this is based on theory and observation. 3. I am not racist, but I will be realistic based on observation of patterns of racial groups and other such groups (racial, sexual, etc.) 4. It will be a bit of a long rant. I apologize in advance.
First off:
A lot of people I saw were commenting on how they didn't understand how an event around the world would have an effect (or affect) on U.S. policy, politics, or the rift already existing between the left and the right:
The real truth is the left here look for any reason to escalate their extremist demands, and their destruction of the US via subversion. (Open borders, flooding via immigration of voting blocks who vote mainly for the left by race, and more) So any events can be used as a precedent to enact more gun control (to prevent future events) which laws are mainly about: Potential. Since laws don't actually stop crime only deter them.
So to say it would have no effect on the US is actually wrong. It's just at a more micro level. (Basically a fuel to a fire kind of play out.) Keep in mind Whites are becoming a minority and we see via studies that indeed minorities often vote not only majorly Democrat, but also anti-2A, and also freedom of speech (For hate speech laws/etc.) There is also a lot of tribalism from these immigrant (illegal and legal) groups that breeds conformity to these kind of thought patterns and events like this are used to provide a feedback loop or a confirmation bias for their voting habits. It's easy manipulation and can be used as emotional appeals in politics to push for such concepts.
It can also be used to demonize those who believe similar things but aren't violent, or "alt-right" or "Nazi's/White supremacist." Yes, I myself as a more centrist/ "Other" group kind of person believes the attempt at White genocide is real with quite a bit of events and evidence and even circumstantial evidence I've seen over the last few years. So him making these talking points if he was to agitate could be to lock down and have anyone who believes in such beliefs as extremist whether it is true or not. Such is a means to discredit those who bring up said "theories" so that they can't be considered in case they are correct or true, and the fact it would be done in the first place seems intentional in my opinion or it could be optics at work thanks to a "muddying of the waters." Hard to say really.
---
Muslims and optics:
The problem I have with people saying "There are better methods to remove them" is there are no legal methods to force them out that wouldn't' violate human rights, or lead to bloodshed. This is not a justification of this shooter's actions, but I do want to enforce the counter extreme "We should all just be pacifist" is also Utopian nonsense that will only end up either making western countries shit holes or having us lose our cultures and going backwards off the proverbial cliff. Even if you don't believe in White genocide that will be eventual if things do not change and if people do not act.
Let me add these groups with the left such as in the US have made a vicious circle of policy where minorities get financial funding to have upwards of often 5-7 children in the US alone. While most white people can barely afford to have one kid if even that, thanks to often being turned down for the same incentives and as some call it "free shit." Even if you remove the "free shit" these groups will not leave because it would be costly for them to which in the long run would lead to violence. This other Utopian belief they will just leave is whimsical and unrealistic at best. You give people money and you expect they'll just give it up? Not happening.
Onto the Muslims though:
Muslims often paint themselves as victims, when they commit terrorism, they are the victims, not the actual targeted by Muslim extremists, when they are attacked they also cry about victim hood. The real truth is I have no sympathy, by this ruse they pull. You can say I'm heartless but I lost all sympathy when estimations of millions of British girls were being raped by Muslim rape gangs and Muslims then went out decrying how THEY were the victims and not the girls because someone might get mad at them for the actions taken by their group in general... It disgusts me .
Let me add, Pew's research has done many studies into Muslims and pushing of Sharia law and the estimations were often calculated between 40%-51% pushing for it in most countries with a sizable Muslim population. That means it could be larger by estimation but those are the general estimates of those who answered and even then of those who answered supposively honestly. For those who aren't so well educated on Islam, Sharia law is a legal system that by all means oppresses all non-Muslims. So if a decent size (2/5) or over Half are pushing for it that is not a good sign. Take into account Taqiya, and other subversive orders some Muslims follow from the Hadith, and other parts of the Quaran and you lead me to why I don't trust Muslims in particular. Don't get me started on some legislation they pushed for in Canada such as "Anti-Islamaphobia bills" to crack down on criticism of Islam and my case becomes more apparent. They also tried this in the US congress recently with a certain bill.
I'd also point out Muslims do not live in tolerant societies, and do not push for tolerant policies. Being tolerant to intolerance is not tolerance. No more than if you had a neighbor that wanted to physically remove you or start conflicts with everyone would that be a live and let live standard. If Muslims did act like that nobody would mind. That's not the case though. We even see that from recently elected Muslims in the US who are not constitutional and seem to have an issue with not only violations of power but acting like civil servants as they should upholding the law of the land instead of their own personal desires.
I do not consider Islam a religion it is a military cult. No matter how one tries to dismiss it the fact is throughout history groups of people had to either beat back Muslims who invaded and over took societies by flooding them via biological warfare (having many children to outnumber the other residents/citizens) or by using their children to kill the citizens while they would produce more children. IE: Have your child commit terrorism killing a small group of citizens, then have two more children while that family line hit in the terror attack is gone. Thus allowing you to outnumber, and subvert a country.
Just because you may know some Muslims who are friendly doesn't mean they aren't plotting against your country or trying to take over. In fact the story of Taqiya was exactly a similar situation by the Muslims. They are to make friends with non-Muslims and then lie to them to undermine them. Many do follow this and the fact many Muslims want Sharia law which would punish non-Muslims implies the same thing.
Even many "moderates" admit to practicing or pushing some extremist content or beliefs (Or get exposed doing so). Such as moderates on Youtube who were caught promoting child brides despite claiming they weren't extremist. It's the same tactic the left does in the US to no one's surprise considering the left has allied with Muslims. Weird coincidence. "I'm not like the extreme left!" as they push for open borders which is tantamount to treason.
Even many ex-Muslims who I've personally known (who are marked for death for a reason!) talk about how moderate Muslims won't kill you, they just get the extreme ones too so they can keep their hands clean of the blood. Which in my opinion makes them just as guilty and just as extreme by indirect execution of their actions.
So what are the optics
To many people play by "normies optics" which means pulling the bigger man routine or the old and idiotic concept that by acting as the Muslims do towards Muslims makes you as bad as them. IE: Bullying the bully makes you a bully. Which is nonsense. Now these people may be "innocent" I use the term may as we don't know them well enough to make that judgement call, but let me say the shooting is unacceptable and won't change much, but there may have been another purpose or intent by it which I'll get to in a bit, I will say though if these groups can not behave like citizens and do attempt to undermine the host countries they do not belong here. IF they push extremist views and push for extremist laws, they again should not be tolerated . They would have you beheaded in an instant in their own countries, but we should tolerate intolerance? NO. That is acting like a bully, cowarding away from responsibility. If you allow someone to knowingly be victimized then you are just as bad as the bully then. Stop pretending to be on a moral pedestal if you don't have a moral high ground by your own inaction or indirect actions leading to these victimization's. It's unseemly and I will say intellectual cowardice of the highest order. Not directing attacks at anyone to be clear, just my view on such rationalizations. (hate the sin not the sinner kind of concept.)--> Hate the idea not the thinker I guess would be the better way to phrase it.
---
Motivations of the shootings:
Now although most people suspect it's simply, "Neo-Nazi group" which it may be, Someone who went ballistic as implied (or directly stated) in the writings. There's also the possibility it may have been a forced escalation, most people have already suggested in this topic about it being to start a civil war, or even undermine a specific political group (of either side.)
Honestly, it may even be escalation (acceleration) of a scorched earth mindset. Let's say he believe full heartedly that White genocide is real, and nothing he says is outright lying he believes what he is saying. Whether it is true or not . He may feel it is a hopeless cause for the west or even White people without forcing the system to basically break down into bloodshed or cause a extreme--->Counter extreme event in a hurry before allowing the Muslims to over populate thus making them have larger numbers than the general populace. Which historically I can see the reason he would take such a drastic gamble with the cowardice within western countries, even if it probably won't end well in either outcome of said actions.
Note: I am not justifying said actions only merely clarifying I can see why these actions and attempt at reactions would take place, no matter how misguided or credible.
However, many people suggesting "Just focus on the adults/elites (Politicians) won't solve this either. In fact if the politicians are attacked optics will kick in and they will be a martyr for the cause of the opposition to those wanting to fix their countries or believe western countries are falling into disrepair. Never forget something similar happened during Brexit where a politician was murdered and became a martyr to remain whether you agreed with Brexit or not.
Now, if you were to believe such an outcome you'd find the only real solution is a gamble, a scorched earth policy, escalating a civil war to force both sides to act while your own side has the larger amount of numbers. Since White people are not having major births and Muslims are you can see the overall conflict and tactical aspect of why many assume Muslims are using biological warfare against western nations and why it may be a real issue.
It may also escalate the heavily biased media to attack one political group (right wing mainly) over the left which could lead to violent retaliation from either side or reverse retaliation, and thus kick it off right there possibly in not just one country but multiple. In a world with internet it's a lot less preposterous than it seems. Especially since many of these western nations are on edge.
-The other possibility:
Some have mentioned "False flaggers" in the comments, and I want to clear one misconception:
"False flags" are conspiracies not directly conspiracy theories. There is evidence to support they happen quite often so to suggest one may have taken place is far from unrealistic. Too many people depend on pseudo-intellectualism to make their arguments but realize rational arguments realize the world is far more complex and often time events are not as simple as they seem. They can be simple, but to flat out deny the counter possibility is more delusional than intellectual. Doesn't mean this is a false flag in this case, but there are quite a few oddities surrounding it. Could be coincidence, but it's a case by case basis and requires context, and a skeptical mind set not a dismissive one.
Even then something be a theory within a conspiracy (conspiracy theory) does not make it wrong, or inaccurate. Never forget the government listening in on phone calls observing e-mails was one considered a "conspiracy theory" as well despite circumstantial evidence for years before Snowden.
-----
The shooter himself:
A lot of people merely say he was stupid or a nut job, the real truth is he was quite intelligent. He understands optics and not just simple optics he knew exactly how the media and more would react. The only question is how much of his manifesto are true to his claims (outside the obvious absurdities like Spyro 3/etc. statements)
To be fair, I've been expecting such a thing to happen for months now. This event did not surprise me, but the whole problem has become a cultural war, and even a "flight or fight reaction" and I fear this won't be the end and it's not just copy cats, but full blown groups that will start acting, personally with actions like this occurring I've predicted civil war being within 20 years max. At this rate we might have it in far less time as thing's continue pushing this pressure cooker on society closer and closer to the brink.
Part of me thinks this is a part of even normal people being pushed to the brink of what's happening in their countries because as far as I can see the guy seemed generally normal outside of you know shooting people to death. Sure many shooters often give off a false facade, but this case I can't quite put my finger on seems a little different to other similar cases.
Though many will point out maybe it's all a joke and maybe this guy was just trolling and fishing (or baiting) people all together, basically a burn the house down around him with everyone inside mentality. (The house being society) However, that doesn't explain why he'd go to such lengths or such meticulous planning. Sure, he made mistakes, but some of his moves were calculated and not something an inexperienced person would consider such as when he went back in to check for those faking death.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if more events like these play out in the next few weeks or months if not days, which is the disturbing part. I think we are starting to see a major pushback by people who have been pushed to the brink, and as some have already said it may snowball from there.
I do want to mention though, people keep making a large deal of this event but barely make a fuss about the multiple Muslim attacks, rapes, and more in the last few years, and honestly I can't help but feel this anti-White sentiment is validated by the same concept. Is it not weird to people when governments were abusing White farmers such as in SA (and still are to the point of a proverbial genocide or threatening them with one in the potential future) no one makes any fuss? Yet this shooting then people lose their minds? Hate to make memes over events like this but the Dark Night Joker meme fits this concept perfectly. (In the U.S. Smollet case, the Sandman case, etc. Attacking white people)
I really do think this may be less of just a "edge lord." thing, a psychopath thing, or even a simple "nutjob thing" it might finally be the push of western citizens might be leading to a releasing of steam so to speak . People in the west have been subject to many abuses by foreign immigrants for years (legal and illegal) and with no help from the law/legal system that often turns its heads, or pleads down the perpetrators and even the cops turning their heads to the issue, we might be seeing a start down a vigilante path in society, we're already seeing mistrust in government, and news organizations (though for good reason in many instances) and these groups do not compromise well like the old saying goes... "Those who make compromise impossible make violent revolution inevitable."
It may sound silly or "grandiose" but realistically I think people have been holding in this anger for too long, against these acts happening in society and this may be part of the straw that had broken the camel's back or even the social contract between different groups. (Religiously/Racially/etc.) It's hard to tell, but I won't lie this hits close to home, because many people in my own state are and have been pushed to the edge as well. I often see "pacifist" I've known for years who also have concluded at this point violence is all that's left. Not that they are violent but I think many are waiting for the start of the end, and that's what disturbs me most about all of this. Too much of a perfect storm for how it was planned, the consequences of these actions, and what it will lead to from here.
Sorry for the long post but just my 2c.
www.standard.co.uk
