Total posts: 19,931
Posted in:
"It's okay to be armed and defend yourself against other armed people, even shooting to kill"
"oh sorry, not if you're a BLM protester"
Created:
Posted in:
People have a right to resist vigilante justice.
Exactly, that's why everyone who reacted to Kyle was correct.
Sick of this double standard.
Created:
Posted in:
Because nobody is stupid enough to approach guys armed like this:
Created:
Posted in:
I'd bet a huge proportion of my entire income and anything I own that in this situation, right-wing people would react far worse than those guys did.
I am extremely sure that if he'd approached a group of Trump supporters at a protest (such as during the January Riots) he'd have been brutally gunned down ASAP and made an example of. He's extremely lucky the guys didn't actually fire at him fast preemptively and gave him a chance to disarm. Fucktard.
Created:
Posted in:
What emotion should he show? Should he shed tears just for show? Not everyone processes sadness the same way.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
zone 4 is 1 each
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
Monsters huh? What the fuck do you think a guy who murders two people by shooting them multiple times like it's a video game is and kept shooting others?
Was he a police officer? Was he the fire brigade? Was he military?
No, he's a 17 year old whose mother was so neglectful that she didn't know her own son had easy access to a weapon barely any American citizen should be wielding under any circumstance and it scared the shit out of the people he approached because, after all, it's exactly the kind of weapon a mass-shooter would bring there if they pre-planned to gun people down.
So, the people react. Not even overreact, they react. In response to being asked to disarm and hold his hands up, he holds onto the gun and tries to run away but if he runs away and they let him, he can then turn around too far away to easily combat with pistols and gun down masses.
Put yourself in the fucking shoes of the people who tried to disarm him. Don't for one second twist this into 'but hurrr durrrr you either want to smash property and support everything looters do or you back Kyle' because it isn't that simple at all. What is simple is seeing how it is absolutely straightforward to empathise with the dead guys.
And as for Ramshutu saying this guy is so traumatised.
Is this trauma? What happens when the mask slips?
You know who was smiling without shame or trying to mask it before they were slaughtered by a vigilante lunatic?
^ These images are used by right wing news
You should be fucking ashamed what you are defending. Let's play this game then, justify the murders.
Tell me how the guys taking the stand have no emotion because they're so fucking sad and nervous that they give deadpan deliveries while kyle is smirking and working with no less than white supremacists to secure his victory. Scumbag.
I don't sympathise, I don't like him and I would be disgusted with myself if I pandered to you guys just to blend in with this forum crowd.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
I had 8 points at the end. Disc had 7. Same ranking, different amount.
Created:
-->
@Barney
just like before, I don't understand it and am impervious to it. I remembered it somewhat but even this time, I instinctively checked the sources for the wooden teeth.
In fact, when they said the slave part I was less concerned with checking, not more concerned, since I didn't care as much as what the overall point was leading to since I'd forgotted the exact point they make.
Created:
-->
@Tradesecret
Pretty dangerous path to go down if you'd kill your own offspring because your imaginary friend compelled you to do so.
If I were Adolf Hitler's mother, I wouldn't do it even if God blackmailed me. Why did God put me in that position and how do I know I'm not just becoming psychotic and schizophrenic thinking another entity with supreme power compelled me to murder my offspring?
It's an unbelievably extreme error in judgement to slaughter and betray your own family because some voice in your head told you to.
Created:
Posted in:
I am against the idea of cancel culture in the same way that I'm against the concept on which prison is based.
Some people think 'it went too far' here and there, I vehemently think that retribution itself is an illusion and in fact coming to terms with that is a huge step for anyone like myself that suffered with anger and had to really take it head-on if they were to improve themselves. I know the dark side of cancel culture and peer-based retribution.
That said, I understand the thesis on which that approach is based and as someone from quite a left-wing upbringing and background, I am among family members who are very pro-cancel-culture but who also see exactly the issue with what you said, depending on the scenario.
The first and foremost line to draw between your two scenarios is that the person who has transitioned is neither completely lying (because even if they truly appear like another biological sex, if they are in a situation where someone would refer to them as their former-presented-gender, it means they are inevitably open about their born sex). The offensive poster often will try to hide the evidence, it's often screenshots made by others that come to haunt them (they can be fabricated but then the social media platform can get involved and trace things in their database time-wise to verify so falsely saying it's faked is somewhat a gamble because if it's severe and big-scale enough, the social media platform will oblige investigation but if you're just about lowkey enough for the drama not to surface to a severe level, then you can probably get away with the lie but it's foolish because you're most likely dealing with someone who has a series of honest screenshots and other encounters, reducing the likelihood they'd fabricate specifically for you).
The second line to draw is the confirmation of change. We can confirm someone transitioned gender literally by what they ask to be identified as (no, not some transphobic troll who does it for the lols, I mean in real life where nobody transitions for the lols). In contrast, many sociopathic types of people or even just normal people towards the sociopathic and/or narcissistic end of the spectrum will rather put a lot of effort into faking having changed as a person rather than ever really change. In fact, it's easy to understand why. If you were a genuine racist, sexist, sadist (who verbally bullied to depths you shouldn't have) or something along those lines and you personally fully believe the person you verbally abused deserved it, you wouldn't really be 'sorry' you'd just feel bad you said the toxic things on a platform that left proof which you hadn't foreseen. It's even more likely to occur when the exact type of toxic user meets a more cunning equally toxic user. Sociopaths and narcissists make brilliant baiters and cajolers for one another, oftentimes it was someone just as toxic who baited the other and took the screenshots, relishing in how they ruined the other person's career prospects and even life in general if their own family and friends 'cancel' them. In general, when very kind people read or receive abuse their instinct is to block the other user and tell only one or maximum two people they care about. On the other hand, when a particularly toxic individual reads or receives text and/or video that they feel is offensive and out of order, they'll relish in not only handling things so the person can't continue to abuse them but knowing that everyone in their local area (and hopefully local area of the abusive texter) knows about it. It's the natural way things go, if an abuser meets someone who is just as bitter and angry, then inevitably the clash will not remain bloodless on at least one of their reputations.
When you ask about the latter aspect of cancel culture, you are talking about what very often is one-on-one 'ha, got a screenshot now let me expose you' ethos. When you refer to the cancel culture that punishes people that misgender others and are transphobic, you tend to refer to people who may well be bitter and angry but who are morally motivated to defend someone that is being intentionally hurt and taunted.
So, I'm not denying that cancel culture isn't fair because it refuses to forgive. That isn't what I'm doing here at all. I'm saying to you that often the biggest examples of it involved an abuser who was an asshole and a recipient who wasn't the nicest guy/girl/genderfluid in the world either. That doesn't make what happened right. Abusive posts are abusive and the exposing of the abuser and cancelling of them is not at all a necessarily wrong thing primarily because we don't know if they really changed or are just going for the path of least resistance and pretending to have changed.
Created:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
i will get second or joint third now
Created:
I made this move thinking disc will do something very different. Whatever, gg Supa
Created:
this is what you spend your spare time doing man
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
@Double_R
Actually bmdrocks has a point.
Let's see what we say when it's a prison guard, movie director, more powerful actor or college professor who would do that with an underling they have power over.
There's many instanced especially with sex where we realise that consent is able to be manufactured if the one doing the initation and pressuring to continue is in a position of power over the one they engage sexually with.
The underling inherently has reasons to go along with due to implied consequences vs rewards and this is where their decision to engage sexually can seem consensual to them when that consent is very iffy. There's also reasons to fear accusing a man that powerful of any kind of coercion, even 20 years later. He'd get away with it now if she said different, after all.
We can't talk shit about Trump and what he does with women while being married if we don't hold Bill Clinton under the same scrutiny, Lewinsky isn't the only woman he has supposedly engaged with just the only confirmed one he had repeated encounters with.
Created:
He accidentally kept the zone 5 plus for me, that's just 3, I didn't add more in round 2
Created:
Posted in:
I agree, in fact it's a big problem that they ever let looters become interwoven with the core BLM cause. Looting is vandalism, theft and paints an image of their race they badly want to remove. They do a disservice to all of their race who don't participate in the looting when they riot and steal.
Indeed, it would have given a far strong positions of superiority over the scumbags that broke into the white house and even manslaughtered a cop as well as four of their own had the protests surrounding George Floyd not involved rioters and looters such as the caucasian YouTube phemonenon Jake Paul.
I would not be surprised if some got paid on the downlow by white supremacists to intentionally sabotage and incite that to make the riots become worse than they were. I don't just mean George Floyd, though this time around in terms of shop-rioting the UK ones were tame (slaver statues were attacked though).
I feel the same thing is happening to rap.
You have raps like this:
and raps like this:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
anarchism is an opposition to unjust hierarchies and illegimate goverence, with a focus on equality
It opposes legitimate governance because anything legitimate is legitimised by a legal system and in anarchy there is only morality, not law. Equality is impossible in anarchy, there's no government to enforce it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
And no - not quite - there has actually been quite a few anarchistic societies which didn't go like that, a lot of times they're overrun by other nations...at least, bigger one's are
of course they are, anarchy is dysfunctional and incompetent at any kind of long term warfare with a non-anarchic faction.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
we are all monsters beneath the skin - undemonstratable - humans are typically empathetic as a part of biological evolution and as a social species in whole. While they do, at times, take advantage of others and ignore suffering for profit - most people get mad at that - because most humans, don't like that.
hence why anarchy is undesirable to most now. We evolved away from enjoying it because those that thrived in anarchy ended up outreproduced in the long run as either they died young with a thug/junkie lifestyle or they lived long enough but were pushed aside by society for their antisocial ways.
Every single instance of anarchy ended up undesirable in the long run as people evolved past their bloodthirsty tribal era of human sociological evolution and then outcasted the most brutish anarchic types (via 'laws' after all). Similarly, in Africa and South America in particular, you will find that the tribes that lasted longest and weren't wiped out were the most open to negotiate and get along peacefully with those that showed up. The tribes that fought the hardest and operated without any respect for rules and peace ended up the most harshly targetted by the colonists.
Created:
Posted in:
Regardless of his reasoning, it is 100% illegal that he had that gun at that time and was even there to threaten people in the first place.
It is also self-defense how the others reacted to him having an AR-15 blatantly preparing to gun them down.
How are people saying he acted in self defence when the guys he shot actually were wielding their pistols and trying to disarm him in their own self-defence in the first place?
I have seen some of the trial, I think Kyle may be a clinical sociopath bordering on psychopathy, he appears to have no genuine deep emotions even giggling/smirking at times in a trial where he should be scared shit and deadly serious even if he believes he's totally innocent (such as in response to the video game question). He even feigned crying and panicking only to instantaneously relax when needed.
This appears to me to be someone deeply disturbed and what he did that day was murder (borderline premeditated), nothing less.
I am not at all saying I don't understand, I've always been a sympathiser for home defenders who kill in hyper defense of their home, I never understand why there's even a law about it. If someone's in my house uninvited and a potential threat to me and my roommates/family, I will take a knife and kill if need be no hesitation other than knowing what the law is and wanting to be proportional to their weaponry and aggression, I'd let them go if they ran but the moment they reach for something I'm willing to do time if need be (I shouldn't do any time for it, however I'd need to convince a jury they reached for a weapon and that I attacked preemptively before they could wield it to stop it being a fight they can win and that's very grey area legally). I understand that panic and mentality, however if I go somewhere else armed with something I shouldn't be and others defend against me, I can't play the fucking victim if I murder them in cold blood.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
If an undocumented immigrant wants to use their 2nd amendment right to protect from a tyrannical government (like ICE), I would support that.
This is where your post lost the plot.
While I don't support a brutal approach to illegal immigration (I prioritise integration over 'elimination'), I cannot fathom how you think the 2nd amendment would cover this, let alone the other things you mentioned.
If America had pro-life laws and someone wanted an abortion are you saying that shooting the cops down that enforce the law is 2nd amendment?
I agree with what Benjamin said but I also think that, in practise, the 2nd amendment is no longer about the government. You need a gun to defend against lunatics who can legally and also easily illegally get guns in the US these days. I resent that being the reality but it is the reality nonetheless.
It doesn't make me a hypocrite to say I'd own a gun if I had to, in the US. I'd try my level best not to need to though. It's the same as saying I'd own and practise with a blade of some kind whether I was a peasant or a Samurai, in oldschool Japan. I'm a person who prioritises defense over anything.
I have educated myself on how hackers and such get information and do what they do. I never use it for black hat purposes, I use it to better protect myself and anyone close to me who will take my advice, against hackers.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I'll do it but I want it the same map, nothing different.
Created:
Posted in:
Veterans should always vote left-wing because they are elderly and deemed useless to the economy by right-wing policies, even if the particular right-wing candidate sympathises with them.
There is no scenario where left-wing policy hurts vets more than right-wing and many scenarios where it helps them more, this is due to them ultimately being more needy than they are productive, which is seen as not valuable in the eyes of the right-wing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
@Dr.Franklin
The Rothschilds are as right-wing as it gets, as are the VIPs... So, I'm confused.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
That answered nothing.
Created:
Posted in:
I would typically oppose your take here but regarding the US, specifically, this seems to be the case.
Created:
Posted in:
but pfizer, moderna and J&J are approved, why isn't AZ? US officially agrees to work with AZ and export on its behalf.
so, my question isn't about big pharma, it's about the competition to big pharma, a non-profit campaign by AZ.
Created:
Posted in:
The US will share up to 60 million doses of its AstraZeneca vaccine with other countries as they become available, the White House has said.The doses will be able to be exported in the coming months after a federal safety review.The US has a stockpile of the vaccine even though its regulators have not yet authorised it for public use.Critics have accused the government of hoarding the vaccine, while other countries are in desperate need.Last month President Joe Biden pledged to share about four million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine with Mexico and Canada - both of which have approved the jab.The crisis in India has also piled pressure on the Biden administration to share US health resources.On Monday, the White House said it expected that about 10 million doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine could be released when the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) finishes its review in the coming weeks.It said that another 50 million doses were in various stages of production.At a news briefing, White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki said FDA officials would carry out quality checks on doses before they were exported."Our team will share more details about our planning and who will be receiving offers from here, but we're in the planning process at this point in time," she added.The US has already announced that it will provide raw materials for Indian vaccine manufacturers as the country battles a devastating surge in cases.In a "warm and positive" phone call with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday, President Biden promised more emergency assistance "including oxygen-related supplies, vaccine materials and therapeutics", a White House statement said.Washington is also looking at supplying oxygen, Covid tests, personal protective equipment (PPE) and the antiviral drug remdesivir to India's health service.The FDA has so far authorised three vaccines against Covid- 19 - Pfizer BioNTech, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson (Janssen). Experts say it looks likely that these will provide all the country's needs and the AstraZeneca jab may not be needed.According to the latest figures, more than 53% of adults have so far received at least one dose of vaccine.
Created:
Posted in:
"It's appalling the way AstraZeneca has been treated. I wouldn't blame them if they were thoroughly fed up and decided to bow out of the Covid vaccine business."That was the view from one of the biggest institutional investors in the UK.It's not a view the pharmaceutical giant and its talismanic boss Pascal Soriot would have expected to hear, having developed a safe, effective vaccine at breakneck speed, signing contracts to deliver nearly two billion doses and doing it all without making a profit.Mr Soriot could be forgiven perhaps for thinking he would be getting a medal.Instead he is getting brickbats from EU politicians like Belgian MEP Philippe Lamberts, who has accused the company of dishonesty and arrogance, in the way he alleges, it has "over-promised and under-delivered".Some are suggesting that the whole endeavour has been more trouble than it is worth.AstraZeneca has foregone over $20bn (£14.5bn) in revenue, while becoming a household name in the EU and the US for all the wrong reasons.Some investors have even questioned Pascal Soriot's position as chief executive.Astra has become a political football in a European blame game.One minute his compatriot, the French President Emmanuel Macron, is describing the vaccine as "quasi-ineffective", and the next, President Macron is volunteering to have the jab himself and backing a move to block exports outside the EU.
Based on what I read, AZ is worldwide the best option, especially for poorer nations. If you have issues either with blood clotting or blood retention then don't take it but otherwise it should be fine. I am not here to speak against Pfizer and Moderna but I'll do so against Pfizer if need be as I deeply resent how they've been blackmailing countries to take liability and cover their (Pfizer's) full legal fees even having military base locations as collateral (yes, really).
Why are some countries so anti-AZ?
Created:
Posted in:
To back its claim to forgo profits from the $1.2 billion collaboration in the United States, Astra has even granted the government access to financial accounts related to the venture, according to Dobber.
“There are very clear milestones before they are going to pay. Because we made the promise to manufacture the vaccine at no profit, auditors of the U.S. administration will get free access to our accounting books,” he said.
I am sorry for US, a country that is making and collaborating with AZ yet refusing to release it to their own people.
AZ is currently the only international vaccine that is fundamentally running on a non-profit agenda with academic motives.
If I were in US, I'd go with J&J as the 'lesser evil' but yeah, that's just weird.
Created:
Posted in:
This is an entirely optional survey for everybody on DART to participate in. If you don't want to, that's totally fine.
- Are you vaccinated (or getting vaccinated very soon, no need to specify which), whether you are or aren't please state why (if it's a 'no' due to rare immunodeficiency disease you don't need to specify which just say health-related)?
recently/soon, yes but until very recently I wasn't open to the idea. I have been continually pressured/encouraged by close family members to get it and while I personally am not in a group or status that will die from Covid (very sure of that, though my family said otherwise out of paranoia), I am someone who reacts terribly to the fatigue and tax-on-body that brutal disease fights take. I'm a tough guy, don't get me wrong, however my quality of life would significantly go down if I had the 'long covid' kind of effects that people can get who don't die from it.
I already suffer from chronic fatigue (not officially diagnosed with CFS but without caffeine and a mild antidepressant I'd be a groggy, bitter/tired guy all the time, I don't think that it's curable, it's just how I was wired post-puberty, I didn't need caffeine to function well or cope before I turned around 18-19 but at 19 it really hit me and has remained with me since). I don't want that kind of suffering of not being able to go for a walk without being exhausted, I have a minimal level of health to not be called useless/unhealthy but I'm not at all a very fit guy, I live mainly on computer (both for work and play) and I would hate that if even that tired me out significantly, life just would be a pain to live through.
- Which vaccine, why that vaccine?
Astrazeneca
The reason why is because I'm paranoid about mRNA but want to protect myself, I'm actually in an age band and health status that I'd be recommended to get Pfizer and/or Moderna rather than that.
AZ was actually developed in a university for motives not related to corporate profit entirely at all (but partly profit-based, yes). It is also far more liable than Pfizer and Moderna for what can happen to it legally and officially if its vaccine is proven to result in severe harm that could have been foreseen.
- Do you support vaccine mandates?
I am moderate/neutral on mandates for professions that directly deal with customers (for the employees) but for the general population beyond that, I am absolutely against mandates. I believe that anyone who is pro-mandate ought first to make all politicians and their bodyguards take the vaccine then and prove it by showing their app-verification or certificate or something. This will help alleviate paranoid people on why the powerful aren't proving they took it.
I do not support the mandate on a legal level (as opposed to company-level), regardless.
- Do you believe Covid is a left-wing conspiracy?
No, I think China is hypercapitalistic in fact and that if anything was involved it was right-wing oriented entirely.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I think I understand a bit more about the game now, though.
I already knew that everything revolved around excess points, if you spent more than 5 points where you didn't physically get points for that spending (so 5 excess is okay, any more is not) you were not going to win.
However, because it's 3-1-0, winning a zone matters 3 times as much as securing 2nd place, making the 5 points excess essential to gamble exceeding if you want to win.
This contradiction makes it very much dependent on guessing what others will do if you are to secure victory and that takes multiple iterations with the same people.
If I were to rematch these 2, I'd start in a 3-3-2 formation, exactly like I did the first time around. Then, in Round 2, I will merely make the 2 into a 3 and use my remaining 3 to either position in somebody else's stack who is low (forcing them to need to push more the next Round, Supadudz would more likely be a target for this than Oromagi) or if everyone had at least 3 in their things, I'd put 2 in one without any, to secure that 1, and then 1 on one of my 3's to make it into a 4 (because I'll end up needing to do that anyway).
The aim is to win 3 zones and have 1 while negating an extra 1 point for the opponent that is ahead.
The lesser aim is to never win less than 2 zones and never have less than 4 extra if only 2 zones are owned, which is the same overall score and is optimal if the other 2 are hyper-defenders/attackers investing into winning zones.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
It amuses me that you can be so virulently opposed to British colonists but not to the Spanish, Portuguese and other colonists that brutally raped and pillaged while forming what is now the US.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
just like when people say they’re not anti Covid vaxx, they’re pro freedom!
This actually is a genuine stance to take and furthermore there's currently four vaccinations being used (actually I think a fifth one is out and about) within the US. I am perplexed at why people think it's okay to blackmail people to be guinea pigs to a vaccine that already more than enough humans have taken for the human-trial phase of the vaccine to complete (which it never did, due to time constraints). We need to see if it in any way harms people and if it harms offspring that were conceived post-vaccine as these are actually specifically where those that have concerns are saying the harms are plausibly at.
You can pretend and twist anything but it is 100% pro-freedom to oppose blackmailed vaccination when the vaccines are still in their preliminary stages.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@949havoc
4. In an undergraduate philosophy course, the professor, discovering I was religious, declared a personal challenge to me, in class, in front of other students, that by the end of the course, I would be an atheist like him. To me, the professor's position was radical.
This is a very toxic thing to do. Everything else you mentioned is somewhat understandable craziness (I am not sure exactly what the tiger scenario was) but this is just direct toxicity. Even if that teacher believed it, this is the type of thing to say in private to you if you're a student he feels he can be candid and/or have a bit of banter with. To directly do this to you is disrespectful on many levels because it implies that every other Theist in the room was more respected in their faith than you.
Created:
Posted in:
If you weren't aware, Shakespeare was popular in Scotland in the years that followed. Macbeth was actually based on a Scottish King.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@949havoc
People in Scotland don't really dislike the association with Shakespeare as a British icon even if originally England was separate from Scotland. I doubt this offended anyone.
Created:
Posted in:
So why didn't Trump use the FBI to arrest Hillary for possessing the pee tape?
Because he has tax fraud he's had the FBI turn a blind eye to and can't admit he hired prostitutes without putting himself in trouble (pee tape involved that) so he couldn't use the FBI, who had agents salivating to take him down for what I don't doubt are many white collar crimes.
Created:
Posted in:
Putin approves of anything that can destroy the US unless it can harm him. If the unfolding of things that imply Clinton to have framed Trump with Russia ends up long-term not being likely to harm Putin's reputation itself, Putin will completely support it regardless of whether or not he originally supported Trump.
To answer the question 'does Putin approve' ask yourself whether or not it will end up harming Putin and if that's a 'not' then ask yourself if it will harm the US; if that's a yes, you have definite approval.
Created:
Posted in:
If I had played as defensive and logical as Oromagi did, we'd both have been doomed with supa having total dominance of the playing field. This is the fatal flaw of Oromagi's approach, it always guarantees defeat if someone else takes that approach while the third person does not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
yes you should definitely allow diplomacy. Otherwise I would have won if i went full thug mode and refused to negotiate Zone 7 after Oromagi turned up there. we'd both just have added 2 to it and 1 and supa would have had free reign to win (except for some reason he put 2 into it, lol).
The entire problem with this game is the 0 point vs 3 point dynamic.
It should be 3-2-1 or 2-1-0 not 3-1-0 that's totally toxic and gambling oriented.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Russia didn't get its 'finger burnt', you don't understand, it played both sides and went with the winner. Taliban doesn't hate Russia at all, in fact Russia set contracts on some US troops for the Afghani militants to attack but you only know surface-level stuff so I don't care.
Created:
Posted in:
I believe Jesus should send me to hell so that I can gain the approval of Satan. This seems like a rational way to teach wrongdoers how to gain the approval of God.
After all, Satan is just God's alter ego.
Created:
Posted in:
The right wing media employs criminals to get its intel, that's all I've gotten from it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
Are you an expert on Russia? Probably not.
Compared to you I probably am. The fact you made this thread without feeling sick and ashamed at the guy you're defending tells me you either are that type of person that he is and in on it or you're a victim of his propaganda. The only way to de-victimise yourself is through your own research.
The only thing I'd gain by spoonfeeding you stuff that hurts Putin's reputation is risking my life if I ever somehow end up in Russia or with Russian authorities and also you saying 'but your source is biased against Russia'. Everyone should be biased against Russia because Russia doesn't 'play ball' it only looks out for Putin (not even Russia, Putin). Putin's agenda is literally to keep himself and his cronies in power and then die, he doesn't give a shit beyond that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Benjamin
By what measure? Economy? Military? Diplomatic relations?
Economically less so, the latter 2 certainly but you see Russia does it very cleverly, it plays 'defender' rather than 'attacker' to corrupt/evil regimes in general. So, its sins appear to be benevolent such as how it helped Assad.
Created:
Posted in:
RM, when are you going to stop raging on behalf of the machine?
When your crew realise you are the machine. You are a tax avoidant cryptocurrency expert milking the system, this isn't ad hominem you have proudly identified yourself as that.
You are the machine, you are the 'corporate lobbyist' type just without the corporation part, you care only about your own greed and cheating the system you are meant to be a part of. I don't resent that actually because you aren't in power, I may do the same if I was as sure I could make it in the crypto market though I'd feel ashamed and probably use some of my wealth for helping others (at least my own family which I don't know if you do or don't).
You call it 'theft' when the others take from the earners but what is inheritance then? If you support unlimited inheritance what part of that money was earned by the recipient?
Created:
Posted in:
Neither party stopped construction of the border wall.
It's one of the few times Republicans did an actual promise, rather than only running anti-Democrat, yet the promise was so absurd and asinine it couldn't be upheld and only a fool would think it could.
The promise was not that the wall would be built alone but that Trump would get Mexico to pay for it. This is the literal, genuine promise (one of the only promises that was tangible) in the campaign of Trump.
Created: