Carl Benjamin / Sargon of Akkad / Akkad Daily / The Thinkery / @not_sargon / @WarPlanPurple - Leader of the "Liberalists" & Droning Pseudo-Intellectual Boomer anti-SJW Activist, Applebees Waiter, Mass Shooter Whiteknight

Would you rape Jess Phillips

  • Total voters
    2,417
BlancoMailo said:
Well since things are a bit slow here, I might as well archive these clips from a drunken stream he did with Layman over a year ago. There's nothing big in them but the twitter account that was hosting them got nuked some time in the last few months it seems and I chuckled slightly at some of them (particularly how pissy the massage parlor meme used to make him).

"That stream Sargon did with Layman around two to three months back had a few fun nuggets, from him talking about:

1. wanting to bang Anita

2. definitely NOT wanting to bang masseuses

3. his wife not being happy about him wanting to bang Blaire White"

"1. wanting to bang Anita"
View attachment 679782














"2 (a). definitely NOT wanting to bang masseuses (part 1)"
View attachment 679786
















"2 (b). definitely NOT wanting to bang masseuses (part 2)"
View attachment 679790















"3. his wife not being happy about him wanting to bang Blaire White" (And a slight mention of the now notorious 'dropped n-bomb' at the end)
View attachment 679791
Click to expand...

tbh I think Anita is a bit better looking in some angles than a lot of people would likely admit, but motherfucker just comes right out and says she's legit hot "because of course you'd have someone like that as the face!".

Fucker legit thinks she qualifies as a sex symbol for feminism.
 
  • Winner
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: Army Burger and Unog
Colonel J said:
Destiny: "We shouldn't tolerate speech that offends large groups of people."
Sargon: "That's just censorship."
Destiny: "You're saying I can't shove my penis in the face of a 4 year old? Guess you like censorship. Checkmate Sargon"

(:_(
Click to expand...

Yeah, this was a real WTF moment from Destiny.

Also it's funny how Destiny says he doesn't believe in human rights but then says that people who are concerned their rights are going to be violated should be allowed to 'enact violence' against people who advocate for their rights to be removed. E.g. non whites should be allowed to punch someone like Richard Spencer. Unfortunately Sargon isn't smart enough to point out the obvious objection 'You say non whites can enact violence against Richard Spencer for advocating their deportation. You say you don't believe in human rights and want to curtail my speech with hate speech laws. Doesn't that mean I can enact violence against you'. All he came up with was the relatively weak 'Richard Spencer has no chance of being in power and able to deport people'.

Another irritating Destiny-ism is "You agree with x, therefore you must agree with X" where x is a very minor version of something and X is a very major one. E.g. you agree the state has the right to ban sexual abuse of toddlers you must therefore agree it has the right to compel and ban speech. And yet I'm sure he'd say the slippery slope is a logical fallacy.

Lastly he claims to want 'the greatest good for the greatest number' and yet he wants to censor the hate speech of the majority on the justification that hurts the feelings of the minority. Most people would say that free speech is an essential liberty and freedom from hate feelings is a temporary safety to use Franklin's classification. And of course limiting the freedom of the majority to protect the feelings of the minority doesn't meet the definition of 'the greatest good for the greatest number'. As usual with people like him, Destiny is much more interested in censoring and persecuting people he dislikes - his critics - than protecting some minority who he's never interacted with. 'Think of the trannies' has become the new 'think of the children' - a justification for using state power against your political opponents.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: BR55, A Useless Fish, White Devil's Advocate and 8 others
These debates are just money spinning opportunities.
Does anyone really believe that people change their opinion after a debate? Its almost unheard of. People watch debates to hear their own opinions reflected back at them or because they are too chickenshit/highbrow for IBS.
There is nothing of value to be had from a debate. Even in the British parliament the result of a debate is a foregone conclusion, nobody changes their minds, nobody says anything that hasnt been said a thousand times before.
So looking at Carl and his 'debate me coward' attitude I cant help but think less of him, if such a thing was possible. Every debate he has is an opportunity to expand his audience, hustle more paypigs with ad money or superchats or hipster welfare, reinforce the fanaticisim of his cultists and ultimately solidify his control of the overton window in his little corner of the internet.
He has been in enough debates in his time by now to know that it really changes nothing. His defeats at the hands of white supremacists have not resulted in a mass exodus of subscribers, instead those who have fallen in love with his charmless bumbling continue the whole affair.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Winner
Reactions: A Useless Fish, White Devil's Advocate, raskogr and 7 others
Unog said:
Ostensibly the target audience of a debate aren't the people who've already decided on a viewpoint concerning the topic at hand, but the people who have yet to form an opinion.
Click to expand...

Look at any debate where they do a before and after poll of the audience. The undecided and skeptical debate attendee is as rare a species as the white rhino.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Shady Attorney, White Devil's Advocate, raskogr and 6 others
Toucan said:
Look at any debate where they do a before and after poll of the audience. The undecided and skeptical debate attendee is as rare a species as the white rhino.
Click to expand...

While true, and it's probably because a lot of the people who attend them are their for the personality representing their side of the debate, it doesn't change the fact that that's why people bother having them.

Just the possibility, no matter how slim, of having someone who previously was either unaware or disinterested in your side of the argument convert to it is worth it. Or at least, that's the idea, anyway. Not to mention as you said the money involved from doing it, since it's the verbal equivalent of a contact sport.
 
Colonel J said:
Destiny: "We shouldn't tolerate speech that offends large groups of people."
Sargon: "That's just censorship."
Destiny: "You're saying I can't shove my penis in the face of a 4 year old? Guess you like censorship. Checkmate Sargon"

(:_(
Click to expand...

...did he honestly say that...

Edit : @IwemduWarrior Does that mean Carl doesn't understand 1/4 of reality then if he's quarter black?
 
Last edited:
Smarty Pants said:
Why does it always come down to child abuse with these fucking weirdos?
Click to expand...
As a species, with some exceptions, we have it hard coded into our bodies to have STRONG reactions to kiddy diddling and abuse.

Feminists taking our games away doesn't get enough of a reaction anymore, so we're now here.
 
683671683672

He should probably never shave.
 
  • Horrifying
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: A Useless Fish, Shady Attorney, Wendy Torrance and 18 others
Marco Fucko said:
Yeah, 59:40

Click to expand...

The last time around was infuriating enough, so I don't think I can bring myself to watch this one. Was Carl that thirsty for another "win"? Who came out of this one looking least bad (there can be no winners between these two)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back