(Part 2) Best products from r/european

Hahaha, I actually googled and found this(SFW): Amateur whore on undercover mission in refugee camp

There's a great book about the clashes of the sixteenth century between Christianity and Islam in the Mediterranean called Empires of the Sea which not only gives an incredibly detailed account of the Siege of Malta from the notes of those who fought there but also elaborates on why it was important. Christianity in the Mediterranean was on the knife edge and a loss at Malta would have been catastrophic; it would have been the key to a full-scale Ottoman invasion of not only the other Mediterranean islands but also Italy itself(Rome at the time was an Ottoman goal in the same way that Vienna was later). The battle was incredibly close and it's great to read about.

> I haven't seen any proof of gas chambers either, except for those used to gas clothes to prevent the spread of lice.

Oh and until this edit I naively believed you weren't holocaust denier... Now I will be prejudiced against ppl asking honest questions about holocaust because of you. You should be ashamed.

have fun
and you might want to check this... before taking any advice.
facepalm

I'm a climate change skeptic; I should probably mention that off the bat.

But ecological disturbances (droughts, epidemics, etc.) often trigger mass migrations, which in turn trigger wars when people migrate somewhere where there are already people.

Interestingly, there's a fair amount of evidence that they can also trigger fundamentalist movements. In Krakatoa the author talks about how Islamic fundamentalism took off in Indonesia right after the famous volcano. A lot of people's lives had been completely destroyed and they were looking for something hard to hold onto.

>I dont see why it's a "hater" mentality to love your own people

Don't be fooled, this is not a universal claim, it is applied exclusively to the whites. No one bats an eye when non-white immigrants all huddle in one area of a city as they sometimes do and only interact with each other, speak their own language, follow their own social norms. In fact, there's been some court cases in the United States where punishments have been lessened or waived for rape and murder because the courts found it acceptable for the non-assimilated immigrants to follow their own social norms. Example: murder wife and/or kids for adultery. See sources in Ann Coulter's "Adios America: the left's plan to turn our country into a third world hellhole".

Here's a copypasta of a former redditor I always enjoy pasting in those situations.

>"Gender" in the way you use it (outside of being a "grammatical construct") doesn't exist, it was made up by a proto-SJW named "John Money", who coined what is today known as "gender theory" or "gender is a social construct" for that.
Biologically speaking there is only masculine and feminine with some abberations, assumed to be because of hormone imbalances during pregnanices and similar effects, actual scientists have been trying to advance science in those areas to be able to more accurately tell if a baby is male or female in these special cases, but it seems hard since their findings conflict with social scientists talking out of their ass like the Psychologist guy you linked and their "gender ideology" often making such research a taboo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFYfZg1jsJU

>http://www.amazon.co.uk/Prenatal-Testosterone-Mind-Amniotic-Bradford/dp/0262524562

>Before John Money, the concept of "gender" didn't exist, in English it was just used as the grammatical counterpart for the latin "genus".
>If you want to read more about him, notice the David Reimer case and what he thinks about pedos near the end of the article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Money#Controversies
>He basically pressured the parents of a child with disfigured genitalia after a failed operation without any scientific basis to stand on to have his "member" removed at a very early age because his theory was that the environmental part of the upbringing will take care of the rest and he will “identify as a girl”, upon which he apparently suffered from the consequences of said decision based on that belief throughout his entire childhood and into his adult life having psychological problems and suicidal thoughts (and finally killing himself), nonetheless this theory and thought pattern still persists today.
>The entire social sciences field, and unfortunately even some hard sciences started adopting the term "gender" after his experiments with children, which as described above failed in a big way but he declared as a success anyway, making him the originator of “gender theory” in the social sciences: http://www.oeb.harvard.edu/faculty/haig/Publications_files/04InexorableRise.pdf
>There was also a BBC documentary regarding this very incident if you are interested to know more: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUTcwqR4Q4Y
>And there was another documentary called "Brainwashing" by Harald Eia that featured an Intersex case in the episode "Nature vs. Nurture", it starts about 15 minutes in and shows another medical doctor that seems to actually care and wants to improve the situation but is contradicted by your usual "social sciences/gender studies" types with the usual SJW bullshit, it's a very interesting episode dealing with the "Nature vs. Nurture" argument: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xp14wz_hjernevask-brainwashing-english-part-7-nature-vs-nurture_news

First, of all, rational arguments NEVER convince anyone. You can find all the data you want, it won't work. It just makes you look like a sneaky crypto-racist, who won't admit to his immorality.

Second, the way to win is to do what Ben Shapiro has perfected: be the first one accusing the other side of a moral transgression, so that THEY have to defend themselves from accusation.

The debate is biased anyway, because arguing against immigration immediately invites the moral accusation of racism. This means that it cannot be argued in good faith, so it is necessary to go for the nuclear weapons of moral accusation early.

I'd go all in and say that: "I don't care about them". Islam's core and irremovable goal is to make Sharia the law of the land everywhere on earth, which is unconstitutional (requires removal of European constitutions), so there is zero room for debate with Muslims on this [100% true][1]. Everybody who argues for the bringing in of Muslims is an enemy of the European civilization and a traitor, and therefore is an immoral person that needs to be prosecuted for treason and executed on the spot. There is no room for debate here.

Just go all in and accuse the other side of the worst.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Catastrophic-Failure-Blindfolding-America-Jihad/dp/1511617500