Huh imagine that
Video: Muslim Women Abused E Crowd, Kicked Out elf Donald Trump Rally
Interviewed E CNN
Interviewed E CNN
...
| |
Anonymous comments allowed.
204 comments displayed.
#14
-
discobleach (19 hours ago) [-] >no proof that it was staged
>claiming comments are now disabled, when they've always been
grade A ********
>claiming comments are now disabled, when they've always been
grade A ********
#28 to #14
-
youregaylol (15 hours ago) [-] I know, I know, you're mad that your media propaganda piece is falling apart.
It's ok, cry it out.
It's ok, cry it out.
#116 to #79
-
youregaylol (11 hours ago) [-] That the woman is a provocateur who acted up specifically to get kicked out so she should whine "mmuh islhampobia."
Any other questions? Would you like me to read it for you slowly.
Any other questions? Would you like me to read it for you slowly.
#118 to #116
-
scorcho (11 hours ago) [-] don't see any concrete evidence supporting that claim.
'wrote guest articles about girl scout cookies for a dem supporting paper'
'jewish man standing next to her (speculation)'
and of course the most irrefutable piece of evidence 'youtube comment'.
I'm gonna go ahead and say that you are full of **** and end it at that.
'wrote guest articles about girl scout cookies for a dem supporting paper'
'jewish man standing next to her (speculation)'
and of course the most irrefutable piece of evidence 'youtube comment'.
I'm gonna go ahead and say that you are full of **** and end it at that.
#121 to #118
-
youregaylol (11 hours ago) [-] Okay, lets reverse it.
A christian fundamentalist who writes articles for fox news goes to a hilary clinton rally with Sean Hannity wearing a yellow star that says "aborted fetus". They get kicked out. The people go on Fox news and they cry about how Hilary Clinton is a bigot against Christians.
Would you still think this would be a fair criticism? No, because you're a partisan hack who has no integrity.
I'm gonna go ahead and say you're just another dishonest liberal **** eater who doesn't want to recognize provocation when he sees one and leave it at that.
A christian fundamentalist who writes articles for fox news goes to a hilary clinton rally with Sean Hannity wearing a yellow star that says "aborted fetus". They get kicked out. The people go on Fox news and they cry about how Hilary Clinton is a bigot against Christians.
Would you still think this would be a fair criticism? No, because you're a partisan hack who has no integrity.
I'm gonna go ahead and say you're just another dishonest liberal **** eater who doesn't want to recognize provocation when he sees one and leave it at that.
#125 to #121
-
detroitshanker (11 hours ago) [-]
Don't see how any of that proves that these christian fundamentalists were causing a disruption.
#133 to #125
-
youregaylol (11 hours ago) [-] Really? You can't see how wearing a badge calling your opponents evil murdering nazis could hint at a provocation? You think those types of people don't want attention? You don't think that they might cause a disruption to make a political point. With gold stars on their clothes while writing for Fox News
Man, I wish liberals were this understanding when conservatives actually do **** like this and not to just to defend their own ******** .
Man, I wish liberals were this understanding when conservatives actually do **** like this and not to just to defend their own ******** .
#141 to #133
-
detroitshanker (11 hours ago) [-]
"You don't think they would?" Still isn't proof, or even evidence. If you want me to believe this, someone's going to have to show me some actual evidence at some point.
#144 to #141
-
youregaylol (11 hours ago) [-] It's called deductive reasoning. Hell it's just called reasoning.
You refusing to accept the obvious implications because of your very apparent biases speaks more against you than me. And here I thought leftists relied on reason. I guess not.
You refusing to accept the obvious implications because of your very apparent biases speaks more against you than me. And here I thought leftists relied on reason. I guess not.
#152 to #144
-
detroitshanker (10 hours ago) [-]
"implications"
Not evidence. According to you, just the fact that they were there is proof that they did it. That no one would want to partake in a silent protest, that they would only want to cause a scene.
Anyway, this is the last you're getting out of me. Well done trolling, you ridiculous bastard.
Not evidence. According to you, just the fact that they were there is proof that they did it. That no one would want to partake in a silent protest, that they would only want to cause a scene.
Anyway, this is the last you're getting out of me. Well done trolling, you ridiculous bastard.
#176 to #152
-
youregaylol (10 hours ago) [-] Yeah, they totally weren't looking for attention by going to that rally with golden stars on. They weren't yelling and making a scene like every other Trump protester at these rallies. They definitely were just going to be silent and not draw any attention to themselves in a huge loud stadium full of people. I'm a ridiculous troll.
Glad to see you're such a reasonable person.
Glad to see you're such a reasonable person.
#179 to #175
-
youregaylol (10 hours ago) [-] Why would i go anon to call you dumb when I've done it with this username over and over again. Once again, reasoning skills.
#137 to #136
-
youregaylol (11 hours ago) [-] What does it make liberals when they cry racism whenever they get called out on their ******** ?
#143 to #140
-
youregaylol (11 hours ago) [-] Oh you don't care? I wonder why.
Logic would dictate that if both sides are easily upset that neither side should be whining about the others fault, as they both share them. I'm simply smacking down your ****** attempts at gotcha moments.
But no, I don't think they're on the same level as libtards as liberals set up this controversy specifically to get people upset at Trump, Trump supporters are just pushing back.
Logic would dictate that if both sides are easily upset that neither side should be whining about the others fault, as they both share them. I'm simply smacking down your ****** attempts at gotcha moments.
But no, I don't think they're on the same level as libtards as liberals set up this controversy specifically to get people upset at Trump, Trump supporters are just pushing back.
#149 to #143
-
scorcho (11 hours ago) [-] i don't care because i don't buy into these childish "us vs them" mentalities.
i am not even american, so i wont get to vote anyway.
And no, that is not dictated by logic at all, that is just rubbish argumentation.
fact is: you get upset just as easy, if not more easy than libtards if a simple sticker causes you this much anger.
and i am talking about you specifically. you lost your temper incredibly easy, even in this short debate.
you are the offended party here, and your childlike attempts to steer this into another
'hurr libtards do the SJW' argument just proves that.
and with that i am done.
i have wasted enough time on your silly ******** .
i am not even american, so i wont get to vote anyway.
And no, that is not dictated by logic at all, that is just rubbish argumentation.
fact is: you get upset just as easy, if not more easy than libtards if a simple sticker causes you this much anger.
and i am talking about you specifically. you lost your temper incredibly easy, even in this short debate.
you are the offended party here, and your childlike attempts to steer this into another
'hurr libtards do the SJW' argument just proves that.
and with that i am done.
i have wasted enough time on your silly ******** .
#161 to #149
-
youregaylol (10 hours ago) [-] You don't care about "us vs them" mentalities yet you're committed to seeing Trump as the evil racist party and this muslim woman as a victim despite all the evidence to the contrary. kek.
"and i am talking about you specifically. you lost your temper incredibly easy, even in this short debate. "
lol, you think this is a debate? And your projecting is strong, the fact is you;re about to rage quit because someone is challenging your partisan view of the world.
"you are the offended party here"
No, I think the people whining because a provocateur got rightfully kicked out are, sorry.
"your childlike attempts to steer this into another
'hurr libtards do the SJW' argument just proves that."
Right, best stick to "Trump is racist and evil and a nazi." I'm sure you'd love that. I call a spade a spade, this whole controversy was spawned by liberal sjws. Deal with it, cry about it, I don't care.
"i have wasted enough time on your silly ******** ."
One sec, I need to reply to your newest rage text I just got. Heh.
"and i am talking about you specifically. you lost your temper incredibly easy, even in this short debate. "
lol, you think this is a debate? And your projecting is strong, the fact is you;re about to rage quit because someone is challenging your partisan view of the world.
"you are the offended party here"
No, I think the people whining because a provocateur got rightfully kicked out are, sorry.
"your childlike attempts to steer this into another
'hurr libtards do the SJW' argument just proves that."
Right, best stick to "Trump is racist and evil and a nazi." I'm sure you'd love that. I call a spade a spade, this whole controversy was spawned by liberal sjws. Deal with it, cry about it, I don't care.
"i have wasted enough time on your silly ******** ."
One sec, I need to reply to your newest rage text I just got. Heh.
#173 to #161
-
scorcho (10 hours ago) [-] i know i said that comment was my last,
but this one really is.
again, you have not presented a smidgeon of solid evidence. Just pure speculation.
you are projecting your infantile rage onto me, don't try to turn this around.
please point me at the comments where i said, that:
'i am committed to seeing Trump as the evil racist party and this muslim woman as a victim'
or
'Trump is racist and evil and a nazi.'
See? That is what projection is. None of these statements even remotely represent any of the points i made, yet you somehow in your convoluted brain attribute them to me.
Because everyone who disagrees with you is obviously one of 'them', right?
That is projection. I think you learned the meaning of a new word today.
And yes, unlike you, i do have better things to do than indulge your fantasies of victimhood, so i am gonna quit chatting with you.
Not like you are gonna contribute anything substantial anyway.
Have a nice day.
but this one really is.
again, you have not presented a smidgeon of solid evidence. Just pure speculation.
you are projecting your infantile rage onto me, don't try to turn this around.
please point me at the comments where i said, that:
'i am committed to seeing Trump as the evil racist party and this muslim woman as a victim'
or
'Trump is racist and evil and a nazi.'
See? That is what projection is. None of these statements even remotely represent any of the points i made, yet you somehow in your convoluted brain attribute them to me.
Because everyone who disagrees with you is obviously one of 'them', right?
That is projection. I think you learned the meaning of a new word today.
And yes, unlike you, i do have better things to do than indulge your fantasies of victimhood, so i am gonna quit chatting with you.
Not like you are gonna contribute anything substantial anyway.
Have a nice day.
#178 to #173
-
youregaylol (10 hours ago) [-] Oh goody, you're back. Who could've predicted that.
"i know i said that comment was my last, but this one really is."
No don't go, this is fun.
"Just pure speculation."
Deductive reasoning is a thing. If it walks like a duck and all that. But nah, lets just assume that the people with golden stars on with known liberal/sjw ties in the media aren't there to make a disturbance like every other protester at these events. Makes so much sense.
"you are projecting your infantile rage onto me, don't try to turn this around."
I like how I called you out on your projecting and then your response is to accuse me of trying to turn this around on you. You can't make this stuff up.
"None of these statements even remotely represent any of the points i made,"
What points have you made exactly besides stating "NU uh" over and over again? In the end thats what it boils down too. Denial. Denial with very little logic involved.
"That is projection. I think you learned the meaning of a new word today."
You mean the word I just used against you first in perfect context? Yeah that makes alot of sense Einstein.
"And yes, unlike you, i do have better things to do than indulge your fantasies of victimhood, so i am gonna quit chatting with you. "
Ahh, you have things to do and I have no life? Right when you're losing the argument too. Damn. I gotta remember to reach into my closet and find my life card whenever I'm getting smacked around in an argument.
"Not like you are gonna contribute anything substantial anyway. "
I'll take one out of your book here to add some substance, alright. "Nuh Uh."
"Have a nice day."
Make sure you spell my username right when you complain on your blog about the cis male who triggered you today.
"i know i said that comment was my last, but this one really is."
No don't go, this is fun.
"Just pure speculation."
Deductive reasoning is a thing. If it walks like a duck and all that. But nah, lets just assume that the people with golden stars on with known liberal/sjw ties in the media aren't there to make a disturbance like every other protester at these events. Makes so much sense.
"you are projecting your infantile rage onto me, don't try to turn this around."
I like how I called you out on your projecting and then your response is to accuse me of trying to turn this around on you. You can't make this stuff up.
"None of these statements even remotely represent any of the points i made,"
What points have you made exactly besides stating "NU uh" over and over again? In the end thats what it boils down too. Denial. Denial with very little logic involved.
"That is projection. I think you learned the meaning of a new word today."
You mean the word I just used against you first in perfect context? Yeah that makes alot of sense Einstein.
"And yes, unlike you, i do have better things to do than indulge your fantasies of victimhood, so i am gonna quit chatting with you. "
Ahh, you have things to do and I have no life? Right when you're losing the argument too. Damn. I gotta remember to reach into my closet and find my life card whenever I'm getting smacked around in an argument.
"Not like you are gonna contribute anything substantial anyway. "
I'll take one out of your book here to add some substance, alright. "Nuh Uh."
"Have a nice day."
Make sure you spell my username right when you complain on your blog about the cis male who triggered you today.
#134 to #132
-
youregaylol (11 hours ago) [-] Meh, if I wanted to educate the ignorant and the stupid I would have become a special ed teacher.
Here, I'll speak your language.
"My side good side. Other guy side bad side. #Feelthebern"
Here, I'll speak your language.
"My side good side. Other guy side bad side. #Feelthebern"
#148 to #138
-
youregaylol (11 hours ago) [-] Oh, are we playing the "I'm going to pretend I don't see any evidence" card? That really shows how intelligent you are.
Out of sight out of mind. I'll try not to "condescent" in the future when dealing with such a logical person.
Out of sight out of mind. I'll try not to "condescent" in the future when dealing with such a logical person.
#172 to #154
-
youregaylol (10 hours ago) [-] Nah, I did. You know I did, which is why i got you to admit below that they were at leasy provoking Trump with their behavior.
If my feelings were hurt I'd probably be sulking and running away like you, but I'm just here, drinking my water.
Maybe you should kick me out of FJ since I'm provoking you so much. I'll get my agent on the line to book me on The View so I can whine about what a bigot you're being to me, lol.
If my feelings were hurt I'd probably be sulking and running away like you, but I'm just here, drinking my water.
Maybe you should kick me out of FJ since I'm provoking you so much. I'll get my agent on the line to book me on The View so I can whine about what a bigot you're being to me, lol.
#37 to #36
-
youregaylol (15 hours ago) [-] What, you're saying it's bad to be gay?
That triggers me, go back to /pol/ you evil rasist stormfag nazi
That triggers me, go back to /pol/ you evil rasist stormfag nazi
#114 to #104
-
youregaylol (11 hours ago) [-] >uses a strawman
>whines when i use the same strawman against him
you should make it harder to spot tumbler
>whines when i use the same strawman against him
you should make it harder to spot tumbler
#124 to #50
-
youregaylol (11 hours ago) [-] Calling everyone who you can't debate with facts a troll is a primo strategy bro.
Hey next time you have a party invite me over, I'm gonna wear a shirt that says you're a cunt, if you kick me out I'll go the media and cry about how you're a racist against me. This is fair criticism and if you disagree you're a troll.
Hey next time you have a party invite me over, I'm gonna wear a shirt that says you're a cunt, if you kick me out I'll go the media and cry about how you're a racist against me. This is fair criticism and if you disagree you're a troll.
#39 to #28
-
discobleach (14 hours ago) [-] she was a muslim girl scout
she wrote an article once for a newspaper that belongs to a corporation that donated some money to democrats
and..?
she wrote an article once for a newspaper that belongs to a corporation that donated some money to democrats
and..?
#40 to #39
-
youregaylol (14 hours ago) [-] I'd say you were the equivalent of an online Helen Keller but she didn't choose to be deaf dumb and blind.
#41 to #40
-
discobleach (14 hours ago) [-] if i've missed any facts, please enlighten me..
she wrote guest columns for this newspaper. she's not even part of the staff. please tell me how that makes her a democrat shill.
she wrote guest columns for this newspaper. she's not even part of the staff. please tell me how that makes her a democrat shill.
#43 to #42
-
discobleach (14 hours ago) [-] apparently the fact that the guy beside her was a jew is the problem? like you'd need to be muslim to disagree with certain policies.
and the "proof" that this was staged is some dude's comment on youtube? really? that's hilarious.
and the "proof" that this was staged is some dude's comment on youtube? really? that's hilarious.
#44 to #43
-
youregaylol (14 hours ago) [-] A muslim activist reporter for a magazine that provides financial and editorial support to democrats with a know social justice provocateur start a scene at a trump event, muslim woman gets thrown out, morons like you tell all your friends on facebook how evil and racist trump is.
Lets switch the roles. A christian activist reporter from Breitbart or Fox News appears with Alex Jones at a Hilary Clinton event, christian woman gets thrown out.
Does anyone really believe you disingenuous mongoloids would take this at face value? No. Get ****** you opportunistic asshole.
Lets switch the roles. A christian activist reporter from Breitbart or Fox News appears with Alex Jones at a Hilary Clinton event, christian woman gets thrown out.
Does anyone really believe you disingenuous mongoloids would take this at face value? No. Get ****** you opportunistic asshole.
#45 to #44
-
discobleach (14 hours ago) [-] you have no evidence that they "started a scene" beyond a comment someone left on youtube.
and the fact that she wrote a couple guest articles for a newspaper that supports democrats is meaningless. she's not allowed to have a political opinion now?
you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here.
and the fact that she wrote a couple guest articles for a newspaper that supports democrats is meaningless. she's not allowed to have a political opinion now?
you're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here.
#47 to #45
-
youregaylol (14 hours ago) [-] Right, because known activists at a protest wearing golden stars to imply that people Trump is an evil nazi wouldn't POSSIBLY start a scene.
Do you even believe your own ******** ? I mean really, is this just some strange ideological denial that you know is crap but you pretend isn't because you want to hurt those who disagree with you?
I might actually respect you more if you were just an intelligent partisan liar than a braindead moron with no critical thinking skills.
Do you even believe your own ******** ? I mean really, is this just some strange ideological denial that you know is crap but you pretend isn't because you want to hurt those who disagree with you?
I might actually respect you more if you were just an intelligent partisan liar than a braindead moron with no critical thinking skills.
#127 to #52
-
youregaylol (11 hours ago) [-] There was a time when kicking out people who disturbed private events didn't make you a racist bigot if they were brown, but that times gone too.
#130 to #126
-
youregaylol (11 hours ago) [-] Holy **** you're stupid.
"you're grade A+ retard" = "you are grade A+ retard"
Maybe that makes sense if you're a Russian prostitute, but I'm going to attribute it to you being a mongoloid.
"you're grade A+ retard" = "you are grade A+ retard"
Maybe that makes sense if you're a Russian prostitute, but I'm going to attribute it to you being a mongoloid.
#131 to #130
-
tarekmig (11 hours ago) [-] What the hell are you even talking about retard?
The "A+" Is a rank/grade, not a determiner, you said said "*you're a grade a retard", and used the "A+" as a determiner. Jesus Christ, learn to spell if you're actually going to debate about it because you don't have a valid argument.
The "A+" Is a rank/grade, not a determiner, you said said "*you're a grade a retard", and used the "A+" as a determiner. Jesus Christ, learn to spell if you're actually going to debate about it because you don't have a valid argument.
#135 to #131
-
youregaylol (11 hours ago) [-] I failed to capitalize a letter.
You sounded like a retarded Korean whore.
Unless you're contention is that "congrats you're grade A+ retard" is grammatically correct sentence.
I think we can agree that I'm better than you.
You sounded like a retarded Korean whore.
Unless you're contention is that "congrats you're grade A+ retard" is grammatically correct sentence.
I think we can agree that I'm better than you.
#142 to #135
-
tarekmig (11 hours ago) [-] I failed to add a letter, checkmate.
How do you know how a retarded Korean Whore sounds like? Heard your mother talk out loud?
The sentence you said before, "you're a grade a retard" Implies that the person you're directing this to is a grade, which makes zero sense, that is why I also added a plus.
I think we both can agree that you're a retard.
How do you know how a retarded Korean Whore sounds like? Heard your mother talk out loud?
The sentence you said before, "you're a grade a retard" Implies that the person you're directing this to is a grade, which makes zero sense, that is why I also added a plus.
I think we both can agree that you're a retard.
#145 to #142
-
youregaylol (11 hours ago) [-] Bad mother jokes aside, your mistake sounded clearly more ridiculous than mine. The fact that someone as inept as you created such a hilariously mongoish sentence trying to call others stupid is brilliant.
In that sense, you're truly special. Good work.
In that sense, you're truly special. Good work.
#158 to #145
-
tarekmig (10 hours ago) [-] I didn't hear you make any mother jokes, but okay. Nope, keep telling yourself that. Inept? You tried to correct me but only ended up making fun of yourself and proving that you are truly worthless, not only politically (like the comment #28) But also failed to successfully correct my grammar. Two fails at once? now THAT'S hilarious, what's even more hilarious that my claim that you were stupid is correct.
Good luck in further arguments failing to prove your point, or anything at all .
PS. Congrats, you derailed the argument into something that doesn't make sense, truly what a 12 year old would do.
Good luck in further arguments failing to prove your point, or anything at all .
PS. Congrats, you derailed the argument into something that doesn't make sense, truly what a 12 year old would do.
#167 to #158
-
anon (10 hours ago) [-] No, I didn't. You're the only one who made a mother joke. Connect the dots and try to come up some better jokes, you're terrible at this.
Yes. Inept.
"But also failed to successfully correct my grammar."
No no, I did that. Though admittedly this should have been your teacher.handlers job, not mine.
"PS. Congrats, you derailed the argument into something that doesn't make sense, truly what a 12 year old would do."
HAHAHAH. "You am reatrd" is a great argument starter, one of the best. You're up there with Socrates with your debate skills champ.
From now on I'll try not to be 12 years old by failing at calling people retards, making dumb mom jokes, and then rage blocking, kek.
Yes. Inept.
"But also failed to successfully correct my grammar."
No no, I did that. Though admittedly this should have been your teacher.handlers job, not mine.
"PS. Congrats, you derailed the argument into something that doesn't make sense, truly what a 12 year old would do."
HAHAHAH. "You am reatrd" is a great argument starter, one of the best. You're up there with Socrates with your debate skills champ.
From now on I'll try not to be 12 years old by failing at calling people retards, making dumb mom jokes, and then rage blocking, kek.
#186 to #168
-
anon (10 hours ago) [-]
Oh, you're rich, that showed me.
Tell me Bill Gates, how does seeing my comments interfere with your totally real and awesome high paying job that isn't mcdonalds?
Surely a big CEO doesn't let the username on a comment detract from his very important work.
PS: You're a joke buddy.
Tell me Bill Gates, how does seeing my comments interfere with your totally real and awesome high paying job that isn't mcdonalds?
Surely a big CEO doesn't let the username on a comment detract from his very important work.
PS: You're a joke buddy.
#204 to #186
-
tarekmig (9 hours ago) [-] Rich? No. Making decent amount of money? Yes. I didn't even put it up as an offense, you're too sensitive and fail to knowledge that there are some people who make more than 15$ a day.
www.amazon.com/Stock-Investing-Dummies-Paul-Mladje
www.amazon.com/Web-Design-Dummies-Lisa-Lopuck/dp/1
For dummies version, because you're clearly a dumbass.
Buy these books, read them 3 times, and come back to me. Oh wait... you're illiterate, nevermind.
"Tell me Bill Gates, how does seeing my comments interfere with your totally real and awesome high paying job that isn't mcdonalds? "
I don't know, you tell me? I am sure Mcdonalds accepts autists like yourself for simple tasks. might as well ask you the prices of fries these days?
PS: When I make 50-60$ from a single client while sitting home pressing buttons, like currently, a joke is you in life, buddy
TL;DR git gud at life poorfag
www.amazon.com/Stock-Investing-Dummies-Paul-Mladje
www.amazon.com/Web-Design-Dummies-Lisa-Lopuck/dp/1
For dummies version, because you're clearly a dumbass.
Buy these books, read them 3 times, and come back to me. Oh wait... you're illiterate, nevermind.
"Tell me Bill Gates, how does seeing my comments interfere with your totally real and awesome high paying job that isn't mcdonalds? "
I don't know, you tell me? I am sure Mcdonalds accepts autists like yourself for simple tasks. might as well ask you the prices of fries these days?
PS: When I make 50-60$ from a single client while sitting home pressing buttons, like currently, a joke is you in life, buddy
TL;DR git gud at life poorfag
#2
-
shabeetus (01/11/2016) [-] The real reason they were kicked out because the husband was yelling during Trump's speech
#146 to #35
-
runescapewasgood ONLINE (11 hours ago) [-] is there any non-anecdotal evidence? honestly, i'd trust a news media outlet over a few online stories...
#159 to #155
-
runescapewasgood ONLINE (10 hours ago) [-] most of that was incoherent, but i think i understood some.
"WHAT ABOUT THE ******* ACCUAL EVENT "
yes. that's what's being discussed.
"WHO CARES"
literally everyone but you on this content
"about the muslim bitch who may or may not have been thrown out "
"may or may not"
no. she was thrown out. stop being a dick about people you don't know.
you didn't even respond to my comment, and since you're an incredibly new account, and probably a troll, i have no problem blocking you
"WHAT ABOUT THE ******* ACCUAL EVENT "
yes. that's what's being discussed.
"WHO CARES"
literally everyone but you on this content
"about the muslim bitch who may or may not have been thrown out "
"may or may not"
no. she was thrown out. stop being a dick about people you don't know.
you didn't even respond to my comment, and since you're an incredibly new account, and probably a troll, i have no problem blocking you
#120 to #35
-
detroitshanker (11 hours ago) [-]
Don't see how any of that is proof, honestly.
I really don't see how #17 had even any suggestion of wrongdoing on her part, if anything it was in her favour.
I don't really see how #18 is relevant that this guy who is "without a doubt" (I really don't deny he looks like him, it probably is, but it's hardly conclusive) some jewish documentary producer means they were causing a disruption. I just don't see how this connects at all.
#19 is just something some guy on the internet said.... really? That's proof? some guy says something on the internet and all the news networks are lying?
I just don't see how any of these prove that they were causing a real disruption.
I really don't see how #17 had even any suggestion of wrongdoing on her part, if anything it was in her favour.
I don't really see how #18 is relevant that this guy who is "without a doubt" (I really don't deny he looks like him, it probably is, but it's hardly conclusive) some jewish documentary producer means they were causing a disruption. I just don't see how this connects at all.
#19 is just something some guy on the internet said.... really? That's proof? some guy says something on the internet and all the news networks are lying?
I just don't see how any of these prove that they were causing a real disruption.
#13 to #10
-
jjjr ONLINE (21 hours ago) [-]
nevermind i found it.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0YBt_6HfbM
www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0YBt_6HfbM
#8
-
johrai (01/11/2016) [-] This is going to end up being positive coverage for Trump. It's why he's unstumpable. Trump kicks out people from every rally. White, brown, yellow, whatever. He doesn't give a **** . Be unreasonable or disruptive, get kicked out.
#74 to #8
-
enlightednatzie (12 hours ago) [-] Awww, you got your own little jimmie åkesson! This exat thimng happened to him and soon he will be our primi minister. Hearing his scanian accent makes my heart calm and i gain faith to my country.
#196 to #8
-
kingpongthedon (9 hours ago) [-]
>Be unreasonable or disruptive, get kicked out.
>Trump kicks himself out of his own rally.
>Trump kicks himself out of his own rally.
#15
-
discobleach (19 hours ago) [-] that being said, even if they did remove her from the premises, i would understand.
i'm not a trump supporter by any means, but this was a rally for him. not a debate. you're only supposed to be there if you've already bought his kool aid. so any form of protest like this is disruptive of the whole idea behind a rally.. i don't know what i would have done in his place, but removing her wouldn't have been outside the realm of possibility
i'm not a trump supporter by any means, but this was a rally for him. not a debate. you're only supposed to be there if you've already bought his kool aid. so any form of protest like this is disruptive of the whole idea behind a rally.. i don't know what i would have done in his place, but removing her wouldn't have been outside the realm of possibility
#187 to #20
-
nickelakon (10 hours ago) [-] Think about it this way
If you when you were in highschool, and your rival through a pep rally, what reason would people from your school have gone? Probably to make trouble, right? Same premise
If you when you were in highschool, and your rival through a pep rally, what reason would people from your school have gone? Probably to make trouble, right? Same premise
#29 to #26
-
lolollo (15 hours ago) [-] So you're saying I would be doing the exact same thing as I'm currently doing for the individual who disrupted Trump's rally? I would be treating each candidate/political figure with fairness beyond any personal biases towards or against any of them?
...thank you?
...thank you?
#115 to #112
-
anon (11 hours ago) [-]
The point is you don't go to a speech where there are no questions and then try and yell your way into a debate. That's why they were removed, not their religion. It's always just outright lying wherever possible to label whoever they don't like as racist to dismiss the points rather than actually discuss them.
#215 to #115
-
lolollo (3 hours ago) [-] That's not what it is at all, I don't give a **** what the race of the person they throw out is, what I care about is the fact that you ought to be confident enough in your ideals to be able to debate them, regardless of when it comes up. To avoid a debate all because "this isn't a debate, this is a hugbox!" is a little suspicious.
#188 to #29
-
anon (10 hours ago) [-]
Ummm....no?
I'm saying that you'd clap at fox news provocateurs being thrown out of a hilary rally while you're crying because a liberal provocateur was thrown out of trumps. I'm saying the exact opposite, that you don't treat all sides equally. You can't read for **** .
You and everyone else who gave you a thumb is retarded
I'm saying that you'd clap at fox news provocateurs being thrown out of a hilary rally while you're crying because a liberal provocateur was thrown out of trumps. I'm saying the exact opposite, that you don't treat all sides equally. You can't read for **** .
You and everyone else who gave you a thumb is retarded
#220 to #188
-
lolollo (3 hours ago) [-] Except I wouldn't? You do realize that the more presumptions you need to make about a person, the more the point falls apart, right? How am I meant to defend against that in a way that would convince you? Say "nuh uh!" over and over? You're not even arguing here, you're finding any artificial justification to protect yourself from "the big bad guy who dun think different from me!"
#21 to #20
-
discobleach (17 hours ago) [-] to brag about the epic turnout on twitter.
which trump does on a regular basis.
a candidate with already a lot of supporters is more appealing to the masses
which trump does on a regular basis.
a candidate with already a lot of supporters is more appealing to the masses
#56 to #22
-
severepwner (13 hours ago) [-] Because "racist" hasn't been a liberal buzzword before this incident anyway.
#66 to #61
-
severepwner (12 hours ago) [-] Because it's a witch hunt, it's like the Red Scare of modern day. They see racism in everyone and everything, especially where it doesn't exist.
I have found it especially humorous when they call Islamophobia racist
These people aren't working against racism as much as they're making it an issue so they can pretend that their opposition fits their fantasies as Ku Klux Klan supporting Nazis.
Oh a thug robbed a store and attacked a cop and the thug was killed because of this? Ok story ended. WAIT! He was black, and the cop was white? This wasn't just another incident of a criminal being stopped, IT WAS RACISM.
Another someone was kicked out of a Trump rally which often happens? Ok story ended. WAIT! The person that was thrown out this time happened to be Muslim? This wasn't just another person that was kicked out like the rest of people that have, THIS IS CLEAR PREJUDICE AGAINST MUSLIMS.
Liberals are "bad" because they act like a flash mob. People aren't anymore racist, then there are witches in our country.
I have found it especially humorous when they call Islamophobia racist
These people aren't working against racism as much as they're making it an issue so they can pretend that their opposition fits their fantasies as Ku Klux Klan supporting Nazis.
Oh a thug robbed a store and attacked a cop and the thug was killed because of this? Ok story ended. WAIT! He was black, and the cop was white? This wasn't just another incident of a criminal being stopped, IT WAS RACISM.
Another someone was kicked out of a Trump rally which often happens? Ok story ended. WAIT! The person that was thrown out this time happened to be Muslim? This wasn't just another person that was kicked out like the rest of people that have, THIS IS CLEAR PREJUDICE AGAINST MUSLIMS.
Liberals are "bad" because they act like a flash mob. People aren't anymore racist, then there are witches in our country.
#80 to #66
-
lolollo (12 hours ago) [-] OK, so then Donald Trump DOESNT want to set up an immigration check to turn people away on the grounds of religion? Because I'm pretty sure that's what the concern is, and if it were a witch hunt, like you said, it would mean that thing wouldn't be a point on Trump's "once I run **** " list.
So then...is it not?
So then...is it not?
#94 to #80
-
sircool (12 hours ago) [-]
I fail to understand the issue if he does though. It's within the presidents power to due such. previous presidents have done it, both rep's and dem's. Some legislation allows the president to "bar immigration to the country on the grounds the people in question adhere to an ideology that will inevitably lead to a violent rebellion or out bursts against the government." or something like that. You can't argue that modern islam isn't an ideology that wants to impose its form of government on the world. intelligence agencies across the globe typically number the amount of radicals in the religion to be around 25% of the total. That's around the population of the entire united states.
taking all of this, the extremely weak screening process for "refugees" or even "immigrants" at this point, said by both european countries and united states officials, it's justified to bar immigration from these places. An elected leader's duty is not to the world. an elected leader's duty is to the people that trusted them enough. If they do not take every chance to protect them without baring their freedoms, they are a failure as a leader.
taking all of this, the extremely weak screening process for "refugees" or even "immigrants" at this point, said by both european countries and united states officials, it's justified to bar immigration from these places. An elected leader's duty is not to the world. an elected leader's duty is to the people that trusted them enough. If they do not take every chance to protect them without baring their freedoms, they are a failure as a leader.
#119 to #110
-
sircool (11 hours ago) [-] no, I just threw a lot of information out there, some bits you might argue against, others not.
www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182
(3) Security and related grounds
(iii) any activity a purpose of which is the opposition to, or the control or overthrow of, the Government of the United States by force, violence, or other unlawful means,
is inadmissible.
www.pewglobal.org/2006/05/23/where-terrorism-finds-support-in-the-muslim-world/
25% of the islamic world openly supports radical terrorism according to Pew research. 7% of that is part of the population that does it, not just support it.
it is an ideology that promotes the overthrowing of secular or nonislamic governments for one that is. so yes, there are grounds for baring of immigration.
www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182
(3) Security and related grounds
(iii) any activity a purpose of which is the opposition to, or the control or overthrow of, the Government of the United States by force, violence, or other unlawful means,
is inadmissible.
www.pewglobal.org/2006/05/23/where-terrorism-finds-support-in-the-muslim-world/
25% of the islamic world openly supports radical terrorism according to Pew research. 7% of that is part of the population that does it, not just support it.
it is an ideology that promotes the overthrowing of secular or nonislamic governments for one that is. so yes, there are grounds for baring of immigration.
#216 to #119
-
lolollo (3 hours ago) [-] That makes it legal to occur, but the point you made was that other presidents have done so. There's also the issue that Trump wouldn't be doing it based on country of origin, but on a religion. If it were the former, I'd like to be told about it, because I'm seriously hoping he's not serious about that. Doing it based on religion is a) a little counterproductive and b) really unconstitutional.
#221 to #216
-
sircool (3 hours ago) [-] i've heard that during the iranian hostage crisis (during the 90's or 80's? Not sure, was still a kid) all immigration was bared.
in terms of when the united states bared immigration based on nationality, note all of these were during times of war which the united states might technically be in.
Presidential Proclamations 2525, 2526, and 2527 or the Alien and Sedition Acts. Used in WW I and WW II. It was used to bar immigration from the countries america was at war with at the time. sadly it was used also to imprison, and deport citizens from these countries, deportation used after the war.
counterproductive I don't understand. in the modern world, it's an ideology that is toxic and anti- every moral the western world holds true to itself. the best way of stopping an ideology is stopping its spread completely.
unconstitutional would imply they're already citizens of the united states. a country should have no power or say over some one who isn't party of its citizenry.
in terms of when the united states bared immigration based on nationality, note all of these were during times of war which the united states might technically be in.
Presidential Proclamations 2525, 2526, and 2527 or the Alien and Sedition Acts. Used in WW I and WW II. It was used to bar immigration from the countries america was at war with at the time. sadly it was used also to imprison, and deport citizens from these countries, deportation used after the war.
counterproductive I don't understand. in the modern world, it's an ideology that is toxic and anti- every moral the western world holds true to itself. the best way of stopping an ideology is stopping its spread completely.
unconstitutional would imply they're already citizens of the united states. a country should have no power or say over some one who isn't party of its citizenry.
#122 to #94
-
detroitshanker (11 hours ago) [-]
I don't think that's true. If there were that number of islamic radicals, we'd be knee deep in **** .
#129 to #122
-
sircool (11 hours ago) [-] like we're not already?
continuing that I'm vaguely sure the majority of that 25% are dirt poor, so they just say that **** , they can't do anything about it. there's a huge wealth gap in those countries.
but seriously, it doesn't matter what you -think- it matters what is. and according to pew research, typically on point and bipartisan, that's what it is.
continuing that I'm vaguely sure the majority of that 25% are dirt poor, so they just say that **** , they can't do anything about it. there's a huge wealth gap in those countries.
but seriously, it doesn't matter what you -think- it matters what is. and according to pew research, typically on point and bipartisan, that's what it is.
#139 to #129
-
detroitshanker (11 hours ago) [-]
I assumed you meant 25% actively involved in extremism, seems I misunderstood. Still, looking through the source you provided, I can't find where it gives this figure. I'm not saying it isn't there, but can you tell me where exactly it is?
#86 to #85
-
lolollo (12 hours ago) [-] Nope, but thinking there's a religious holy war going on pretty much is...
I thought I was supposed to be the one seeing racism where there isn't racism. Now here you are seeing jihads where there aren't any. Now why don't you tell me why, and how justified you feel with your perception of what's going on, and why I shouldn't substitute every single phrase you say for an argument for what you seem to think I'm doing.
I thought I was supposed to be the one seeing racism where there isn't racism. Now here you are seeing jihads where there aren't any. Now why don't you tell me why, and how justified you feel with your perception of what's going on, and why I shouldn't substitute every single phrase you say for an argument for what you seem to think I'm doing.
#108 to #99
-
lolollo (11 hours ago) [-] Why is it suddenly a holy war though? It wasn't back when Bush was going after the wrong group in the early 2000s. It wasn't when Obama was managing the war in the Middle East the last 8 years. Now that you need a hot button topic to support someone from your party, though?
"HOLY WAR! HOLY WAR! ITS A HOLY WAR! TRUMP NEEDTA FIGHT THE HOLY WAR! YOU SHOULD BE SCARED OF THE HOLY WAR! WHY AINT Y'ALL SCARED OF THIS HOLY WAR?!"
Totally not suspicious...
"HOLY WAR! HOLY WAR! ITS A HOLY WAR! TRUMP NEEDTA FIGHT THE HOLY WAR! YOU SHOULD BE SCARED OF THE HOLY WAR! WHY AINT Y'ALL SCARED OF THIS HOLY WAR?!"
Totally not suspicious...
#165 to #108
-
anon (10 hours ago) [-]
Sick strawman, who said it hasn't been a war on western culture from an oppressive violent religion since it started?
oh gee, Barack "what is islamic terrorism" Obama didn't call it a holy war for 8 years?
Who said it wasn't a holy war, was 9/11 done as a religious terrorist attack? Are large military groups killing off civilians based on religion, ideology or sexuality? Their savagery in the middle east has always been there and always been disgusting.
oh gee, Barack "what is islamic terrorism" Obama didn't call it a holy war for 8 years?
Who said it wasn't a holy war, was 9/11 done as a religious terrorist attack? Are large military groups killing off civilians based on religion, ideology or sexuality? Their savagery in the middle east has always been there and always been disgusting.
#189 to #66
-
anon (10 hours ago) [-]
"Oh a thug robbed a store and attacked a cop and the thug was killed because of this? Ok story ended. WAIT! He was black, and the cop was white? This wasn't just another incident of a criminal being stopped, IT WAS RACISM. "
Department of Justice Report on Fergusion ( www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/attachments/2015/03/04/ferguson_police_department_report.pdf )
"Ferguson’s approach to law enforcement both reflects and reinforces racial bias,
including stereotyping. The harms of Ferguson’s police and court practices are borne
disproportionately by African Americans, and there is evidence that this is due in part to intentional discrimination on the basis of race."
Read the full report. It's not just 'butthurt SJWs on a witch hunt for white folks.'
Department of Justice Report on Fergusion ( www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/attachments/2015/03/04/ferguson_police_department_report.pdf )
"Ferguson’s approach to law enforcement both reflects and reinforces racial bias,
including stereotyping. The harms of Ferguson’s police and court practices are borne
disproportionately by African Americans, and there is evidence that this is due in part to intentional discrimination on the basis of race."
Read the full report. It's not just 'butthurt SJWs on a witch hunt for white folks.'
#192 to #189
-
youregaylol (10 hours ago) [-] The same Justice Department that refused to prosecute Black panthers holding weapons outside of a voting booth?
Yeah, very credible.
Yeah, very credible.
#199 to #192
-
conantheviking (9 hours ago) [-] Do you have a specific refutation, or are you just going to 100% disregard the most in-depth investigation into the Ferguson situation that currently exists because of that ******** excuse?
#200 to #199
-
youregaylol (9 hours ago) [-] I'm challenging the credibility of a department that has taken a very partisan view of race relations in this country. I imagine if Karl Rove was the leader of the DOJ at the time instead of Eric Holder and said that there was no racism involved at all you'd have the same opinion as me.
Spare me the fake indignation.
Spare me the fake indignation.
#201 to #200
-
conantheviking (9 hours ago) [-] Attacks on credibility are just lazy, dude. That's a weak-ass, ******** refutation and you know it. Why don't you address the substance? I thought conservatives were all about "the cold hard truth!"
"African Americans are more than twice as likely as white drivers to be searched during vehicle stops even after controlling for non-race based variables such as the reason the vehicle stop was initiated, but are found in possession of contraband 26% less often than white drivers, suggesting officers are impermissibly considering race as a factor when determining whether to search."
"Nearly 90% of documented force used by FPD officers was used against African Americans. In every canine bite incident for which racial information is available, the person bitten was African American."
_
"Our investigation indicates that this disproportionate burden on African Americans
cannot be explained by any difference in the rate at which people of different races violate the law. Rather, our investigation has revealed that these disparities occur, at least in part, because of unlawful bias against and stereotypes about African Americans. "_
"African Americans are more than twice as likely as white drivers to be searched during vehicle stops even after controlling for non-race based variables such as the reason the vehicle stop was initiated, but are found in possession of contraband 26% less often than white drivers, suggesting officers are impermissibly considering race as a factor when determining whether to search."
"Nearly 90% of documented force used by FPD officers was used against African Americans. In every canine bite incident for which racial information is available, the person bitten was African American."
_
"Our investigation indicates that this disproportionate burden on African Americans
cannot be explained by any difference in the rate at which people of different races violate the law. Rather, our investigation has revealed that these disparities occur, at least in part, because of unlawful bias against and stereotypes about African Americans. "_
#203 to #201
-
youregaylol (9 hours ago) [-] I understand that a liberal might be offended by attacks on credibility considering their noticeable lack of it, but when citing a source thats sort of important. You know, having a credible source. Thats a thing.
I refuse to take the DOJ's methodologies at face value. I'm sure you've also been skeptical of reports released by at least some government agencies.
Something tells me you're not a fan of Bush's reasoning for the Iraq war.
I refuse to take the DOJ's methodologies at face value. I'm sure you've also been skeptical of reports released by at least some government agencies.
Something tells me you're not a fan of Bush's reasoning for the Iraq war.
#205 to #203
-
conantheviking (9 hours ago) [-] "I understand that a liberal might be offended by attacks on credibility considering their noticeable lack of it"
That's rich. Coming from the man with no sources, and whose refutation to my overwhelming evidence is INCREDULITY. 10/10 credibility mate!
"I refuse to take the DOJ's methodologies at face value."
Taking it at face value isn't necessary, seeing as they describe their methodology in the report (not that you'd know, because you're too afraid to read it and face the COLD HARD TRUTH).
"reviewed over 35,000 pages of police records as well as thousands of emails and other electronic materials provided by the police department. Enlisting the assistance of statistical experts, we analyzed FPD’s data on stops, searches, citations, and arrests, as well as data collected by the municipal court."
It's just numbers, baby! It's just the straight up mathematical facts of the matter!
Your incredulity is just a flimsy attempt to justify hiding from the truth.
That's rich. Coming from the man with no sources, and whose refutation to my overwhelming evidence is INCREDULITY. 10/10 credibility mate!
"I refuse to take the DOJ's methodologies at face value."
Taking it at face value isn't necessary, seeing as they describe their methodology in the report (not that you'd know, because you're too afraid to read it and face the COLD HARD TRUTH).
"reviewed over 35,000 pages of police records as well as thousands of emails and other electronic materials provided by the police department. Enlisting the assistance of statistical experts, we analyzed FPD’s data on stops, searches, citations, and arrests, as well as data collected by the municipal court."
It's just numbers, baby! It's just the straight up mathematical facts of the matter!
Your incredulity is just a flimsy attempt to justify hiding from the truth.
#206 to #205
-
youregaylol (8 hours ago) [-] So, hypothetically speaking, if I were to provide a source that disagree with you, would that make me right, you wrong, or would we be even? I could spam multiple statistics about how blacks are dangerous and stupid, but something tells me you're not gonna accept "DA COLD HARD TRUTH" this joke is funny, isn't it guys? so easily.
Perhaps you're not intelligent enough to know how easily numbers can be eschewed or manipulated for a specific purpose. Perhaps you're just another partisan hack. Maybe both.
Regardless, I did notice you didn't address my point about Bush. Do you take that report at face value? Hopefully I'll get an answer next time. Lets hope you don't miss it by accident again.
Perhaps you're not intelligent enough to know how easily numbers can be eschewed or manipulated for a specific purpose. Perhaps you're just another partisan hack. Maybe both.
Regardless, I did notice you didn't address my point about Bush. Do you take that report at face value? Hopefully I'll get an answer next time. Lets hope you don't miss it by accident again.
#207 to #206
-
conantheviking (8 hours ago) [-] "I could spam multiple statistics about how blacks are dangerous and stupid"
Go ahead if you want. It wouldn't change the facts of documented racial bias in the police.
"Perhaps you're not intelligent enough to know how easily numbers can be eschewed or manipulated for a specific purpose."
I'm a graduated biologist, we're all about stats. If you can point me out a flaw in the methodology then I'll humour you, but right now all you have is conspiracy and speculation.
"Perhaps you're just another partisan hack. Maybe both. "
Of course. I'm so politically biased I can't see the facts right in front of me, but YOU are so wise and impartial! YOU see the cold hard truth!
"Regardless, I did notice you didn't address my point about Bush."
I assumed it was a throwaway remark, but if you insist.
"Something tells me you're not a fan of Bush's reasoning for the Iraq war."
Yes, because we know now after-the-fact that the evidence was fabricated and the justifications were flimsy. (Do you know who was against the Iraq War from the very start though? #FeeltheBern) We have the advantage of hindsight for the Iraq War. I was like 8 when that **** kicked off, so I had no opinion of the reports at the time. What's your point? 'Reports can be wrong!!!' Yeah, no **** .
"Do you take that report at face value?"
No I do not. I read it and assessed its methodology for myself. I looked into what data it was analysing. I considered the report in light of other evidence (i.e. the recent cop whistleblower from the Baltimore police dept).
Go ahead if you want. It wouldn't change the facts of documented racial bias in the police.
"Perhaps you're not intelligent enough to know how easily numbers can be eschewed or manipulated for a specific purpose."
I'm a graduated biologist, we're all about stats. If you can point me out a flaw in the methodology then I'll humour you, but right now all you have is conspiracy and speculation.
"Perhaps you're just another partisan hack. Maybe both. "
Of course. I'm so politically biased I can't see the facts right in front of me, but YOU are so wise and impartial! YOU see the cold hard truth!
"Regardless, I did notice you didn't address my point about Bush."
I assumed it was a throwaway remark, but if you insist.
"Something tells me you're not a fan of Bush's reasoning for the Iraq war."
Yes, because we know now after-the-fact that the evidence was fabricated and the justifications were flimsy. (Do you know who was against the Iraq War from the very start though? #FeeltheBern) We have the advantage of hindsight for the Iraq War. I was like 8 when that **** kicked off, so I had no opinion of the reports at the time. What's your point? 'Reports can be wrong!!!' Yeah, no **** .
"Do you take that report at face value?"
No I do not. I read it and assessed its methodology for myself. I looked into what data it was analysing. I considered the report in light of other evidence (i.e. the recent cop whistleblower from the Baltimore police dept).
#208 to #207
-
youregaylol (8 hours ago) [-] "Go ahead if you want. It wouldn't change the facts of documented racial bias in the police. "
But would it prove that blacks are dangerous and stupid? If the answer is no, I have to point out your inconsistency on the whole "sources are always right" implication. If the answer is yes, well, maybe police have a reason to be racist, eh?
"I'm a graduated biologist, we're all about stats"
I'm the King of Austria, I'm all about spiking peasants.
"but right now all you have is conspiracy and speculation. "
Nah, just casual skepticism. I'm sorry that offends you so much.
"Of course. I'm so politically biased"
I'm lead to that conclusion based on the whole "unless you believe this department with a known partisan perspective on race relations, you're a dumb conservative" things.
"YOU see the cold hard truth! "
Really, a third time? Even after I mocked you? I guess biology majors don't require any wit.
"Yes, because we know now after-the-fact that the evidence was fabricated and the justifications were flimsy."
Oh wow, so the evidence was fake after the fact? Huh. Crazy how that happens.
"#FeeltheBern"
Excuse me while I simultaneously laugh and vomit. I'd just like to point out though that me and Cuckie Panders have something in common, and thats not a bad thing for once. Using your "logic" he'd be a loon in denial because he was skeptical of the evidence presented at the time, and where it was coming from. Someone should of told him questioning credibility is soooo weak, though I don't imagine that would phase Bern all that much, it's what hes known for. Besides being an idiot who appeals to idiots. Eh hem.
" I was like 8 when that **** kicked off, so I had no opinion of the reports at the time"
But if you were you'd believe them without a doubt, right? Damn conservative sheep.
"What's your point? 'Reports can be wrong!!!' Yeah, no **** . "
You say that, but you seem to be flabbergasted that I could be skeptical of a partisan DOJ. It's funny how bias works, huh?
"he recent cop whistleblower from the Baltimore police dept"
Oh golly, whosteblowers are known for their accuracy, and that really reflects poorly on american policing as a whole and especially Ferguson. A lot of great evidence to compare it to there, chief.
When you have time I'd suggest googling confirmation bias. And also another candidate. Preferably one thats not a meme.
But would it prove that blacks are dangerous and stupid? If the answer is no, I have to point out your inconsistency on the whole "sources are always right" implication. If the answer is yes, well, maybe police have a reason to be racist, eh?
"I'm a graduated biologist, we're all about stats"
I'm the King of Austria, I'm all about spiking peasants.
"but right now all you have is conspiracy and speculation. "
Nah, just casual skepticism. I'm sorry that offends you so much.
"Of course. I'm so politically biased"
I'm lead to that conclusion based on the whole "unless you believe this department with a known partisan perspective on race relations, you're a dumb conservative" things.
"YOU see the cold hard truth! "
Really, a third time? Even after I mocked you? I guess biology majors don't require any wit.
"Yes, because we know now after-the-fact that the evidence was fabricated and the justifications were flimsy."
Oh wow, so the evidence was fake after the fact? Huh. Crazy how that happens.
"#FeeltheBern"
Excuse me while I simultaneously laugh and vomit. I'd just like to point out though that me and Cuckie Panders have something in common, and thats not a bad thing for once. Using your "logic" he'd be a loon in denial because he was skeptical of the evidence presented at the time, and where it was coming from. Someone should of told him questioning credibility is soooo weak, though I don't imagine that would phase Bern all that much, it's what hes known for. Besides being an idiot who appeals to idiots. Eh hem.
" I was like 8 when that **** kicked off, so I had no opinion of the reports at the time"
But if you were you'd believe them without a doubt, right? Damn conservative sheep.
"What's your point? 'Reports can be wrong!!!' Yeah, no **** . "
You say that, but you seem to be flabbergasted that I could be skeptical of a partisan DOJ. It's funny how bias works, huh?
"he recent cop whistleblower from the Baltimore police dept"
Oh golly, whosteblowers are known for their accuracy, and that really reflects poorly on american policing as a whole and especially Ferguson. A lot of great evidence to compare it to there, chief.
When you have time I'd suggest googling confirmation bias. And also another candidate. Preferably one thats not a meme.
#209 to #208
-
conantheviking (7 hours ago) [-] "But would it prove that blacks are dangerous and stupid?"
Statistically more so than whites, yes. There's a whole discussion as to WHY, which I know you racists hate, but the statistics are what they are.
"If the answer is yes, well, maybe police have a reason to be racist, eh? "
Which brings us to the discussion of WHY!
One of my original quotes...
"African Americans are more than twice as likely as white drivers to be searched during vehicle stops even after controlling for non-race based variables such as the reason the vehicle stop was initiated, but are found in possession of contraband 26% less often than white drivers, suggesting officers are impermissibly considering race as a factor when determining whether to search."
See, perfect example of racial bias proving INEFFECTIVE. Racial profiling has been assessed, and it doesn't have a strong case!
"because profiling can increase crime while harming communities, it has a “high risk” of contravening the core police objectives of controlling crime and promoting public safety" Jack Glaser, Suspect Race: Causes and Consequence of Racial Profiling 96-126
"Nah, just casual skepticism."
skepticism = any questioning attitude towards unempirical knowledge or opinions/beliefs stated as facts, or doubt regarding claims that are taken for granted. You're not being skeptical, because the data I'm providing you IS empirical. You're just being close minded.
"I'm lead to that conclusion based on the whole "unless you believe this department with a known partisan perspective on race relations, you're a dumb conservative" things."
You've yet to show any evidence of 'partisan perspective on race relations' in the Ferguson report. Again, pure speculation!
"Someone should of told him questioning credibility is soooo weak"
Yeah, that's why he had substantial justifiable reasons to be opposed to the Iraq War. You, on the other hand, have 0 substance to your rejection of the Ferguson report. PROVE ME WRONG.
"Oh wow, so the evidence was fake after the fact? Huh. Crazy how that happens."
Yeah, and the evidence was suspect from the very start (hence Bernie Sanders rejecting the idea with arguments to back it up). You've provided 0 substance to your rejection of the Ferguson report. Face the STONE COLD TRUTH or prove me wrong.
"you seem to be flabbergasted that I could be skeptical of a partisan DOJ."
I'm not flabbergasted at all - I knew you were an idiot from the start!
The thing is, you're not skeptical. You're just rejecting it without justification. "I SAY THEY'RE NON-PARTISAN, THEREFORE ANY FINDINGS THEY HAVE CAN BE REJECTED WITHOUT ANY FURTHER JUSTIFICATION!!!"
No dude, no. You're an idiot.
Here's how the debate stands. I provided empirical data that the Ferguson Police Dept is racially biased in an unjust manner. I went through the evidence, described and assessed the methodology, and pointed out some damning evidence.
You said 'NUH UH, THEY'RE BIASED! NOT ME, THEY ARE! THIS REPORT HERE WAS BAD, THEREFORE ALL REPORTS ARE BAD!"
You're losing this debate, hard.
and I'm going to bed. Catch you in the morning faggot.
Statistically more so than whites, yes. There's a whole discussion as to WHY, which I know you racists hate, but the statistics are what they are.
"If the answer is yes, well, maybe police have a reason to be racist, eh? "
Which brings us to the discussion of WHY!
One of my original quotes...
"African Americans are more than twice as likely as white drivers to be searched during vehicle stops even after controlling for non-race based variables such as the reason the vehicle stop was initiated, but are found in possession of contraband 26% less often than white drivers, suggesting officers are impermissibly considering race as a factor when determining whether to search."
See, perfect example of racial bias proving INEFFECTIVE. Racial profiling has been assessed, and it doesn't have a strong case!
"because profiling can increase crime while harming communities, it has a “high risk” of contravening the core police objectives of controlling crime and promoting public safety" Jack Glaser, Suspect Race: Causes and Consequence of Racial Profiling 96-126
"Nah, just casual skepticism."
skepticism = any questioning attitude towards unempirical knowledge or opinions/beliefs stated as facts, or doubt regarding claims that are taken for granted. You're not being skeptical, because the data I'm providing you IS empirical. You're just being close minded.
"I'm lead to that conclusion based on the whole "unless you believe this department with a known partisan perspective on race relations, you're a dumb conservative" things."
You've yet to show any evidence of 'partisan perspective on race relations' in the Ferguson report. Again, pure speculation!
"Someone should of told him questioning credibility is soooo weak"
Yeah, that's why he had substantial justifiable reasons to be opposed to the Iraq War. You, on the other hand, have 0 substance to your rejection of the Ferguson report. PROVE ME WRONG.
"Oh wow, so the evidence was fake after the fact? Huh. Crazy how that happens."
Yeah, and the evidence was suspect from the very start (hence Bernie Sanders rejecting the idea with arguments to back it up). You've provided 0 substance to your rejection of the Ferguson report. Face the STONE COLD TRUTH or prove me wrong.
"you seem to be flabbergasted that I could be skeptical of a partisan DOJ."
I'm not flabbergasted at all - I knew you were an idiot from the start!
The thing is, you're not skeptical. You're just rejecting it without justification. "I SAY THEY'RE NON-PARTISAN, THEREFORE ANY FINDINGS THEY HAVE CAN BE REJECTED WITHOUT ANY FURTHER JUSTIFICATION!!!"
No dude, no. You're an idiot.
Here's how the debate stands. I provided empirical data that the Ferguson Police Dept is racially biased in an unjust manner. I went through the evidence, described and assessed the methodology, and pointed out some damning evidence.
You said 'NUH UH, THEY'RE BIASED! NOT ME, THEY ARE! THIS REPORT HERE WAS BAD, THEREFORE ALL REPORTS ARE BAD!"
You're losing this debate, hard.
and I'm going to bed. Catch you in the morning faggot.
#23 to #22
-
discobleach (17 hours ago) [-] that's what people want .
he's appealing to those who already hate islam, this will only make him stronger.
to republican voters.
when the general election comes around, he doesn't stand a chance.
he's appealing to those who already hate islam, this will only make him stronger.
to republican voters.
when the general election comes around, he doesn't stand a chance.
#65 to #64
-
discobleach (12 hours ago) [-] oh, i am fairly certain trump's campaign will last until the very end. he will annihilate all other republican candidates.
then he'll lose.
then he'll lose.
#68 to #65
-
chiselbit (12 hours ago) [-] Because the Dems have such strong opposition to throw against him? A literal communist who got run off his own stage and awoman with so many skeletons even the lib media are starting to get spooked thinking about them being brought up by Trump.
It sounds like you're expecting Trump to win a cage match with Russian bears then fall to malnourished dogs.
It sounds like you're expecting Trump to win a cage match with Russian bears then fall to malnourished dogs.
#150 to #101
-
chiselbit (11 hours ago) [-] But he doesn't get as much media as Trump, positive or negative. Source, Bernie himself
www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrdl0pyw5xk
www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrdl0pyw5xk
#69 to #68
-
discobleach (12 hours ago) [-] the odds are definitely not in his favor: it's not even close.
www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2016/winner
www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2016/winner
#73 to #70
-
discobleach (12 hours ago) [-] 25 different betting sites - their entire business is calculating odds - all consider Clinton about 3-4 times more likely to win that Trump. that's insignificant to you?
#76 to #75
-
discobleach (12 hours ago) [-] skeptical, sure.. but you seemed to be certain of the opposite, with no evidence to back that up
#27 to #23
-
youregaylol (15 hours ago) [-] It's nice to see two liberals hug each other for support.
Something tells me you're gonna need that on election day.
Something tells me you're gonna need that on election day.
#24 to #23
-
lolollo (17 hours ago) [-] The people who would like it...are already at the rally. The people who are on the fence over whether or not to vote for him aren't the sort of person to think "we'll I don't know about this guy...if only he were to do something really really racist..."
If you're impressing people who would already be voting for you, you gain nothing.
If you're impressing people who would already be voting for you, you gain nothing.
#81 to #20
-
sketchysketchist (12 hours ago) [-] Well it's like a klan meeting.
People who are already into the whole thing show up and bring friends who are potential supporters, then the huge crowd attracts more people because everyone likes doing the hip new thing, and they all work together to brainwash one another into believing what they're told to believe and tricked into thinking it's because they believe in it.
This is why many things like Feminism have exploded over the last decade.
People who are already into the whole thing show up and bring friends who are potential supporters, then the huge crowd attracts more people because everyone likes doing the hip new thing, and they all work together to brainwash one another into believing what they're told to believe and tricked into thinking it's because they believe in it.
This is why many things like Feminism have exploded over the last decade.
#195 to #190
-
sketchysketchist (9 hours ago) [-] I wasn't comparing trump's rally to KKK meetings.
I was comparing all political rallies to KKK meetings, thank you very much.
I was comparing all political rallies to KKK meetings, thank you very much.
#55 to #15
-
anon (13 hours ago) [-]
After seeing what I've seen, I don't believe it was staged or fake, but I don't think he was necessarily wrong with his actions.
I don't even get why liberals are making this a big deal.
If I went to Hillary's rally and started shouting " **** feminism" I'd honestly expect to get kicked out
I don't even get why liberals are making this a big deal.
If I went to Hillary's rally and started shouting " **** feminism" I'd honestly expect to get kicked out
#60
-
anon (13 hours ago) [-]
Trump is an asshole, but he is nowhere near as awful or manipulative as the mainstream media. He could open an orphanage and CNN would report it was Trump wanting people to abandon their kids.
#83 to #18
-
scorcho (12 hours ago) [-] truthfully, this whole bit of 'evidence' you're presenting is not only uncovincing, it is entirely without substance.
She wrote a guest column for a democrat supporting paper? About selling girl scout cookies?
Some jewish guy stood beside her at some point?
Oh right, that explains it all, of course.
The evidence is there, all you have to do is connect the dots.
Let's ignore the other people who are clearly part of the same protest, but are infact not getting thrown out.
It's all fake of course.
Seriously though, even by /pol/ standards, this is so incredibly flimsy, it's outright laughable.
She wrote a guest column for a democrat supporting paper? About selling girl scout cookies?
Some jewish guy stood beside her at some point?
Oh right, that explains it all, of course.
The evidence is there, all you have to do is connect the dots.
Let's ignore the other people who are clearly part of the same protest, but are infact not getting thrown out.
It's all fake of course.
Seriously though, even by /pol/ standards, this is so incredibly flimsy, it's outright laughable.
#7
-
pugglez (01/11/2016) [-] Seems like she had other friends there wearing the yellow star with the word "Muslim" on it. But for some reason, they weren't kicked out. I'm not a Trump fan by any means, but this post does bring up an interesting point.
#169
-
peanutpunk (10 hours ago) [-] www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0YBt_6HfbM
1.click link
2.thumb down video
3.upvote comment so everyone sees it
4.upvote content so everyone sees it
5.profit
1.click link
2.thumb down video
3.upvote comment so everyone sees it
4.upvote content so everyone sees it
5.profit
#1
-
whitegamedeveloper (01/11/2016) [-] **whitegamedeveloper used "*roll picture*"**
**whitegamedeveloper rolled image** The left wing lying?
They're the same in Europe funny enough.
**whitegamedeveloper rolled image** The left wing lying?
They're the same in Europe funny enough.
#77
-
drpenguinz (12 hours ago) [-] every proof deleted and you show us an empty page
you could have said anything...like "comments said trump is the leader of the illuminati and then suspiciously comments were disabled..."
yeah...no, thats not how it works.
you could have said anything...like "comments said trump is the leader of the illuminati and then suspiciously comments were disabled..."
yeah...no, thats not how it works.
#72
-
rmoran (12 hours ago) [-] Disabling user comments is one of the biggest giveaways that you're full of **** . Having moderated (approval-only) comments is even worse.
#88
-
anon (12 hours ago) [-]
Most all the negative media about trump is faked though...
Seriously. It's really funny when you watch the debates expecting him to make a complete ass out of himself and speak about retarded **** . It's quite disappointing really... He's actually a better candidate than the others from what I've watched.
I wish billy mays was here to run for president.
Seriously. It's really funny when you watch the debates expecting him to make a complete ass out of himself and speak about retarded **** . It's quite disappointing really... He's actually a better candidate than the others from what I've watched.
I wish billy mays was here to run for president.
#57
-
anon (13 hours ago) [-]
Anyone protesting at any rally/event (having any negative sign/cutout or otherwise making a scene) is normally removed from that rally/event.
Woman wants to protest, she does so in a moderate fashion, and is removed from the rally in a very peaceful way. of ******* course supporters yelled at her on the way out, its the way people who attend rallies react.
Seems to me like an open and shut case that the news media ran with to stir **** up (shocker)... I don't get why it had to have been "faked"
Woman wants to protest, she does so in a moderate fashion, and is removed from the rally in a very peaceful way. of ******* course supporters yelled at her on the way out, its the way people who attend rallies react.
Seems to me like an open and shut case that the news media ran with to stir **** up (shocker)... I don't get why it had to have been "faked"
#11
-
anon (21 hours ago) [-]
He kicks the assholes out of his rallies. I could vote for him if he ran the country the same way.
#34
-
nanako ONLINE (15 hours ago) [-] the guy next to her is a very vocal jewish sjw.
they were both just there to cause trouble
they were both just there to cause trouble
#49 to #34
-
jokexplain ONLINE (13 hours ago) [-] We finally found the cause to unite jews and muslims
they both hate the trump
they both hate the trump
#25
-
animesource ONLINE (16 hours ago) [-]
You don't have to do good things. You just need to be known. When people go to vote they'll be like "woah we have 30 candidates? Who are they all? I know about Trump, lets vote for him then".
#59 to #25
-
severepwner (13 hours ago) [-] Quite true. From time to time I might ask people: "What about Ben Carson? Or that female candidate? What's their deal?" But I don't feel like I ever get a straight answer. Considering their under the radar status, that probably highly impacts their electability.
But, voting doesn't matter anyway.
But, voting doesn't matter anyway.
