>>514715173
> doesnt explain "WHY" as directly and explicitly requested, despite given ample example, but instead deflects

>>514715615
> violates the NAP
Glad to see your starting to grow up.

>>513914188
You sound like the same dumb nigger ten years later still on the fence about Richard spencer being controlled opposition too, huh? Whats your opinions on the Proud Goys-err proud boys, leader also being a mexican federal informant? Do you not think its a little coincidental, or you just this new?