Kraken

Seriously can we just do this in the General American Politics?

I mean... we could talk about this in the General American Politics thread, rather than on the game list. Because I think this falls more under that than what Ross has to do with it.

Shame I didn't see Secret Weapons Over Normandy on the list. (Totally not an obligatory statement since I posted in obscure games on it.) Although I don't think he'd like it very much. Maybe flight arcade games aren't his thing, I don't know. Though I will admit the game can be a bit over-dramatic at times. I still liked it though. I thought it was kind of depressing. I mean the whole concept is kind of depressing. The music slaps though. But I don't know if it's Ross' style of music. Anyways it's just one of those games that takes a while to kick in. I think of it as a game that's better for people that don't quite understand what mental disorders can do. Or really a game for people who need coping.

He's the only competent medic. Or really the only one I trust. Probably because he can't be killed so any stupidity his AI does isn't that big a deal to him.

Not even close to rumours for S.T.A.L.K.E.R.. I'm playing Shadows of Chernobyl and the AI is actually fairly competent. Most of the time. I don't know what F.E.A.R. levels of AI are (having never played it), but I'd say that S.T.A.L.K.E.R. has a pretty good system. Although I've heard the grenade-wielding enemies in the later S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games are ridiculous. The AI parts that made them ridiculously competent were dummied out as far as I've heard. But they slowly brought it back in later S.T.AL.K.E.R. games. It's hit or miss, really.

I don't think I'm quite at that point of dedication to run it in a VM. It works for the most part as-is, and I can pretty much live with it, flaws and all. Mostly because I know nothing about VMs, and then there's the obvious issues of using a PS4 controller for it, and also whether or not it'd even accept the disc(s). But I might be wrong. But still, not quite to the point of figuring out VMs for it.

I have replayed it with a PS4 controller and the experience was far more enjoyable. However, I should note that you will need to rebind the buttons in the menu to the controller of choice. As well it should be noted that it doesn't specifically state which buttons are which when you rebind the buttons, so good luck figuring that somewhat cryptic part out whenever you come back to look at it after a while of not playing. I had the blessing of having a manual showing what the buttons were for the PS2, so I will list these so anyone else can get a bit more of an authentic PS2 experience. (I mean you can use the Xbox controls if you want, but I have no idea what they are.) I think we know what a PS2 controller looks like but I want to just be extremely clear. (Transparent, even.) L2 = Target Track (Left lower bumper) L1 = Zoom (Left top bumper) R2 = Fire Secondary (Right lower bumper) R1 = Fire Primary (Right top bumper) Left Stick (L3) = Movement of plane. Right Stick (R3) = Up/Down is throttle. Left/Right does nothing in basic flight control. Roll is an option for Full Flight Controls, but I couldn't tell if it was actually working or not. R3 Press = Rear View. There's no camera movement aside from this. Triangle = Camera/Bomb Sight Circle = Reflex Time.* X = Air Target Square = Ground Target *Reflex Time (Can also be known as bullet time, or speedy time. Depends on if you tap or hold, respectively.) is your best friend. Use liberally. Note: Speeding up time will cause dialogue to stop playing. Recommendation: Keep subtitles on. Also unrelated, the screen resolution is capped at 1280x920. In fullscreen. Gotta love CD-ROM. Personal experiences with bugs (Unsure if result of use of Windows 10 or not. Previous experience (Windows 7) dictates it might just be like that for anything newer than Vista or XP.): -The ME-262 you pilot has no engine sound. Could just be me. Will update if I notice the issue with other ME-262s. -Crashes happen. Both into obstacles with a plane, and in terms of the program. Save between missions. (Be prepared for a restart or user log-out. When the program crashes, it crashes spectacularly.) -Unsure if it's an issue pertaining to the gamepad programming or not, but square is the accept button and triangle is the back button for menus. Also I have no idea how you access the menu with the PS4 controller, as it has no binding stating it. So be ready with Esc while playing. -Performance issues will happen, I almost guarantee it. Just be prepared for a bit of lag. (Especially in Fjords... good god.) -The Fjords are glitchy. Texture-wise. Physically they're fine. Most of the time. (Refer to crashes.) -Be sure to check your volume. The movies are ungodly loud.

Just saying it's a bit pointless. The drama's pretty much over.

I don't see how this is relevant to the thread now that it's y'know... over with that part.

Okay, so what would you propose otherwise? We read better? We can't read something "better" which only can be interpreted safely in one way. Going beyond that would be assuming things, and would likely make the debate worse.

What if you just explain your point a bit more plainly? Because I can't tell what you mean besides taking it at face value. If you're failing to explain what you mean cohesively enough for other people to understand and then blaming us for it, it's not our fault. In some cases it's a little hard to tell what exactly a person means. This is one of them. Because we don't hear what your thoughts are while you type something. You might think you're writing one thing and it comes out meaning something completely different. Edit: I should also mention that we haven't heard any other examples of annoying behavior by the LGBT community. Not including us, according to you. Because we're having a debate. It's bordering on being ad hominem. (If you can say that unintentionally misinterpreting something is being annoying.)

You're getting upset about pride parades which typically only happen within the month of June. Hypocritical to say Annie is picking a strawman argument, when getting upset about LGBT+ pride isn't. I don't hear any annoyance about military parades. (Seriously we have a big enough military, it's not even a dick measuring contest anymore.) I'd say parades in general are annoying... but laying the blame specifically on LGBT pride is not the best reason to hate LGBT people. Also I'd say that LGBT people are far more vocal in general because they have issues with the way they typically get treated in society. Christians might have more of a majority in America, but that's because they're the status quo and have been socially accepted for hundreds of years. They essentially have jack shit to say that people haven't already heard. And most of it is inherently hypocritical when they criticize LGBT people and people who have abortions, when Jesus Christ went out of his way to hang out with "the degenerates of society". Sounds like a good band name.

God I wish it were that easy. But Alabamans are losing their shit about a gay wedding in a kids cartoon. So my bar isn't set very high about religious people.

So is no one going to bring up the obvious use of abortion if it's a case of rape? Or is that a (in my opinion completely legitimate) motive for abortion that also applies to basically mean "Carry your rapists' baby and give it up for adoption"? Cause I don't know, it feels like having a constant reminder every day for 9 months that you got raped is pretty mentally unhealthy. Like sure we can argue about the morality of it all we want but I would say having to babysit for someone because they're an asshole you had interaction with is a pretty universally disliked idea. Also I feel like having it open as an option is fine? Let people have that option because in all honesty it really doesn't concern you unless you're actually the one carrying the baby. I would also say the father gets a say in it but if he really wants a baby that bad he should probably look somewhere else or actually discuss it with the person beforehand rather than doing some evil shit like poking holes in the condom behind their partner's back. At that point when they do shit like that they should immediately lose any say in the matter. (Sarcasm) God, to think it would matter to actually have consent in relationships. How unthinkable. (/Sarcasm) Also I think we should drag in the fact that religious conservatives lose their shit whenever they see homosexuality depicted normally, despite the fact that a big part of Christianity is not judging other people. Like I haven't been to church since I was 9, but I think it's a pretty well understood idea that Jesus and God aren't assholes that are going to smite you on sight or some shit as soon as you diverge from what you assume God wants you to do. Cause the whole point of Christianity is FORGIVENESS, which a few people seem to lose out on. Though I feel like part of this is something we can blame on the 200 sects of Christianity where they focus more on one part of the Bible than the other, instead of taking it all in in one go. That and apparently the Bible has always been really questionably translated, so I'm wondering how much more has been lost in translation from Hebrew. I just feel like it's a massive failure on Religion's part to actually... say the message it's supposed to be.

I have noticed lately that I am having some issues with the forum's functionality at the moment. I cannot seem to do anything with any of my posts or replies made pre-migration, aside from deleting them. This is only a slight issue when considering I edit some of my topic posts to either be more legible or provide more accurate information. For example, on my topic started in the Obscure PC Games channel, I have noticed that a picture has been deleted from the original source, and having replayed the game recently there were various other inconsistencies within my post which I would want to correct.

If we're assuming 'natural fuel reserves' includes nuclear fuel, then it would be far more likely that we're going to die from heat death. And considering that we could go up a few degrees in CELSIUS over the next century, that would be enough to have a large amount of ice on the caps melt. That's kind of an issue considering how much of the population of Earth lives near water, like it's a resource we need. And if we're just talking about Oil, it's probably just far more likely we're all going to go the route of Fallout and nuke each other. Although, considering the reluctance of any Nuclear power to give a country the chance of Nuclear Energy, and inevitably Nuclear weapons, it's unlikely it would stay stable forever. But either way we're likely going to die from something heat related. We *could* colonize the Moon, which would make going to Mars exponentially easier, but as far as 'habitable' goes, Mars is not a very good candidate, and it would take hundreds of years for proper terraforming, not to mention the issue that it doesn't exactly have a magnetic field. And it could take hundreds of years for the Moon colonies to become self-sustaining, not to mention the obvious issue of a lack of atmosphere, incredible temperature ranges, and the fact that asteroids can and will eventually hit something important. Kinda like... Moonbase Alpha. But anyways, have this

Secret Weapons Over Normandy (SWON) is an arcade styled WW2 aircraft game. The world revolves around you in the position of a pilot. I will say it's obscure only because in the last 10 years, I have heard NO-ONE talk about this game, despite its selling an estimated 500,000 copies. Although that might indicate that it's not memorable, it is like a dead relic of the early 2000s and I haven't forgotten this game. That might be perhaps due to me having played this game relentlessly on the PS2, though. There will be some spoilers in here now and then, but I won't try to get into too much detail anyways. The story goes like this: You are an American pilot (James Chase) who goes to Britain to serve with the RAF, assumedly in 1940. The game doesn't really explain why you do it, but it's most likely because you're young and you want to explore the world, or some equally grandiose purpose. You are assigned to France, at Dunkirk. You are trained with an aircraft, the Hawker Hurricane, in the encirclement leading to the evacuation at Dunkirk. When the evacuation commences, you are guarding the city while everyone evacuates when your main antagonist, a German ace pilot, known as Krieger, shows up, along with the rest of his squadron, named "Nemesis". You somehow manage to shoot him AND his squadron down (if you don't rely on the AI teammates that are trying to help. Trying being the key word.) This leads to your wingman -who is actually a pilot in a top secret squadron- recommending you to join his squadron, named "Battlehawks", and help fight against Nemesis. This leads to you encountering Nemesis repeatedly, fitting the namesake. You're also more generally fighting the German army/airforce, and as well you get to do some fighting in the Pacific. This is a theater of war entirely stumbled upon because the squadron has secret information stating that the Germans are exchanging technology with the Japanese on the coast of Saipan. And then you somehow get involved in the Battle of Midway. Also you go to the Cliffs of Dover, Africa, Denmark, and Russia because you're fighting the entire Wehrmacht/Luftwaffe and/or its secret projects, no matter the location. I can't say that the game is inherently racist, but it does feel like it feeds into stereotypes a little bit more than it probably should. This is despite the lengths of hiring voice actors from countries depicted who know the language, or at least someone convincing enough otherwise. For some reason the Soviet Union doesn't follow this pattern though, given a stereotypical Russian accent rather than proper language. It's probably nitpicking, but in reality only about 30% of Russians in modern times know English of some form, and I assume that this was far lower during the 1930s-40s, particularly due to the rare interaction of most of Europe and the Soviet Union by that time anyways. Now let's dig into the quality of the game. The voice acting isn't too bad, but some things do obviously show. It was made when WW2 was a popular theme, so you can definitely feel some saturation. However, the publishing company, LucasArts, did publish another few flight games before the main saturation, except it felt less arcade-y, so they had at least some experience before the theme was saturated. Now, I will say this right now, the game isn't perfect, and it has some issues. it doesn't like modern computers quite as much, and is only available on CD. Not to mention that to install it you have to put 4 different disks in the slot, in order. There were also console ports for the PS2 and Xbox, although they didn't HAVE that issue. I'm not sure exactly why this is? Did they think that having 3 disks to install things then having a 4th to execute it would be faster? Maybe it's a storage issue involving the different settings? Regardless, the graphics still sort of hold up, albeit it is very polygonal and has its obvious edges. It was made in the early 2000s, so I can't say anything points out too horrendously when I played it. Considering LucasArts is a Disney company subsidiary as of writing (and years later, editing), it really puts the game in a weird abandon-ware area. Disney just keeps it afloat with only a few people to retain licensing powers and to publish games. The company which actually developed this, Totally Games, is defunct as of 2015. So I'd think it's pretty firmly in abandon-ware, although I also think that Disney probably still has some rights to it in some form via Lucasfilm Games, the rebranding of LucasArts. In short, this kind of makes it a can of worms. There is also a BEAUTIFUL orchestral soundtrack (It all is rather gung-ho sounding though, definitely very few emotional pieces) composed by Michael Giacchino. The guy has done MOVIE soundtracks, even some soundtracks for the TV show Lost. He's done some for Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, The Incredibles I & II, and even Rogue One. If it was a big movie, and it was done in the last 20ish years, there's a pretty good chance this guy might have composed for it. At least if it wasn't Hans Zimmer or John Williams. Anyways, SWON is lacking in some areas, such as it being rather short, as I 100% completed it in about 10-12 hours of work. But, to be fair, I DID play the game a lot in the past on the PS2, so I had an idea of what to expect. It might be more like 18 hours for a normal person, but that's for the 100% run. To actually complete it any% would probably take you only 8 hours, if that. And there could have been more missions too. Why not fly over Europe, escorting bombers to Germany instead of just being a ball-gunner? I'd love to have that as a mission. Let's have to intercept some more secret weapons! I want to fight a flight of Ho-229s over the battle of the bulge! And while the tie-in to the pacific theater was a nice touch, it could have had some of the beach invasions from that. Why not have that as a training mission so you know what to expect in Normandy, if you really wanted to end it there? What about Italy? I feel there could even be a remake of this game so it doesn't feel so dated. The addition of some more missions would generally just beef up the gameplay, and nothing says that you have to be limited to just the one character. Let us have some variety like it's World At War. Although, some things definitely needed to be adjusted both in the gameplay, and dialogue, because a bit felt cheesy. That, and there are some difficulty spikes if you're going for a 100% run. (I'M LOOKING AT YOU MIDWAY. Which is also conveniently mid-way through the game.) Although as far as I know you don't get a completion bonus besides a few "Instant Action" vehicles. I mean sure, one could argue that there are spiritual successors that are more modern, such as the Blazing Angels series, but each game has its perks, and I happen to like a lot of the perks in SWON. I guess maybe you could attempt to remake these in War Thunder or IL-2 but that may be difficult or outright impossible, and wouldn't do the game justice. A flying pancake. I'm not sure where or why Lockheed Martin endorsed this? Maybe they gave the developers a P-38 to model? Maybe they gave the developers some blueprints to follow? I don't know. There's little to no mention of this anywhere online, but I'd have to say that a major flight company slapping their brand on the back of a case is pretty important. An all-black plane paired with yellow lightning bolts going down the sides of the fuselage? That's a pretty unique paint job, and you will see it very often. Although I can't say that Nemesis is very hard to kill all the time, especially not when they are fighting with generic unspecified variant BF109s while you are in a P-51 or even a ME-262. And I don't have much reason to believe these are ever upgraded later-war variants. The gameplay is about as much as you can expect of an arcade WW2 airplane themed game. It handles about as well as trying to drive a smart car around a corner while on ice. Not the slippery ice you usually see on platformers, mind you. That's just lazy ice. But that might just be on the PC. You could try using a joystick though, as it has support for it. And alternatively you could just rebind everything to a PS4 controller like I did, although I recommend adjusting the sensitivity of it. It also just felt better on consoles. The planes are rather well designed, and you can tell that Totally Games really cared about the product. They even had interviews of actual veterans as bonuses in it. Some of the bonuses were how the plane sounds were recorded and generally just behind the scenes stuff. Everything is (somewhat) accurate to their real life counterparts, and the only regret I have with the game, is that they couldn't fit in more planes... or secondary weapons, come to think of it. I will say this, the maps you fly over are BEAUTIFUL, and if you can remake the game/maps in a modern engine, I would love to see it. But just seeing a overview of the maps would be great too. I would say that the developers of the game probably just drew out a rough outline of most of the geographic locations and added things to make it more interesting, but it's doubtful how much was realistically depicted, especially with it being a simple arcade title. I'm sure if I tried to line things up with real-life counterparts they would look either nothing like their real counterpart, or similar enough to pass. Anyways, the Xbox version had some DLC with it. Anyone know how they could mod that into the PC version? I don't think the PC had DLC for it and yet the Xbox did. (originally from hooked gamers, saving for posterity in case) Like, these had new missions and planes! AND THESE WERE INCLUDED IN XBOX MAGAZINES. NOTHING FOR PC. WHO DOES THIS? YOU'RE LOCKING AWAY DEVELOPER CONTENT BEHIND OBSCURE SOURCES AND- "Check out this content download for Secret Weapons Over Normandy! New Plane: Ki-61 The Kawasaki Ki-61 Hien (‘Swallow’) was the only Japanese fighter powered by an inline liquid-cooled engine and could threaten any U.S. fighter with its two .50 cal machine guns and two 20mm cannons. New Single Player Mission: Last Chance! A small American carrier task force has wandered within reach of Japanese ground-based aircraft. This single-player mission challenges Ace pilots to fly Japan’s latest fighter, the Ki-61 ‘Tony,’ and clear the skies of deadly American Corsairs to give the fragile G4M1 ‘Betty’ bombers a chance to hit the carrier. This download also includes an updated camouflage pattern for the Betty." "Yet another content download for Secret Weapons Over Normandy! He162 Volksjager Plane This rocket-powered plane was designed to be cheap and easy to produce. It could very well have become the jet-powered workhorse of the Luftwafee. Furious Engel Mission This two-player mission pits Axis versus Allies and allows gamer to fly any plane – including the new Volksjager. That’s not enough for you? Well, you’re in luck because this download also includes two new camo schemes." "Download a new plane plus a new mission! The Macchi 202 is the first Italian fighter plane for Secret Weapons Over Normandy. It combines Italian design skills with a German inline engine. Plus, in the exciting new ‘Escape from Tripoli’ single player mission, you play the role of an Axis pilot taking on Allied invaders. That’s not enough for you? Well, you’re in luck because this download also includes an alternative camo scheme for the JU-87 Stuka." "Download a new plane, the F4U Corsair, in our final Secret Weapons Over Normandy package." "They are on these OXM discs: 33, 34, 35 Secret Weapons Over Normandy Corsair F4U Package - 35 He-162 and Furious Engel - 33 Ki-61 and Last Chance - 33 Mc202 and Tripoli - 34" Did I mention there is a program called SLED so you can make your own missions?

Hey, I think you missed me saying this: Anyways, let me just carefully deconstruct this: You're trusting a source who is wearing a T-shirt literally displaying a musket and an M4, and it states "Rights don't change just because technology advances." While this may be nit-picky, it's honestly as good a starting point as I'll get because, no matter how far you get into the video, that's the first thing you see. Taking that statement literally means that there would never be any legislature applying to social media and video games, but we know that as a fact that those rights have changed, i.e. the "PATRIOT Act". But then, not even two minutes later comes an issue I have with what he's saying, which is inherently ironic. "The most staunch anti-gunners out there like Tom Cruz and all the others making millions of dollars showing the misuse of firearms, glorifying violence, yet they have the audacity to tell us that we're not to be trusted with firearms." Sorry, wasn't he rated as an A+ by the NRA? Isn't he the one saying "thoughts and prayers" about the gun violence victims? Isn't he promising he'll do something about guns, then he immediately does nothing about it? How in the hell does he view Ted Cruz as an anti-gunner? https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/how-the-nra-grades-the-34-members-of-texass-congressional-delegation/ "The focus has been lately on the AR-15. 'Let's get rid of the AR-15 because it's just an evil implement of war', Well it's not an implement of war because it's not an M16, it's an AR-15 and it was developed as a civilian rifle before it was even considered as a military rifle." Let me just quote this: "Colt started selling the semi-automatic version of the M16 rifle as the Colt AR-15 in 1964." So... it's an M16? Additionally even though the patents have expired and there are many AR-15-similar weapons, these all follow the basic design of the Colt AR-15 which is derived from the M16. So while he's saying that it's not exactly an M16 he is still referring to a lineage of it. Sorry, I'm only 4 minutes in and I've already got this many issues? I'm not arguing with his point about the mainstream media detailing everything about shooters, because yeah, that's a pretty goddamn big issue. But I'm getting confused by his knowledge (or lack thereof) of his rifles and politicians, despite being "Military Arms Channel"? While I could find that NRA statement issued about the BAFTE review, I haven't seen anything else relating the NRA to the review that he is suggesting. I highly doubt that I should trust a person who is showing all of these things that may actually be independent of each other and suggesting that there is a bigger picture going on without providing the resources to validate it for yourself. He even states "I'm not going to do your homework for you." which makes me doubt that much of what he is saying is even true if he is making it difficult to find the sources he references. While yes, some parts of anti-gunners would bus people to protests for gun controls, large parts of these events are because it's public opinion. I'm not gonna say it's a conspiracy by Bloomberg like he says it is. I'm getting a headache from this video after 15 minutes cause I've never been this confused about a man's gun control stance.

I'm pointing out the open-carry as a loophole in the law. Handguns are regulated (i.e. you need a permit to open-carry), yet you are able to open-carry a rifle no problem.

Not really, this applies to General American Politics too. I doubt that firearms education would help anything, unless it's for safety or something similar. But even then, I don't think you understand what I mean when I talk of open-carry in Texas. People carry rifles around in public down there because the law only applies to handguns, a loophole or an oversight if you will. But anyways, nice little video came out by AlternateHistoryHub, so let's all watch that.

Sooo anyway, there has been *yet another* school shooting today, this time it's in Santa Fe, Texas. Not to come off as a sarcastic asshole or anything, but it's an open-carry state where people walk around with semiautomatic rifles on their back because their gun laws only specifically mention handguns, and not a rifle, and yet here we are with what most conservative gun-owners would state as "preventable" had it happened anywhere else. I also see that the NRA's twitter, which is usually on top of the latest news concerning guns, is quiet about the latest shooting. And needless to say, the latest shooter, whom I will not name due to the lack of need to state for post-custody fame, was following Ivanka, Donald, and Melania Trump on Instagram, as well as the White House, but that last one is a little less indicative. But, he did follow eight other accounts that just so happened to be fan pages for firearms. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts/shooting-suspect-dimitrios-pagourtzis-posted-born-kill-t-shirt-n875571 But let's look at the numbers again, yeah? We're fine with more children dying than soldiers involved in war since 9/11, i.e. something they signed up for, knowing the risks? http://www.newsweek.com/gun-violence-children-killed-sandy-hook-military-soldiers-war-terror-911-848602 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/05/18/2018-has-been-deadlier-for-schoolchildren-than-service-members/?utm_term=.40c0b9e81eae Oh and, by the way, do we want to talk about how horrible Texas gun legislation is? http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2014/jun/05/mike-hashimoto/texas-law-effectively-permits-long-rifles-be-toted/ I kinda am getting sick of having to mention every single goddamn mass shooting we've had this year, but noooo we can't ever get rid of guns. https://www.snopes.com/news/2018/05/18/mass-shooting-texas-high-school/ Oh and, here's a direct quote from that article right there from Snopes: "Meanwhile, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick suggested that cutting down on the number of entrances and exits at schools could be a solution. "We may have to look at the design of our schools moving forward, and retrofitting schools that are already built. What I mean by that is there are too many entrances and too many exits to our over 8,000 campuses in Texas," he said: "There aren’t enough people to put a guard at every entrance and exit. You would be talking twenty-five, thirty, 40,000 people. But if we can protect a large office building or a courthouse, any major facility we need to look at limiting the entrance and the exits into our schools so that we can have law enforcement looking at the people who come in one or two entrances.'"" I can't see this backfiring, can you? 'Let's just make it so there's only one entrance for a building (fire escapes be damned I suppose?) so that we can stop a school shooter before he starts! Don't worry about your second amendment rights, you'll still be able to own a semiautomatic rifle and be able to carry it in public!' Honestly I'm trying to keep this as little 'I-told-you-so' as possible, but this is just kinda getting ridiculously pointless.

Despite insistence from certain individuals that the mainstream media is alt-left/left or what have you, I have to wonder if it's an issue when they report on people BEING FUCKING NAZIS? So, as most people consider 4/20 as National Weed Day in the U.S., it is of course also the birthday of Adolf Hitler and the anniversary of the Columbine shooting which, surprise surprise, was done on that day because the two shooters were, surprise surprise, also Neo-Nazis, or at the very least revered parts of Nazism and wanted to celebrate Adolf's birthday. This also adds on that I haven't seen any mass shootings committed by an "alt-left"/Antifa member... Anyways, have some things concerning the Neo-Nazis gathering in Newnan, Georgia. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/georgia-neo-nazi-rally-police-militarized-arrests_us_5adbf0f6e4b075b631e65f49?ncid=edlinkushpmg00000313 http://time.com/5249811/neo-nazis-burn-swastika-georgia/ https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/21/us/neo-nazi-rally-georgia.html https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/04/neo-nazi-counterprotesters-met-by-aggressive-military-police-force-in-newnan-georgia.html Or perhaps now we want to talk about the Waffle House shooting? Another AR-15 style weapon being used by a mentally ill person against an establishment occupied with primarily people of color. But nooo, 'We can't call it terrorism or a hate crime because of my funding by the NRA' despite it obviously being a hate crime or incident of terrorism. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/huppke/ct-met-waffle-house-shooting-huppke-20180423-story.html http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-waffle-house-shooting-20180423-story.html http://time.com/5249531/nashville-waffle-house-mass-shooting-latest/ https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/waffle-house-shooting-w519440 Sure, he had a handgun as well, but tell me: Do you think that he would have done as much damage with a handgun compared to an assault rifle? Certainly handguns are still dangerous, but do you think he would have been able to do as much damage?

So you're just going to call dash a communist without providing details why you think so, and you get pissed when people think you're an alt-right member because you believe a lot of alt-right lies, and continue to say those lies thinking they're evidence to support your views? I mean, I'd rather you have this discussion with me rather than dash, but again, you didn't want to argue with me, because I listed out the alt-right lies you keep repeating. Do you think that everyone that disagrees with you has no moral arguments? Do you label everyone who doesn't agree with you as "Communist"? I swear, you're literally Liberty Prime right now, except it's not even over-the-top funny, it's kind of sad.

Y'know, I think that saying the Nazis were left leaning is also an alt-right lie... Which would somehow be ironic given that they are Nazis. But as it turns out, that's actually what it is. https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/09/05/were-nazis-socialists/ Also, are you not willing to argue because I'm right? Because I find it difficult to believe it's something you can't respond to, especially when you are still arguing about feminIsm, even though my response touched on it. I never called you alt-right, I just said you believe a lot of alt-right lies. I feel like I'm getting deja vu from that last statement...

Jesus. Fucking. Christ. I really don't intend to start many responses with taking the lord's name in vain, and then having vulgarity sprinkled in, but holy fuck do I need to get that out of my system. Alright, let's talk about Conservative Christians. I explicitly referenced Conservative Christians referencing you stating "nothing hates women more than other women", because I wanted to show to you that that is a bullshit statement. I stated that Conservative Christians are hypocritical in hating women's rights to their own reproductive systems, then immediately stating that they follow the bible to a Tee. I sure as hell have a right to judge what you know, considering most of it seems to be a repetition of alt-right circle-jerk lies. You believe in a lie that 'women explicitly hate each other for simply existing'. You also believe in a lie that says that Native Americans weren't killed by genocide, which is also complete bullshit considering that the U.S. Government was perfectly fine, and sometimes had even endorsed mass hunting of Bison, which were the main source of resources for Natives. Additionally, there was the figurative (and sadly, sometimes literal) fucking over of Native tribes with treaties that the U.S. Government would immediately invalidate. Did you forget that Custer existed? You believe that Christianity is so innocent and pure despite me pointing out that conversion therapy exists and that Conservative Christians aren't capable of such atrocities. And more recently, I have proven that yes, while the NRA used to be a (Relatively) useful organization, past the 1970s they became a radical shell of what they were, attempting to give everyone guns in the hopes that problems would sort themselves out. You believe that the Alt-left is instigating violence, despite the fact that the alt-right consists of ACTUAL FUCKING NAZIS. These are people that believe that Jews have taken over the government, that Hitler did nothing wrong, and are perfectly fine with advocating the superiority of a race over another, even sometimes internally joking about the holocaust, thinking that it was a good thing. Even if the alt-right isn't composed mostly of Nazis, you'd think that most of them would have already left the group when they saw that literally everyone else at Charlottesville was a Nazi. You believe that politics isn't supposed to be scientifically backed, which is a dangerous thought in itself. Hitler's regime was also based on fake science or even straight up lies. What about the PMRC, metal, and video games? Two of those things have repetitively been blamed for violence in society, which makes me wonder where you get this notion from. You know the golden rule refers mostly to being kind to another person, right? The whole negative part of it came from Hammurabi's code, which had similar rules for crimes, except with negative connotations. Man, that is a really ironic statement. "To hell with kindness." Guess that really sums up your view on things, hmm? Also ironic is this: "The government shouldn't be telling what anyone can or can not do with their body", which you stated yourself. Guess who should be able to decide what should be done with their own bodies? Hmm? I feel like it's on the tip of my tongue, or rather my fingers. It's almost as if women don't have full political control over their reproductive systems to decide what they want to happen within it... Did you forget the part where I mentioned that women can also be abusive? But noooo let's just completely ignore that. As if men don't do similar things to women? Your views on virginity and masculinity are laughable. "Ah, more post-modernist bullshit that are neither meaningless nor "constructs" you left-wing leaning parasite." First off, I said explicitly that the government doesn't give a shit about virginity or masculinity. And as far as I'm concerned? These are meaningless concepts invented by men to justify "superiority to women." How ironic it is that a male can have multiple female partners and be given a positive view, whereas a female having multiple male partners makes them look negative. "Slight of hand, because the US government does have race and sex profiling in the census. And no one cares if you're a virgin because cultural marxism has erroded pop culture to promote sexual intercourse at younger ages and to view restraint and virginity as bad and the sign of a loser." Jesus. Fucking. Christ. Yet again I'll have to repeat that phrase, because this sentence is so goddamn insulting. You completely missed the point that I mentioned race SPECIFICALLY as being registered by government, but virginity and masculinity AREN'T. And of course, who the fuck should care if you're a virgin? It's a made up construct, as I said 4 sentences ago. What does cultural Marxism have to do with it? I'm sorry, but as far as I can tell, you refer to cultural marxism as some evil thing, when if you take it literally within context, it would mean cultural equality, which seems to have nothing to do with what you're referring to. And this is also an alt-right fabrication, made up to make their own point of view more appealing. Please, tell me of any real instances of cultural marxism and I would be glad to debate it with you. I find it difficult to believe that pop culture views virgins as losers, considering that it's a made up construct. And even so, were these in place before the "erosion" via cultural marxism, or was it something that simply showed up because of it? That's also a question to ask concerning sexual promotion to younger ages. Also, nice link to a $4 movie. I'm assuming it's a reference to The Matrix, given the title. Is it about the alt-right or some circulation of alt-right lies? So you're admitting you don't know what feminism is? It's certainly about women's rights, because they don't actually have them already. There's no right to equal pay, to equal guarantee of employment, or that they will even get viewed socially as equals. If you'd read the speeches, they are shockingly similar. Anyways, anything I've not said about the alt-right will most likely be stated in this video covering Charlottesville.