I am sure if some Osama himself has come out to say I am Osama before he was killed some people will still doubt it and call it a conspiracy theory and whatever it is, people will still not believe he was really killed. Aside that, what I am still waiting for is for him to come out and debunk his death rumor which is yet to happen until then, he remains dead and United States has taken the credit...
I am a follower of Obama, but I didn't initially believe this. No body, they buried it at sea, which is odd, because obviously America would have liked to see this corpse (we are a morbid culture). However, apparently there was some issues with the Seal Team that performed the operation; they weren't supposed to shoot his face, but they came in like a wrecking ball apparently, and fucked up much shit. So, I understand now, but it's still suspicious. He's quite dead though. None of that video shit popping up (he dropped more videos then some rappers). What I really don't get, though, is why alot of these Seals have died subsequent this military operation. |
|
|
|
They were already told even before Duterte was still running for president. After Duterte won the presidency he also warned many many times to stop doing it or even surrender or they will suffer the consequences. Thousands surrendered and weren't killed. Those stupid idiots who think they are still well protected by the narco-politics were either arrested or dead. But most of those got killed were believed to be killed by those on top to avoid giving very important information.
Exactly. That was the only rule that president Duterte have always stated. "Stop it" most of the drug users did stop it and nothing happens to them. Of others can why would other people cant? Possibly because they have an addiction, which is globally recognized as a mental disorder, and cannot quit? We are literally talking about an additive drug here. Most poor dealers, use the drugs themselves and sell to support their habit. Help these people, don't kill them like dogs. Have some empathy, love. You seem inhuman with your lack of love for your fellow. |
|
|
|
I think the thing that bugs me about the MGTOW thing is how vocal and misanthropic they are. It's far classier to just make a dignified exit and shut the fuck up about it. And cut the whining about male oppression too. Women aren't having a great deal of fun either.
It's been a couple of years since I've been involved with anyone. I don't really know if I'm ever going to bother again. When I look back I don't see that I gained the slightest thing from any of it, but can very easily point to the harm.
If I was gay then it wouldn't be any different and quite possibly considerably worse.
Amen. If you are turning in your cocksmans license, simply remit it without fanfare. And yes, when I hear 'female biased world' when it's clearly not (really?) I tune out. This is no different then the extreme forms of feminism practiced by the crazy ladies. It is human nature, to couple with your counterpart. If our fathers had felt this way, where would we be today? |
|
|
|
Alright, let's see. Conservatives tend to be
1) Religious/Christian and try and make laws that suit their (false and hypocritical) beliefs. Yea gay marriage shouldn't be allowed but divorcing is totally fine? A prime example of a hypocrite
2) Believe that global warming does not exist (Global warming does exist, not just by the hole in the ozone layer, but by obvious things, go take into account the millions of cars, airplanes, coal plants, etc releasing tons of abnormal and excess carbon dioxide, monoxide, etc and tell me that doesn't affect the environment. All that man-made technology has to have an affect on a planet which has never experienced any such thing before)
3) Are usually sexist and tend to not support women's rights such as the right to have an abortion(Abortion is NOT the killing of babies, abortion is basically the taking of stem cells before they form into an actual fetus. If you consider "cells" as being alive, then everyone on planet earth is a murderer because our skin sheds millions of cells everyday)
4) Tend to be more racist than any other political party as proven by the fact that most KKK members and other racial groups identify as conservative
5) Support having low to no restrictions on gun handling and buying. Let's take this into account, in order to drive a car you need a license and rigorous training of the laws of the road, as well as how to actually drive the car. Well, in some states you don't even need to have a gun license to buy a gun or even know how to shoot the gun in order to buy one. Does that make any damn sense when a average gun is far more dangerous and cheaper to buy than a car ? No, therefore I come to believe that anyone who supports the buying of guns without rigorous testing and at least having a license, is heavily retarded or wants to watch the world burn
The only logical conclusion is to get rid of conservatives from america. Like how trump is deporting illegal immigrants, well conservatives go against the constitution itself(such as trying to integrate religious belief with law, etc)
I know this is rhetorical, but I gotta respond. What you are seeing in the Trump era is not true Republicanism. The Conservatives haven't changed a bit. Trump energized the populist voter, who is failing to thrive in their own environment and believes that the reason for this is because they have been marginalized in favor of minorities. No, the reason for this is because corporate interests have used you and moved along, like the rest of America. This 'nationalism' is 'racism' that is being justified under this false political heading of patriotism. True Rebuplicans have varied beliefs, but they all can agree that the smaller government is, the better. Opposite for Dems, they prefer more engaged, larger government. So, this fake brand of Rebuplicanism is just a facade for those that want to push the lie of trickle down economics. By wrapping it in a delicious, racist and insensitive candy coated shell, they can feed bulllshit to the ignorant masses. Who will then be tricked into supporting fiscal policies that don't benefit them. |
|
|
|
Trump may have a made a mistake by doing things openly.
He could have ordered an unofficial travel ban as well. Visas for Syrians or Somalis have only been delivered on a case-by-case basis for years. Trump could have discreetly ordered to make the scanning process even more rigorous, actually blocking all demands, and nobody would have noticed.
Why should he do something like that? He is the president of the United States, and he is having the liberty to change and modify the policies regarding immigration. It is the judges who are overstepping their jurisdiction. This is correct, but Trump must wait until Gorsuch is confirmed for the Supreme Court, and then go with a broad question to them: Can circuit court judges trump an executive order of Trump? If the question is not posed broadly, then these renegade judges can go time and time again, over ruling a President. With Gorsuch confirmed and the Court then 5-4 instead of 4-4 as is current, then a decision can be rendered that solves this matter once and for all. Notice they have largely left the challenges alone. After Gorush makes it in, suddenly, it will get appealed to the highest court in the land. I'm curious to see what else gets pushed to the court once makes it in (its pretty much inevitable at this point). I'm curious. You have a fairly opposite political view than I do. Should any circuit court judge be capable of squashing a POTUS executive order? Before answering, consider that POTUS can and will flip from one party to the other. Of course they should. I could give a fuck if they were Green Party, it matters not. The executive order byoasses Congressional oversight, hence it should be subject to additional legislative scrutiny to compensate for this, and ensure no abuse of power. The parties all suck in their current iterations. Sponsorship must be removed from politics before this ameliorates. I want what is moral and right, with an emphasis on harm mitigation for all involved parties. And, it really is unconstitutional as fuck, and pretty dumb to boot. Please explain to me how a ban of countries that don't terrorize us specifically is going to help our security. If Saudi Arabia had made it on the list, I wouldn't be typing this. Oh, and the passage giving Christians preferential treatment for refugee status. I'm Christian myself, and even I can see the problem with that. |
|
|
|
Government sponsored hacking was started by the CIA and the FBI. The CIA used this, to spy on their enemies and even on their allies. Russia and China are late entrants to this sector, but they have caught up pretty fast.
And that history lesson correlates with current reality how?/Did the US hack the farcical Russian 'election' (it's even more a sham then our last one) ? China invented guns. The US and Russia were late entrants to the sector, but boy, they caught up and surpassed the entire world. But how about that Russian hacking though? And can we please stop using the two wrongs fallacy to describe Russia's actions? Educate yourself: The tu quoque fallacy is committed when it is assumed that because someone else has done a thing there is nothing wrong with doing it. This fallacy is classically committed by children who, when told off, respond with “So and so did it too”, with the implied conclusion that there is nothing wrong with doing whatever it is that they have done. This is a fallacy because it could be that both children are in the wrong, and because, as we were all taught, two wrongs don’t make a right.
Example
(1) The Romans kept slaves.
Therefore:
(2) We can keep slaves too.
This argument commits the tu quoque fallacy because it assumes that if someone else does a thing then it’s okay for us to do it too. It does not follow, however, from the simple fact that the Romans kept slaves, that there is nothing wrong with keeping slaves. It is plausible to think that the Romans acted immorally in keeping slaves, and that we would act immorally if we followed their example. The conclusion of the argument therefore does not follow from its premise. |
|
|
|
Taken at face, would this not delegitimize the Trump Presidency?
No. Russia didn't hack the election, they didn't hack the votes. And believe me, they didn't effect how many people were or were not voting for Clinton. The majority of people were not interested in anything she was offering. Multiple news sources and the Federal Government have admitted there is no evidence that Russia's hacking influenced voters. In fact, Russia's hacking was a GOOD thing...even if you hate Trump. It exposed how corrupt the US political system is. And if American's had some balls, enough to not vote for the two existing bullshit parties that exist in that country you wouldn't have Trump in office either. *A brief aside on the Yahoo hacking debacle. I have my beefs with Yahoo (they get hacked more than wood), but this one is pretty odd on the surface, as are all things Russia these days. Anywho, they formally charged a Russian national and two FSB agents with the intrusion, but we won't be able to apprehend one of the agents because he's already being held by Russia for treason.
What the blue fuck?
So apparently, he was charged by Russia of collaborating with us (double agent)? I don't get how you can be hacking for Russia, and us, without one of them (Russia or the US) knowing and condoning it. So is Russia lying to protect the agent?
This will all make the most amazing movie one day.
There already is a movie about this, check out Stuxnet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet)Stuxnet is a documentary about a US operation to spy on Iran and hack their nuclear facilities to make their reactors self destruct, this minimizing their ability to create nuclear weapons. Any dumb shit any other country is doing was probably done by the US first...soo...who's really the asshole in this scenario? LOL , really? Actually, the majority of people voted for Hillary, my man. Trump only won the electoral college. You must have swallowed the lie about illegals and voter fraud. And no, an avowed enemy of the state using massive resources to influence the election is never a good thing. Let me guess, Vault Seven is a good thing too, right? And Stuxnet is not the same beast at all. It was a joint US/Israeli operation to reinforce ignored nuclear sanctions by Iran. It was a move for global security, And, it like, wasn't an election. Also, let's break down this dumb ass rhetoric about Russia actually hacking the election. To everyone on the board, you are being a coward intellectually if you can't see why interference by a state actor in this manner obviously had to influence the election. You didn't even vote for Hillary, yet the first thing you cited was DNC emails. So you in one breath, admit the emails influence people not to vote for Hillary, and in the same breath state that had no effect on the outcome of the election. Well man, which one is it? The purpose of an election is for votes. You think Russia is so stupid they would perform an act of war just to 'release some emails for shits and giggles'? If they didn't want to actually influence the outcome of the election, why even attempt this in the first place? Examine motivations. Again, why would Russia risk this, if not to sway public opinion in order to influence the vote? You didn't see RNC emails, despite the fact they were allegedly hacked as well. |
|
|
|
Feminism turned into a war of the sexes. I do not like it, I'm against violence and domination. Man and woman are created in order to complement each other and live in harmony with themselves and the world around them.
Agree, but you have to agree women have always been lowest on the totem pole, and it's kind of reasonable that in this day and age, they might be pissed about it. Nothing's perfect, and shit will have to fix over time , but even as a dude, you can't turn a blind eye to how differently we treat females in most societies, versus males. It's really a man's world, and as a dude, I don't completely have a problem with that, it benefits me hugely even as a Black male in America. It is certainly an equality, a complementary pair. But we aren't quite playing a level field with the ladies. |
|
|
|
I believe that Bitcoin will be our last resource in times of need. Especially during a complete and total war. Think of all the taxation that will be done to raise funds for the military. On top of that, forex trading will not wish to invest in any country's currency who is under an attack from a war.
I believe that people would have to look to Bitcoin in order to keep their financials in check -- and in order to survive. Imagine a tyrannical nuclear war were to break out. No businesses will be able to run and freedoms will be taken away in exchange for martial law where leaders and politicians can do whatever they please. The IRS would collect all the money, homes would be raided.
These are really scary and drastic proposals, but it's truly what the government will do to its citizens in the name of security. Therefore, government will lose all respectability causing the masses to flock to alternative currencies. And for that, the only trustworthy one is Bitcoin. Therefore, I believe that Bitcoin would surely profit during a war.
Let me finish this topic for everyone. If we have a WW3, I can pretty much assure you that, along with alot of other shit, bitcoin will no longer exist. And if it does, well, you probably have some pressing, radioactive shit to worry about instead. WW3 = total destruction = no internet = no bitcoin. |
|
|
|
People are behaving as if Trump personally told the Russians to personally hack the DNC. Why aren't the liberals demonstratng against the DNC for sabotaging Bernie Sanders campaign, after all its their own fault for putting and choosing such a flawed candidate for the position of President.
If Bernie Sanders was the Democrat nominee, then there wasn't even a 0.00000001% chance for a Trump victory in the POTUS elections. But somehow, the Democrats managed to nominate their worst ever candidate. And now they should be gracious in their defeat, and don't act like sore losers. Notice how Democrats didn't react like this to previously Rebuplican administrations, however. Maybe it's Trump? Just maybe? The hatred is making you blind to reality, brother. Examine everyone's motivations. The truth always lies in motive. |
|
|
|
Trump can choose a wife. Melanie is very nice and irresistible lady, looks like a fairy princess. Probably in all spheres of life is good
Well.... if you have a choice, which one will you prefer? Option 1:  Option 2:  I think most of the heterosexual males would prefer the first option, unless you are having some weird fetishes. Yes, because we all know that every male that likes box obviously prefers an older white woman, right? Y'all sound like some fucking kids right now. It's a female. There's like, a fucking grip of them. She looks like, most of them. Move on. If you need to ogle a chick, because you obviously don't sleep next to a female at night, try porn. Yalls racism is showing again, SMH. |
|
|
|
Meliana doesn't control him. Maybe in bed but not any other place. He is too strong to allow this. Its obvious. That is the good point about Donald Trump. And compare him with the previous one they had (Barack Hussein Obama). Obama was just a puppet controlled by the Clinton crime family, Weiner, Abedin, Biden.etc. Well, I guess I preferred them to our new masters, the Banks and Big Oil. At least the world made sense, and we weren't making international headlines. And dictating foreign policy through a fucking social network represented by a blue bird. It's like, y'all were so damn geeked to get Obama's legacy removed that you went full retard. Dammit, there were other Republican candidates, did the racism, misogyny and general lack of political experience just scream 'I gotta vote for this guy'? I guess the evil you know, right? But oh when he fucks up Middle America's healthcare with this repeal. It will be some shit to see. Feed the people red meat, Donald. |
|
|
|
Uh.
You get US citizenship easily in 1-2 years if you work in certain sectors or you invest 100k $ in an US venture (it depends on your origin too - people from the UK, Canada or germany will have it much easier as some nepalese or sub sahara african). No. It doesn't depend on your origin. It doesn't matter if you are from Somalia or Iceland. The visas are given irrespective of the nationality. And the amount is not $100K. The EB5 visa requires a minimum investment of $500,000 to $1,000,000 (depending on the jurisdiction). There are other requirements as well, such as the creation of jobs for a minimum of 10 US nationals. Please research because you either are misinformed or not informed at all. 1. It depends on country of origin, because the US has contigents. Currently, no group of permanent immigrants (family-based and employment-based) from a single country can exceed seven percent of the total amount of people immigrating to the United States in a single fiscal year. It behaves similar for the diversity visa program. 2. Im talking about the E-2 visa which on the low end needs 75.000$. Edit I researched a bit more and there is actually a huge problem with the naturalisation process. There exist a backlog of over 500.000 cases and over 350.000 are from south america and mexico.http://newobserveronline.com/512190-backlog-us-immigration-courts/That's not exactly the naturalization process, it's the refugee issue. The backlog is for court hearings. Call yourself a refugee, then you get a court hearing, but guess what? You and your friends just overloaded the court system. So they give you a couple years to stick around. That's the Saul Alinsky tactic. That's not the normal process of applying for citizenship at all. And like anyone from Mexico is going to get "refugee status." ROFL, with one of the worst drug/corruption issues in the world, why wouldn't Mexico have refugees? People flee drug lords/corrupt police on a pretty regular basis. Also, it's like the whole South America. I mean, if it's bad enough that we have to build a wall to keep the 'bad hombres' out, why the hell wouldn't people possibly be fleeing a fucked up situation? |
|
|
|
People are behaving as if Trump personally told the Russians to personally hack the DNC. Why aren't the liberals demonstratng against the DNC for sabotaging Bernie Sanders campaign, after all its their own fault for putting and choosing such a flawed candidate for the position of President.
You are being sarcastic, right? He like, literally asked Russia during a campaign rally to, and I quote, “I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” followed by, “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”  this is normal.  Fuck a fake news, do you partake in news at all my man? |
|
|
|
58% of the population does not support its activities. So, rating the unpopularity of the head of government reached the highest point since he became President in January. I wonder when it will reach 100%. Your forecasts. http://www.gallup.com/home.aspxWell its never gonna reach 100% as trump has his own die hard supporters. Although i never did believe trump won via popularity votes in the first place but well, he won. A lot of people doesn't like how he talks and a lot more do not agree with his policies so it's very likely that trump's popularity rating would still decline in the coming months I agree, Trump has sycophants that will never deny him despite what he does, but something curious has cropped up that may be a sign of really bad public sentiment, or a diversionary tqxrix by the administration. I was just talking about all the security breach attempts going on around the White House, didn't even see the one about the car bomb threat. Makes absolutely no sense as well, guy drives up to a checkpoint and casually tells the agents he has a bomb in thd car. Because we all know thats a winning strategy. At first, I thought that this was a bunch of crazyheads coming out if the woodwork (I'm no fan of Trump, but I don't want to see him get harmed). But I'm starting to suspect this might be a false flag. The bomb shit seems kind of far fetched. And all these guys are getting close, but no cigar. And are all carrying non lethal weapons. Like, 5 guys trying to penetrate the white house in a few weeks? Makes my head hurt a bit. |
|
|
|
|
Alright, let's talk about the Russia thing now that we can't pretend it didn't happen anymore. Now that all of the intelligence agencies have agreed, including the FBI (took them a while, huh?), with the latest being that the hacking is actually an ongoing process. This is on top of the Yahoo indictments*. Given that other countries have also accused Russia of interfering in their elections as well, is this finally real enough to take seriously? Taken at face, would this not delegitimize the Trump Presidency?
*A brief aside on the Yahoo hacking debacle. I have my beefs with Yahoo (they get hacked more than wood), but this one is pretty odd on the surface, as are all things Russia these days. Anywho, they formally charged a Russian national and two FSB agents with the intrusion, but we won't be able to apprehend one of the agents because he's already being held by Russia for treason.
What the blue fuck?
So apparently, he was charged by Russia of collaborating with us (double agent)? I don't get how you can be hacking for Russia, and us, without one of them (Russia or the US) knowing and condoning it. So is Russia lying to protect the agent?
This will all make the most amazing movie one day.
|
|
|
|
Trump is a very charismatic and energetic man. Next to such a beautiful wife, he is ready to earn a few more billion and raise the country.
   Oh yes, he will certainly make America great again. What's up with all the security shit going on around the White House all of a sudden? This is unpresidented, and I'm not being sarcastic, for once. Something doesn't feel right. We had the guy with Mace that got apprehended on the grounds, a guy that hopped a bike rack, a guy that hopped the fence, and someone that managed to steal a fucking Secret Service laptop with actual security plans on it. In a month, children. A month. Is it feasible that public setiment is actually poor enough that an assassination attempt is likely/has occurred (not talking about the British guy at the rally, old news). What in the actual fuck is going on, people? |
|
|
|
|
So, we finally have Comey coming out and confirming the proverbial nail in the coffin, the fact that the FBI has no evidence of 'wiretapping' (whatever the hell that was supposed to mean). So that makes it pretty official, every ABC agency, grandma, and the kitchen sink have confirmed the obvious; the President doesn't really have the ability to order surveillance of American citizens. Now, it's poignant that Comey finally came out and said this; this signals to me a clean break with Comey's circle and the White House. Comey, as I have said before, is no friend of the Clintons. To see him directly refute Trump (he didn't really have a choice, TBH) and confirm that Russia interfered in the election is a lot from the agency that:
A) Clusterfucked the election with the Hillary pronouncement
B) Was the only agency that didn't initially find evidence of Russian collusion
C) Then, after A, refused to commit on the status of the FBI's investigation because "it contained classified information
Now, he drove the leak issue home, IE, someone's getting arrested soon. When the next big something happens, it will be a convenient distraction.
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
Trump may have a made a mistake by doing things openly.
He could have ordered an unofficial travel ban as well. Visas for Syrians or Somalis have only been delivered on a case-by-case basis for years. Trump could have discreetly ordered to make the scanning process even more rigorous, actually blocking all demands, and nobody would have noticed.
Why should he do something like that? He is the president of the United States, and he is having the liberty to change and modify the policies regarding immigration. It is the judges who are overstepping their jurisdiction. This is correct, but Trump must wait until Gorsuch is confirmed for the Supreme Court, and then go with a broad question to them: Can circuit court judges trump an executive order of Trump? If the question is not posed broadly, then these renegade judges can go time and time again, over ruling a President. With Gorsuch confirmed and the Court then 5-4 instead of 4-4 as is current, then a decision can be rendered that solves this matter once and for all. Notice they have largely left the challenges alone. After Gorush makes it in, suddenly, it will get appealed to the highest court in the land. I'm curious to see what else gets pushed to the court once makes it in (its pretty much inevitable at this point). |
|
|
|
The pollution is a real problem. You should not shit where you eat. Less intelligent animals understand this. But somehow humans don't.
Another problem is that our population growth is not restrained. Nothing on this planet can stop us from reproducing and exploiting the planet.
Even natural disasters do not stop us. We rebuild and reproduce. We are like a plague that cannot be eradicated.
We need a new planet or things will snowball for us.
Wouldn't really go ahead and say that we don't understand the problems it may cause, I think the real issue is that generations keep passing more and more problems down to the next generation. They think that it'll be someones problem who isn't them, plus they think that once it is uncovered all the problems that business and such caused in order to save money, the people who ordered these decisions will be long dead and they won't face any type of consequences. New planet would be nice, I must say. This is compounded by the fact that corporate entities routinely abuse the environment for profit, and are able to skirt regukation, totally ignore it all together, or just litigate their way out of it, becuase of the effects of aggressive lobbying in their respective industries. Our environment, our global environment, is being sacrificed jn the name of capitalism, and it's only going to get worse, because the current administration sees a lot of our environmental regulations as just a bunch of 'silly red tape'. We are merrily going to hell in a hand basket, folks. Put on your helmets. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
