I put together a text version of Brenton Tarrant's book "The Great Replacement," which he released after his Christchurch, NZ shooting (books)

submitted ago by TheGreatReplacement

Plaintext has a few advantages over other formats.

If ANSI-encoded, it's 126 KB. This is about 4.5 times smaller than the DOCX and about 6.9 times smaller than the most common PDF in circulation. This fact matters in many cases: for example, to permanently upload it to blockchains where fees increase with bytes.

Plaintext won't infect your device, so it's far safer and more likely for people to read. A PDF can contain malware, and a few PDFs of the book have different file sizes. One version of the book attaches a malware payload that rewrites your master boot record.

Text is one of the easiest forms of data to share, so as text the book can go into wider circulation and be read by more people. Through a simple copy and paste job it can reach different audiences it wouldn't have if it remained in the PDF and DOCX formats.

Here are five mirrors. If some go down, others should remain.

Pastebin

Hastebin

0bin

ZeroBin

PrivateBin

If you want to spread this across Voat, copy and paste this:

Here's Tarrant's Christchurch manifesto, "The Great Replacement," as text.

It's easier shared than a PDF or DOCX file, and with less [chance of malware](https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/vigilantes-counter-christchurch-manifesto-with-weaponized-version/).

[Pastebin](https://pastebin.com/raw/uqwBPt9E)

[Hastebin](https://hastebin.com/raw/bulofecale)

[0bin](https://0bin.net/paste/LlAcMmXZxvvPjcbX#NkEUAjkg3U5JvIiiGhBuBuLycejl78jLGk6QguFMqWb)

[ZeroBin](https://sebsauvage.net/paste/?a2038e7e52942f87#/1C1a3EeTRvJv2v53BmWdD2d5e8sOd6QfBrtu7pc8Kg=)

[PrivateBin](https://privatebin.net/?689f19d4ae76d128#54dy5g4B4x+AzBA0Wvg6jNqiIXdPnFmOZA6hajdmuHE=)

maxmayer221 ago

That's cool. thank you

NNdmt ago

The malware thing is utter bullshit. yes its possible, but the story going around about it existing has been debunked

TheGreatReplacement ago

The malware thing is utter bullshit. yes its possible, but the story going around about it existing has been debunked.

I'm not convinced of that.

Even if it was so, the story I link is only one example. There are other versions of the documents with file sizes different from Tarrant's originals. One explanation for this is that malware payloads were attached by post-Tarrant distributors.

Even if that's not so, attacks are doable and there's motive.

The wide circulation of the manifesto means that a hacker could own many computers, even if the attack only works on some. The manifesto also popularizes a counter-narrative that many among the powerful want to censor. That NZ criminalized it evidences this.

They claim it destroys the MBR. Computers haven't used MBR for a long while now. Its all UEFI. Yeah, old computers exist, some people still use MBR, but thats a small portion

I agree it's the minority, but the portion is big enough for justified concern. All mainstream Windows versions support MBR, including XP, Vista, 7, 8, and 10, even though MBR systems are less common. StatCounter says Windows 7 makes up a third of all desktop Windows installs, and 32-bit Windows 7 is almost always MBR, not GPT.

They claim the attack vector is using VBScript in Office. This isn't enabled by default. You have to modify the registry to enable VBScript

The BleepingComputer link text claims the attack vector is using VBA. VBScript is a subset of VBA, and not VBA. The file name of the picture Blue Hexagon links says VBA and the function and variable declarations in the code look like VBA.

The first line of your link says your information is for new builds of Office 365. That says something only about new builds of that version, and that version is only one of over ten versions.

usually when security researchers find malware they disclose factual information about it, such as a hash so others can identify the malware. Blue hexagon did no such thing. Blue Hexagon chose to not responsibly disclose the vulnerability

They weren't perfect, though some disclosure beats nondisclosure. The article at least documents the malware with many screenshots.

I think there's enough reason, from malware risks alone, to recommend text for the manifesto. For those that don't want it, I do provide instructions in the foreword to safely locate the original DOCX. I agree malware will only infect a minority, but it's a minority that doesn't need infection.

NNdmt ago

In security terms that is non disclosure. There is 0 hard information presented. There are 0 copies of this malware found by any other researchers.

diff file sizes don't mean that it has malware. Having a proven, active payload is proof of malware. Until someone actually has any proof of its existence, i dont buy it.

you dont need to actually make malware, just tell people it exists to get people to not download it

scripting is disabled by default in all versions of office since the stone age

https://support.office.com/en-ie/article/enable-or-disable-macros-in-office-files-12b036fd-d140-4e74-b45e-16fed1a7e5c6

tl;dr It doesn't exist. Unless you have a copy of the active code i won't buy it. A picture of some code, and a news article means shit. Real viruses end up in malware databases

TheGreatReplacement ago

In security terms that is non disclosure.

It's disclosure. That it is not perfect disclosure does not make it non-disclosure.

About this malware, Blue Hexagon disclosed:

  • metadata about the malware
  • the pictures added to the modified document
  • the obfuscated VBA code, in full
  • the file name of the malware
  • the mechanism of its operation
  • a before and after comparison of the hex of the MBR
  • an image of the outcome of the malware

This is disclosure. It's not as much disclosure as you want, but it's disclosure.

There is no standard way to make vulnerability information available to the public.

diff file sizes don't mean that it has malware.

I agree and I never disagreed. I said that's one explanation for the differences.

Until the causes of those differences are audited, the files remain suspect.

Even after an audit, new files with different sizes may emerge that are suspect.

A text file is a simple solution without the research required to deal with this.

Having a proven, active payload is proof of malware. Until someone actually has any proof of its existence, i dont buy it.

One doesn't need undeniable proof when there's a reasonable suspicion of malware and an aboveboard alternative that meets one's objective.

Suppose there are two peaks joined together by two bridges, rickety and old. Blue Hexagon comes along and says, "One of these bridges is bad," and posts a report on why. I say, "Huh, one of these bridges might be bad. I should build a new one," and then I build a third bridge, sturdy and new, to the safest standards of modern construction. At the start of my bridge, I say, "If anyone wants to use one of the old ones, here's how you find one that's safe," and I explain how. You say, "Until anyone has proof one of the other bridges is bad, I don't buy it." People then say, "Huh, that sounds reasonable," and walk on the old bridges. Some of those people then fall through the bad one. This would be a bad outcome that can be avoided without cost.

you dont need to actually make malware, just tell people it exists to get people to not download it

This is true. It's also irrelevant here, as I provided people a safe alternative, and I explained how to safely locate the original document if they don't like my alternative.

scripting is disabled by default in all versions of office since the stone age

No, that scripting has been disabled by default only for several years of releases of Office, not since the stone age. Microsoft admits this in an up-to-date article published only two days before your post. They say "macro malware was fairly common several years ago because macros ran automatically whenever a document was opened."

Your link doesn't support the statement you made. It's to a Microsoft article titled "Enable or disable macros in Office files." I read through your article and I see nothing in there about a time period. Microsoft, who you use as a source, says macros were disabled by default for only several years of releases.

The majority of online computers are not running an Office version from the last several years. The majority were not even bought in the last several years.

Even if everyone was running one from the last several years, malware authors can still convince users to turn on macros with fake warnings in malicious documents.

Even if this wasn't so, a minority of people would still have these enabled and be vulnerable to infection. That's not good. There is cause for concern.

tl;dr It doesn't exist.

Your posts do not establish this conclusion.

Unless you have a copy of the active code i won't buy it.

That's your right, as it's mine to inform people there's reason to suspect other formats.

A picture of some code, and a news article means shit.

It means that to you. It doesn't mean that to me, and it doesn't mean that to everybody.

This also isn't all there was. You make it seem less than it is. Blue Hexagon disclosed:

  • metadata about the malware
  • the pictures added to the modified document
  • the obfuscated VBA code, in full
  • the file name of the malware
  • the mechanism of its operation
  • a before and after comparison of the hex of the MBR
  • an image of the outcome of the malware

That is much more than a picture of some code and a news article.

Real viruses end up in malware databases

No, many don't this fast. For one example, crypters can obscure detection for a while.

In general, consider the perfect solution fallacy. Disclosure, evidence, and infection do not have to be complete for information about them to be useful. It was useful to me as it motivated me towards a solution. It was useful to others who posted in this topic.

This topic has aged over two days and is no longer popular. Few will read these words and fewer to none further follow-up, so I may conclude the conversation here due to the fast decreasing public benefit of my written defenses of my security warning.

middle-path ago

How can I tell if I have this malware?

mCoder ago

I really doubt their is anything about this.

JimmyMcJones ago

There are a number of problems that i see in his manifesto. First is his profound unwillingness to call out jews for their role in communism and the mass genocide that was the Russian revolution. The idea that they lied about the holocaust would shake many normies. Despite having a large audience he failed to name them and seems to be only concerned with islamists. Second he failed to mention that 70% of islamic men are married to and rape their own underaged cousins. The notion of equality with these cousin fucking rapist is repulsive even to normies and discredits the idea of equality itself.

CameraCode ago

Someone sure does not want this information spreading to submit the same comment twice with a anonymous account.

Jabilukka ago

Thanks for that.

TheGreatReplacement ago

You're welcome, Jabilukka.

Einsatzgruppen1939 ago

Thanks

TheGreatReplacement ago

You're welcome.

BOILEDSWEETS ago

Well done , people need to read this and make up their own minds independently.

TheGreatReplacement ago

Thanks. I agree.

Baconmon ago

Brenton is a hero, and if we could all join together in a giant protest in public and then start getting more violent (kind of like the yellow vest protesters) maybe we could start affecting some change and take back our countries.. I admire brenton for what he did, but random lone wolves can't kill the whole deep state them selves.....we only have power in numbers..

But his words have much truth to them, and I think his manifesto has done more for the world (by red-pilling people) than just the shooting did.. The jew elites want to censor his manifesto because they know that if people read it they will understand that brenton is not the bad guy; he is a man that sees invaders for what they are and took a stand to try to defend his country, his race, and try to secure a future for all white people.. I'm really glad that you took the time to convert the manifesto in to text format.

Juster ago

Brenton isn't a hero. He's just someone who reached the end of his rope. We are and were doing just fine at spreading our message without livestreamed mass-murder sprees. His attacks have only made it harder for us to spread the exact arguments he used by linking them to terrorism.

It's not easier now that Amazon has removed nearly every book on white identity and white nationalism from the Kindle. It's not easier when identitarian leaders like Martin Sellner are banned from coming to the United States, and their movements demonized because Brenton sent them a check once.

We're still doing fine at spreading our message. People know it. They see Jussie Smollet committing hate crimes against whites and getting off scot free. What they want is a white identity movement with dignity they can stand behind. I just wish our people would give us time to build it.

Delacourt ago

You are absolutely right. Reading this is like a breath of fresh air.

TheGreatReplacement ago

I'm really glad that you took the time to convert the manifesto in to text format.

You're welcome.

I think his manifesto has done more for the world (by red-pilling people) than just the shooting did..

Yeah, I suspect the manifesto has done more to change people's opinions.

The jew elites want to censor his manifesto because they know that if people read it they will understand that brenton is not the bad guy; he is a man that sees invaders for what they are and took a stand to try to defend his country, his race, and try to secure a future for all white people..

Many normal people are more sympathetic to the manifesto than they let on, if they get to read it.

Thanks for the sincere message.

R210ii ago

Perfect for hosting on an open gopher server.

TheGreatReplacement ago

Gopher it and let us know how it goes.

papadosio_dude ago

I feel like you might be mentally retarded.

TheGreatReplacement ago

You're welcome.

Feel free to copy the plaintext to your blog as well, or to anywhere.

Blondie_Hitler_1 ago

I'm so proud :,)

TheGreatReplacement ago

Thanks, Hitler.

edgydude69 ago

Why did you add a bunch of bullshit?

TheGreatReplacement ago

I did not add a bunch of bullshit, but truthful, verifiable, sourced, or useful information:

  • the legal status of the document

  • evidence of radicalization by the mosques, which most assume were innocent

  • dates, numbers, and locations

  • what happened after and where Tarrant is now

  • copies of the video, linked across 6 mirrors

  • names of the songs he played in the video

  • useful follow-up links, like to the thread he posted and his Facebook page

  • instructions on how to find and verify the original document

  • file hashes and metadata of the manifesto

  • a table of contents for search and summary

Two in this topic have asked me for stuff they didn't realize was already in there, so it helped them, as it has helped others. The foreword has been better received than not by most. You're welcome to dislike it, and I'm fine with that. I don't ask you to read it, and you can just skip past it.

edgydude69 ago

Nobody needs your analysis of events. Nobody wants your analysis of events. Would’ve been cool if you’d just posted the manifesto separate from your blog.

TheGreatReplacement ago

your analysis of events

your analysis of events

your blog

Out of about 400 lines in the foreword, 397 represent pure information absent my take on it, and only 3 include my analysis (19, 62, 95). Had you read the foreword that you criticize, you would know my analysis of events represents only a fraction of one percent of the foreword, which itself is a small fraction of the document.

Nobody needs your

Nobody wants your

In this topic, FuckshitMcDickTits, a somebody, wanted and expressed appreciation for information I included in the foreword. In this topic, Womb_Raider, a somebody, wanted and asked for information that I anticipated and included in the foreword. In another topic, theoldones, a somebody, wanted this, and republished to his subverse the same text that I published here. In another topic, TraditionalCode, a somebody, wanted information that I included in the foreword. In another topic, KILLtheRATS, a somebody, wanted this, and asked me a question about how to republish the same text I published.

This topic was ranked 1st on all of Voat shortly after it was posted. At the time I wrote this post, half a day later, it was ranked 2nd. It has shown more staying power than the majority of top posts and has the 2nd most views of any topic posted in the last half day.

I've been thanked many times by many users in many places and for this thread I was invited to participate in a project. The community put you dead last on this page at -4. The community appreciates my efforts, and the community does not agree with you.

You do not need or want what I have done. Speak only for yourself and do not presume against all available and apparent measurements the opinions of others.

edgydude69 ago

Is peak for myself when I say you’re a retarded cunt.

KDs_Other_Burner ago

Is peak for myself when I say you’re a retarded cunt.

You speak for nobody you hermaphrodite goat fucking queer. Even the goat fuckers have no problem killing these phony cunts....Tarrant saved them ammo. Save your faggot concern trolling for Reddit, it's not welcome here.

edgydude69 ago

I think concern trolling is the wrong term here, considering I don’t really give a shit.

To be fair, I was a bit of a cunt. But whatevs, shlomo, have a nice sabbath.

edgydude69 ago

Wait, are you saying I fuck hermaphrodite goats, or I am a hermaphrodite who fucks goats?

KDs_Other_Burner ago

I fuck hermaphrodite goats, or I am a hermaphrodite who fucks goats

Why is the distinction important? Do your fellow kikes have a preference?

edgydude69 ago

That’s mighty antisemitic talk coming from a Jew.

ar151488 ago

Go on reddit and post this to the NZ and Australia subreddits.

TheGreatReplacement ago

While I did what I will, you have my blessing and encouragement to do so.

ar151488 ago

Thank you for the work you've done. I will share it.

TheGreatReplacement ago

That's great, thanks.

Womb_Raider ago

Can we get some mirrors of the video? I have local copies, but I want links I can distribute.

TheGreatReplacement ago

I post mirrors of the video in the "Media" section of the "Video" section of the foreword.

FuckshitMcDickTits ago

Should post the file hashes, especially if posting p2p sharing formats.

Files can be changed, or nefarious scripts embedded in documents.

TheGreatReplacement ago

I post the MD5, SHA1, and SHA256 hashes of the original DOCX file in the "File information" section of the foreword, along with simple instructions to verify them on Windows and the tip that with these hashes one can locate the original document.

FuckshitMcDickTits ago

Nice, good on ya.

konidunul ago

A PDF can contain malware

How is it meant to work? I thought pdfs are just static text, vector graphics and images.

konidunul ago

Yes it can. PDF is a rich format that aside form static content, can contain dynamic elements. The latter can for example contain JavaScript, and other elements. Modern PDF viewers tend to warn the user about potential malicious activity though.

I have never seen such pdfs so apparently this is rarely used. Then why this feature is there if it's an obvious security breach? PDFs are supposed to be lightweight and static by design and not trying to act like a web page.

Momo_Applebach ago

I have never seen such pdfs

lmao you probably have malware

odinist ago

"I have never seen such pdfs so apparently this is rarely used"

Sand niggers haven't raped my daughter, so it obviously doesn't happen."

Skeeterdo ago

Editable pdfs with input boxes or check marks are the best example of this. You can have input boxes trigger JavaScript. Etc. They're not that uncommon.

Artofchoke ago

Thank you. Every person has the right to read his words.

JimmyMcJones ago

There are a number of problems that i see in his manifesto. First is his profound unwillingness to call out jews for their role in communism and the mass genocide that was the Russian revolution. The idea that they lied about the holocaust would shake many normies. Despite having a large audience he failed to name them and seems to be only concerned with islamists. Second he failed to mention that 70% of islamic men are married to and rape their own underaged cousins. The notion of equality with these cousin fucking rapist is repulsive even to normies and discredits the idea of equality itself. Third why france. Why not south africa. The normies still think it is a rainbow nation over their. They are completely unaware of the black communist death squads operating a brutal campaign of torture and terrorism.

The script strikes me as alt-right talking points parroted by a person that did not fully understand them or was not truly a right winger as he pretends to be. It was Anti immigration, anti islam and it only further accelerates left wing causes by painting with a broad brush and not dealing with root issues. Politics has been since the dawn of time governed by malitia death squads. Founding fathers, KKK, Mafia, Cartels, Triad, Malcom X, Nelson Mandela, Mossad, people like Brevik. This was not a gang or squad. This public and useless display was a public relations event for the left in with no important or significant targets and it was done in a extremely public and harmful way to the movement that Tarant claimed to support. I have to conclude after reading the manafesto that Tarant is not alt-right.

His actions were ineffective and his words probably will not reach many ears. Further they did not touch on a single point beyond the well established and jewish sanctioned reality

TheGreatReplacement ago

failed to mention

On page 19, Tarrant says:

Is this your complete writings and views?

Unfortunately not, there was a much larger work written, roughly 240 pagies long that spoke on many issues and went into much depth, but in a moment of unbridled self criticism, I deleted the entire work and started again, two weeks before the attack itself. I was left with a short period of time to create a new work and only leave my views half finished. I will let my actions speak for themselves.

No work can be truly complete.

his profound unwillingness to call out jews for their role in communism and the mass genocide that was the Russian revolution. The idea that they lied about the holocaust would shake many normies. Despite having a large audience he failed to name them and seems to be only concerned with islamists.

On page 21 and page 22, Tarrant says:

Why attack muslims if all high fertility immigrants are the issue?

They are the most despised group of invaders in the West, attacking them receives the greatest level of support.

His aim was to achieve the greatest level of public support. What he said and did won a lot of public support, whereas evidence for Judeo-Bolshevism and arguments against the Holocaust do not win public support. They lose a lot of public support.

On page 15, he also denies Nazism:

Were/are you a nazi?

No, actual nazis do not exist.They haven’t been a political or social force anywhere in the world for more than 60 years.

So, there's less of a chance he would propagate those ideas.

Third why france. Why not south africa.

South Africa has its issues but they're outside his scope. The manifesto focuses on Islam and in 2010 the population of South Africa was only 1.7% Muslim.

The script strikes me as alt-right talking points parroted by a person that did not fully understand them or was not truly a right winger as he pretends to be. I have to conclude after reading the manafesto that Tarant is not alt-right.

He does not label himself as alt-right nor necessarily right-wing:

Were/are you “right wing”?

Depending on the definition, sure.

Were/are you “left wing”?

Depending on the definition, sure.

He also disclaims group membership on page 10.

extremely public and harmful way to the movement that Tarant claimed to support

On pages 6, 11, 63, and 66, with the greatest focus on page 66, his goal is apparent: to destabilize society, radicalize people, create tensions, and incite conflict.

He links to this which claims, when it was made, that the fertility rate across the entire European Union of 31 countries is a mere 1.38, and that a fertility rate of 2.11 is required for a culture to maintain itself. That in France, 30% of children 20 and younger, and 45% in some large cities, are Islamic. That in the last 30 years, the Muslim population of Great Britain multiplied by 30 times. That in the Netherlands, 50% of all newborns are Muslim. That in Russia, 20% of the population is Muslim. That in Belgium, 50% of all newborns are Muslim.

As he sees it, an acceleration of the public harms you mention will lead to Western war at a time when the West can still win.

His actions were ineffective and his words probably will not reach many ears.

Facebook alone reports that it removed 1,500,000 copies of the video in one day. That's in one day, that's just on Facebook, and that's with hard censorship. I don't know how widely the manifesto was circulated, but at the least I assume to over a million people. Even an apolitical friend told me out of the blue that they read it.

Thanks for the analysis.

no-hurry-no-pause ago

Im disappointed.

You're irrelevant.

He made a difference.

Have you? (other than just parroting joos, joos, joos like a broken record)

He should have just stayed home.

You should have just shut the fuck up.

jimibulgin ago

I largely agree.

Evileddie13 ago

I felt, deep in my heart, that he did this for US, for Whites all over the world.

CameraCode ago

Wow, sure is brave of you to post that anonymously.

TheGreatReplacement ago

You're welcome. I do this for a few reasons:

  1. In the interests of free speech and expression. It's being censored from the world by Web sites big and small.

  2. For the sake of civil disobedience. The Chief Censor of New Zealand has made it a crime to possess or distribute, punishable by up to 10 and 14 years imprisonment, with a fine of up to 135,000 USD for a body corporate.

  3. To help people avoid malware by distributing the manifesto as a text file. When it's not a text file, you have hackers doing things like hiding inside of it a script that downloads malware that rewrites your master boot record.

  4. To expose others to the information so everyone can make up their own mind about it from a place of knowledge.

  5. Because the manifesto goes over ideas important to the future of the West that many haven't pondered in depth.

  6. To expose the lies of media that engage in popular public speculation of motives Tarrant disclaims in his manifesto.

Artofchoke ago

Would you be interested in being interviewed for a Voat related project in the not too distant future?

Hey_Sunshine ago

What are you up too?

Artofchoke ago

Buddy and I have been thinking about creating a repository for eurocentric entertainment and information. Maybe a podcast, reviews, news, op ed stuff.

What you think?

Hey_Sunshine ago

Well, you are a member of an oppressed minority group, so you'll automatically be deferred to when speaking on issues of race and 'privilege'.

Artofchoke ago

Was hoping to remain anonymous, no sex, no race, but yeah. I quite literally win the oppression Olympics.

Hey_Sunshine ago

If you've got it flaunt it, wave that victim card in their face while you beat them over the head with cold hard facts.

TheGreatReplacement ago

You'll need to private message me further details before I can answer.

Haywood_Jablomeme ago

Keep up the fight, soldier!

TheGreatReplacement ago

Thanks. Feel free to help spread it around.

Kalergi ago

Excellent contribution. I still don't know if anyone actually died or not, but his ideas are pertinent.

executiveintern ago

I think it's a valid discussion to have. I'm conflicted myself. Is there a subverse about the Christchurch shooting?

TheGreatReplacement ago

The center of conversation on the Christchurch event is where Tarrant posted the stream:

https://8ch.net/pol

blackguard19 ago

Probably, no one died. After a real shooting, there may be a steady stream of visual confirmation, which has not emerged as usual. The video of the shooting appeared to be clumsily fake and kind of goofy, per usual relying on the power of suggestion rather than showing any actual carnage.

This seems like some kind of silly window-dressing, to leave no doubt who the bogeyman of this false flag/ hoax is supposed to be.

CameraCode ago

live Facebook stream of the shooting

"relys in power of suggestion rather than showing any actual carnage"

If Brenton had taken and posted HD pictures of the bodies with brains everywhere, you still would never accept that it is legit. In fact, no amount of proof would ever convince you.

TheGreatReplacement ago

New Zealand police should have the higher-definition footage. I wonder if someone could somehow obtain and distribute it?

blackguard19 ago

Yes, I would. I would react more credulously to visual proofs which seem like they could not have easily been faked. Also, where is the other proof? Just that one video? There should be a lot of photos of wounds and bullet damage by now.

Answer the question about Sandy Hook shill.

Kalergi ago

I didn't study the video, but I have a keen bullshit detector and this doesn't pass the sniff test. Just too many birds with one stone, like 9-11/ Patriot Act/ payouts/wars for Israel. Too neat of a package. Time will tell, but in the interem, collective punishment for firearm owners.

CameraCode ago

It's always the same criticisms. No real, concrete proof that it is fake. Just "It doesn't feel right to me, therefore it must be fake."

Kalergi ago

Are you familiar with "gut instinct"? how about "comfirmation bias"?

Have you ever fired an AR? In a room? While livestreaming video? Ever hunted? If so, what was your breathing like the first time?

KDs_Other_Burner ago

Tarrant literally livestreamed it so faggots like you would KNOW he was for real. And you still say it was faked! SMH.

Kalergi ago

reeeeeeeeee

Not_C ago

Probably, no one died.

One of the biggest flaws that humans have is that we believe everyone is the same as us.

Maybe if you were to commit a false flag attack in order to push an agenda, you wouldn't kill innocent people. Or you can't imagine taking someone else's life in order to push an agenda.

(((They))) are not like you. They want their agendas pushed no matter how many need to die.

There are false flags - There are many false flags. But the ones committing them will commit as many as they need to. And they will kill as many people as they need to. They aren't like you.

blackguard19 ago

No doubt that “they” wouldn’t mind killing “us.” However the goal of such an event like this is obviously to promote a political agenda, not kill a bunch of random people.

And I’m willing to believe this is a true false flag — i.e. one with real deaths — when there is evidence for this.

Not_C ago

No doubt that “they” wouldn’t mind killing “us.”

You're thinking that they're like us. They aren't like us. They will kill as many people as they need. Not because they "need" to kill people, but because there's nothing stopping them. If it's slightly easier to kill to push their agenda, then they'll kill without hesitation, because it's slightly easier than not killing. Just like how our brain evolved to be different because of the different conditions our ancestors evolved in, our brains evolved differently. Their brains don't work the same as ours.

However the goal of such an event like this is obviously to promote a political agenda, not kill a bunch of random people.

The goal is to push an agenda. If they need to kill a bunch of random people, then that's what they'll do. If they want to push an agenda and the result is that a bunch of random people will die, then people will die. Again, they aren't like us.

Think about this - You need to drive to work tomorrow. Your car might hit a few bugs. Are you still going to drive to work tomorrow? Of course. What about the bugs you' might murder? Who the fuck cares, right? You aren't driving to work just so you can kill bugs, you're just trying to get to work. If some bugs die, then some bugs die. That's the way they view human life.

And I’m willing to believe this is a true false flag — i.e. one with real deaths — when there is evidence for this.

There's a video. Half of it was live streamed. There's evidence. How much evidence do you need to say it did happen, and how much do you have that it didn't?

true false flag — i.e. one with real deaths

A false flag attack is an attack that is done in a way that makes it look like it was done by someone else. Like a Jew committing an attack and making it look like it was done by a white supremacist, or a Jewish operative committing an attack, getting caught and then pretending like they are a white supremacist. That's what a true false flag attack is.

You're talking about faking an attack. Yes you can fake an attack (Gulf of Tonkin for example). But a true false flag attack places someone else's flag on the attack. While a fake attack is just faking an attack.

blackguard19 ago

Just saying, in my years of conspiratorial online discussion it is a characteristic of shills to line-by-lime dissect and respond to every sentence in the previous post in what I think is an effort to create a wall of text that will either scare away the casual reader or convince the slightly curious reader that you actually have something worthwhile to say.

So in that case I have to follow up with a simple yes or no question which will indicate whether you have the right to opine about NZ and it is this: did children die at Sandy Hook?

Because they did not, and that event (and many others since) was completely fake. So if you’re starting from the premise that these kinds of things cannot be or are not ever fake, you’re wrong and should stop and do a lot of research first.

Also your speculation about “they” not facing any consequences of murder, which is incorrect anyway, is not evidence whatsoever that anyone was actually killed at this event. It’s literally just speculation and assertion. The video is highly fake-looking, and as usual shows no gunshot wounds, bullet damage, or actual medical activity, and instead is modeled after a FPS video game and just shows some gunshots and people falling down.

They used a graphic setup with fake blood and a fake leg prosthesis along with 2 or 3 one-legged actors playing the same guy at the Boston Bombing Hoax. The theory here is not that there’s a fake shooting with no effort to seem like a real shooting..... just because there’s a “video” doesn’t mean there was a real shooting. Where’s the video that actually shows evidence of a real shooting and which couldn’t be easily and cheaply faked? Where are the real victims with their healing wounds? Where is the bullet-riddled church walls?

Anyway, answer the simple yes or no question about Sandy Hook before speaking again.

Not_C ago

did children die at Sandy Hook?

I will answer this question. And my answer will be the all out 100% undeniable truth. No conspiracy, just undeniable fact. So don't read it unless you're ready for the truth. Answer -

Yes I went on a long winded rant. First you said, "Probably, no one died.". I replied in a relatively short reply pointing out some factors that when taken into consideration makes it improbable that no one died. But then you doubled down while purposely avoiding those factors. So I decided to tear apart everything you said. Not because I'm a shill, but because you're a complete fucking idiot.

Just saying, in my years of conspiratorial online discussion it is a characteristic of shills

Ohhh, I'm dealing with an expert here. Since I'm in the presence of an expert I'm in need of some answers:

  • If you were to say the line, "Just saying, in my years of conspiratorial online discussion it is a characteristic of shills", out loud - Would your right or left hand be pinching the brim of your fedora trilby as you say it?

  • If you’re starting from the premise that these kinds of things cannot be or are not ever real, are you wrong, and should you stop and do a lot of research first?

  • You stated, "However the goal of such an event like this is obviously to promote a political agenda, not kill a bunch of random people." If your goal was to drive to work and it was not your goal to kill a bunch of bugs with your car, does that mean you didn't kill any bugs? Would you not drive to work because it might result in you hitting bugs with your car?

For fuck's sake. The goal appears to be getting guns banned and/or making opposing immigration illegal. (Why am I typing this out) What's more likely, more probable? Making a video, having fake victims, fake funerals, going through all that work and risk of being found out. Or just simply kill a bunch of random people? Honest question - Why not kill random people to push agendas? Honestly, what's stopping them? Seriously, what is stopping you from thinking that this is a possibility? How is it that you're coming to the conclusion that they're more likely to fake this attack rather than just do an attack to push their agendas? Fake attack or real attack, the result would be the same so why fake it? Yes, killing random people isn't the GOAL, but there's no reason for them to not take that path to the goal. The easier path, the simpler path, the path that's more likely to succeed in reaching the goal.

  • Our skin colours evolved to be different because of the different conditions our ancestors evolved in. Does that mean that our brains also evolved to be different too? If you wouldn't kill random people to push agendas, does that mean that no one else would either?

And again, a false flag attack is committing an attack and blaming it on someone else. Faking an attack is making it look like there was an attack when no attack took place.

And once again, I've went on a long winded rant, not because I'm a shill, but because you're a complete fucking idiot. Oh, wait - It was an honour to talk to an expert with years of experience in conspiratorial online discussion, and expertise in the characteristics of shills. You fucking idiot.

Anyway, answer these simple questions.

TheGreatReplacement ago

Thank you. Here are the names of many Muslims reported dead.

LazyJello8 ago

no one died in 9/11 either... or WACO... or WW2..

CameraCode ago

It sure didn't take you long to get everyone to dislike you. Welp, time to make another new account, right? I'm sure this time it will be different.

Stalins_bedpan ago

Kill yourself, faggot.

performance ago

Good work, bro. Keep those fires burning as we redpill the masses.

JimmyMcJones ago

I really doubt their is anything red pilling about this.

KDs_Other_Burner ago

Worlds biggest faggot arrives on Voat!!!

Evileddie13 ago

LMAO. I am stealing that line.

JimmyMcJones ago

I can feel my racial solidarity and love for the white race growing with every word that comes out of the shit hole that you call a mouth. People like you are niggers. Youre just to dumb to know it

KDs_Other_Burner ago

People like you are as good as niggers.

I say death to all fucking hajis. I say Tarrant was a hero.

They guy was stupid.His targets were meaningless and generally innocent.

Your words faggot, not mine.

TheGreatReplacement ago

Thank you.