Advertisement

by Lady Scylla » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:22 am
Valrifell wrote:Hexgard wrote:
Mainly because a lot of the vocal anti-Trumpers are total hypocrites. They preach anti-racism, yet a pro-Trump latino gets called a "race traitor", they preach peace yet I have seen enough footage of them beating people up bloody, some even barely of legal age, they preach equality and democracy, but hold up signs blaming "white women" for Trump winning (at the so called Women's March, aka Women Against Trump).
Let us not forget, speaking of the Women Against Trump march and their hypocrisy, it is enough said how one of their main figures and co-chair is an islamist and fundamentalist.
https://web.archive.org/web/20170126231 ... 1513401344
You see, that's the problem with a group so huge. There's gonna be a few bad apples in there who are gonna make the rest of them look bad.
Don't let one bad apple spoil the whole bunch, that's disingenuous.

by Lady Scylla » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:23 am
Great Confederacy Of Commonwealth States wrote:Hexgard wrote:
Mainly because a lot of the vocal anti-Trumpers are total hypocrites. They preach anti-racism, yet a pro-Trump latino gets called a "race traitor", they preach peace yet I have seen enough footage of them beating people up bloody, some even barely of legal age, they preach equality and democracy, but hold up signs blaming "white women" for Trump winning (at the so called Women's March, aka Women Against Trump).
Let us not forget, speaking of the Women Against Trump march and their hypocrisy, it is enough said how one of their main figures and co-chair is an islamist and fundamentalist.
https://web.archive.org/web/20170126231 ... 1513401344
Well, I'm anti-Trump, I participated in the Women's March. I didn't beat anyone to a pulp, I didn't call anyone a race traitor, and I didn't blame anyone specifically for Trump winning.
Now, how does your argument hold up?

by Lady Scylla » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:27 am

by Washington Resistance Army » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:28 am
Lady Scylla wrote:Valrifell wrote:
You see, that's the problem with a group so huge. There's gonna be a few bad apples in there who are gonna make the rest of them look bad.
Don't let one bad apple spoil the whole bunch, that's disingenuous.
And then you've got the Black Bloc, who have been growing in numbers, but aren't associated with the movement. Their sole goal is to cause havoc and anarchy. They get lumped up with the crowd they're in.

by Tyrassueb » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:29 am
Washington Resistance Army wrote:Lady Scylla wrote:
And then you've got the Black Bloc, who have been growing in numbers, but aren't associated with the movement. Their sole goal is to cause havoc and anarchy. They get lumped up with the crowd they're in.
They aren't even good at causing havoc. Breaking Starbucks windows and flipping over garbage cans just makes you look like a moron.

by Corrian » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:30 am
Lady Scylla wrote:Looks like China is eyeing the top slot

by Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:30 am
Lady Scylla wrote:Great Confederacy Of Commonwealth States wrote:Well, I'm anti-Trump, I participated in the Women's March. I didn't beat anyone to a pulp, I didn't call anyone a race traitor, and I didn't blame anyone specifically for Trump winning.
Now, how does your argument hold up?
I'm not even a Democrat, I don't even like the Democrats.

by Ifreann » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:49 am
Colbert Super PAC wrote:Russia sold a 19.5% stake in Rosneft to unknown buyers. Now what does this have to do with Trump, you might ask?
Well, the Trump dossier published by Buzzfeed mentions on page 30: "In terms of the substance of their discussion, SECHIN's associate said that the Rosneft President was so keen to lift personal and corporate western sanctions imposed on the company, that he offered PAGE/TRUMP's associates the brokerage of up to a 19 per cent (privatised) stake in Rosneft in return. PAGE had expressed interest and confirmed that were TRUMP elected US president, then sanctions on Russia would be lifted."
Now I'm not saying that Putin bribed Trump & Co. in order to get him to lift the sanctions on Russia, I'm just pointing out that that's what alot of people are saying, some very smart, very reputable people, the best people! And if so many people feel it to be true, well then it has to be. (That was a joke, in case you couldn't tell.)

by Internationalist Bastard » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:51 am
Sec. 5. Enforcement Priorities. In executing faithfully the immigration laws of the United States, the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) shall prioritize for removal those aliens described by the Congress in sections 212(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(6)(C), 235, and 237(a)(2) and (4) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(6)(C), 1225, and 1227(a)(2) and (4)), as well as removable aliens who:
(a) Have been convicted of any criminal offense;
(b) Have been charged with any criminal offense, where such charge has not been resolved;
(c) Have committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense;
(d) Have engaged in fraud or willful misrepresentation in connection with any official matter or application before a governmental agency;
(e) Have abused any program related to receipt of public benefits;
(f) Are subject to a final order of removal, but who have not complied with their legal obligation to depart the United States; or
(g) In the judgment of an immigration officer, otherwise pose a risk to public safety or national security

by Philjia » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:54 am
Lady Scylla wrote:Great Confederacy Of Commonwealth States wrote:Well, I'm anti-Trump, I participated in the Women's March. I didn't beat anyone to a pulp, I didn't call anyone a race traitor, and I didn't blame anyone specifically for Trump winning.
Now, how does your argument hold up?
I'm not even a Democrat, I don't even like the Democrats.

by Ifreann » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:55 am
Internationalist Bastard wrote:I'm not liking some of these immigration reforms likeSec. 5. Enforcement Priorities. In executing faithfully the immigration laws of the United States, the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) shall prioritize for removal those aliens described by the Congress in sections 212(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(6)(C), 235, and 237(a)(2) and (4) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(6)(C), 1225, and 1227(a)(2) and (4)), as well as removable aliens who:
(a) Have been convicted of any criminal offense;
(b) Have been charged with any criminal offense, where such charge has not been resolved;
(c) Have committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense;
(d) Have engaged in fraud or willful misrepresentation in connection with any official matter or application before a governmental agency;
(e) Have abused any program related to receipt of public benefits;
(f) Are subject to a final order of removal, but who have not complied with their legal obligation to depart the United States; or
(g) In the judgment of an immigration officer, otherwise pose a risk to public safety or national security
Like, I'm notmgood at Legalese, but doesn't this basically mean that all someone has to do is claim an alien commited a crime and they can get deported?

by The East Marches » Fri Jan 27, 2017 6:59 am
Lady Scylla wrote:Looks like China is eyeing the top slot

by Genivaria » Fri Jan 27, 2017 7:02 am
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, chaired by theoretical physicist and actual atheist Lawrence M. Krauss, announced today that President Donald Trump’s actions have moved the group’s “Doomsday Clock” to two and a half minutes ‘til midnight.

by Bakery Hill » Fri Jan 27, 2017 7:08 am
Genivaria wrote:K So THIS fucking happened.The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, chaired by theoretical physicist and actual atheist Lawrence M. Krauss, announced today that President Donald Trump’s actions have moved the group’s “Doomsday Clock” to two and a half minutes ‘til midnight.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyat ... -midnight/

by Bakery Hill » Fri Jan 27, 2017 7:10 am

by Bakery Hill » Fri Jan 27, 2017 7:13 am

by Hurdergaryp » Fri Jan 27, 2017 7:16 am


by The East Marches » Fri Jan 27, 2017 7:16 am
Genivaria wrote:Bakery Hill wrote:Coz you seem to be giving it some importance.
Rather than a bunch of theoretical physicists giving their opinion on foreign policy with a shiny prop in the background.
'opinion' yeah okay sure.
It's not like these kind of people know what they're talking about or anything because all opinions are equal right?

by Hurdergaryp » Fri Jan 27, 2017 7:17 am


by Chestaan » Fri Jan 27, 2017 7:17 am
Yeah I don't think we can see he really knows what he's talking about!Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Chum Chum, Democratic Kingdom of South India, Gotland and Oland, Josorrenevadero, Kewelsburg, New yugoslavaia, Saarland-Westpalia, The Galactic Supremacy, The Sernetian Empire, Valrifell, Vilosia
Advertisement