In reply to this comment by hpqp:
where's this quote from again?

In reply to this comment by gwiz665:
Did they just.. scissor or something?

where's this quote from again?

In reply to this comment by gwiz665:
Did they just.. scissor or something?

Hi, I think I broke the sift's rules: http://videosift.com/video/Oslo-Bomber-and-Utoya-Shooter-s-Manifest

I am not sorry.

>> ^Pprt:

DerHasisttot, I fear you've been totally consumed by two particularly devious and masochistic mental afflictions, counterproductive critical theory and cultural Marxism.
I have just read someone who honestly believes that a lowly bird is worth protection but would not lift a finger to defend human culture because "all cultures are equal and none is more worthwhile than another". Correspondingly, it does not matter if one of them disappears or if all of them disappear. Effectively, you believe in everything and nothing at the same time.
You are a destroyer of nations because you do not believe in nations.
My only advice is that you realize that we live in a world where Europeans are the ONLY people who are affected by these social ills. No other culture is masochistic, they are proud of themselves for who they are.. for better or for worse.
I can only hope that, through time and personal experience, you may come to realize that your own culture (and every culture) is worthy of conservation.
That's if it's still around you in old age.


You have not understood how I thoroughly deconstructed your premise. Cultures are inconservable. I never said that all cultures are equal. I said they are enhancing each other. The best things stay, the others fall away.

You are either a troll or an enormous, racist ideological (maybe even Nazi) -asshole whose life would be best spend scrubbing sewers so your brainfarts do not stink up the place. I will not respond to you anymore.

>> ^Pprt:

"Racist" is nothing more than silly name-calling. Its only effect is making the accuser seem unoriginal and intellectually lazy. Congratulations to anyone who uses that word for employing the debating tactics of a five year old.
Before Breivik's name was out there I expressed caution in not blaming anyone for the attacks. Unlike most media sources who immediately suspected Muslim involvement, I waited for more facts to emerge before making assumptions. That is not the action of a "racist" as you would define one.
Further, it is impossible to condone the recent events in Norway, nor would any sensible person defend these assassinations as a reasonable act. My admission is that his reasoning is sound, his concerns legitimate and his motivations worthy of study.
As for DerHasisttot's logical pretzel. I'm sure he is the type of fellow that would mobilize government in defense of an endangered species of duck, but yet finds the mild concept that a civilization wishes to maintain its existence is morally wrong. Shame on him.


It is not name calling if it is a true description. If you want to know the exact moment when libel ceased to be libel if the libelous statement was demonstrably true, look here.

>> ^Pprt:

I'm sure you guys are smart enough to understand basic math, so here you go:
Population group A has a lower than replacement level reproduction rate.
Population group B has a higher than replacement level reproduction rate and benefits from an unlimited external source of replenishment.
The outcome is that over time, group A will cease to exist.
As it happens, some individuals in group A may be displeased about their upcoming extinction.



Pprt, you are a racist.

Both Population A and B are humans. Therefore, there are no populations A and B, just population.

If A and B are distinguished by culture, B will not replace A: They will form, what non-idiotic people might call, AB + A + B.

See you next tuesday!

>> ^Pprt:

I'm sure you guys are smart enough to understand basic math, so here you go:
Population group A has a lower than replacement level reproduction rate.
Population group B has a higher than replacement level reproduction rate and benefits from an unlimited external source of replenishment.
The outcome is that over time, group A will cease to exist.
As it happens, some individuals in group A may be displeased about their upcoming extinction.


Riiiight...he did it for the future of the Caucasian race.

Spoco was right on all points. He did it because he was a psychotic racist...and the same diagnosis holds for anyone who insists that he was right and that the only pity is that he set back the racist agenda.

You might want to reconsider your priorities in this case...I'd say the 90 murder victims are just a BIT more important than some theoretical (or more accurately, delusional) racial breeding race.

Is the pity that his actions will set back "the New Right" or that ~90 people were killed in the process?>> ^Pprt:

I agree almost fully with his points.
Pity his actions will set back the New Right.

The massacre of innocent people was, unequivocally, lunacy and retarded. However, for you to simply dismiss ALL the points raised in this video as b******t, is too simplistic and, dare i say, rather naive.

In reply to this comment by kulpims:
yeah, well I think you're retarded and so is this bullshit>> ^Pprt:

I agree almost fully with his points.
Pity his actions will set back the New Right.

yeah, well I think you're retarded and so is this bullshit>> ^Pprt:

I agree almost fully with his points.
Pity his actions will set back the New Right.