Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,287,000 Posts!
Poker ForumFTR Community

**** Elections thread *****

Page 92 of 111 FirstFirst ... 42829091929394102 ... LastLast
Results 6,826 to 6,900 of 8309
  1. #6826
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    The media are mostly left wing, but they'll say it's Islamic terrorism. The BBC are quoting the Spanish leader as calling the Barcelona attackers "jihadists". That's hardly apologetic.
    I don't know about the BBC but I do know CNN. Blitzer just finished calling the Barcelona terrorists copycat killers of the Charlottesville killer. Nevermind that Charlottesville is possibly copycat of the many car homicides Political Islam terrorists have already conducted. When one white guy kills somebody in the US, CNN calls all white people Nazis. When Political Islam terrorists go on a killing spree, CNN says the motives are unclear and that Islam isn't to blame and blah blah blah.

    American mainstream media is an exemplary study in apologetics for violence and for anti-western values.
    Last edited by wufwugy; 08-17-2017 at 08:58 PM.
  2. #6827
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,665
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    The vast majority of Trump supporters didn't even know what it was. The only legitimacy "alt-right" ever got was from the fabulous whore Milo Yiannapolous once saying he was alt-right. Outside of that, Trump supporters being thought of as alt-right was a creation of the leftist media.
    the_donald disagrees with that, or they took the ball and ran with it. It's basically split between4chan and reddit was my impression


    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    Though, I totally agree that the leftist violence and bigotry is not alt.
    I didn't say anything about violence nor bigotry. Are you saying that the left is violent and bigoted?
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  3. #6828
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    This description is enough, there is no need to name him.
    I'll be honest I thought about leaving out his name for that exact reason.
  4. #6829
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    the_donald disagrees with that, or they took the ball and ran with it. It's basically split between4chan and reddit was my impression
    Some portion on the_donald have grabbed it and run with it, but it's still not much of a thing. The media had some small success with the label. Back when the label was first introduced, I remember checking it out and its subreddit was tiny. I think it doesn't even exist anymore. I've seen far more "alt-right" from the media-Democrats than from Trump supporters.

    I didn't say anything about violence nor bigotry. Are you saying that the left is violent and bigoted?
    Violence and bigotry is at the core philosophy of the left.
  5. #6830
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,665
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    Violence and bigotry is at the core philosophy of the left.

    Explain this opinion wuf, please. Why do you think/say this?
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  6. #6831
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    Explain this opinion wuf, please. Why do you think/say this?
    Thank you for asking. Inquisitive minds are the best minds.

    It has the same philosophy as Marxism (which it derives from). Marxism is the philosophy that individuals are to be judged by group identity and violence must be used to ensure control and distribution such that no identity is better or worse off than another.

    Many people who today think of themselves as left are not (or just marginally so) and instead are confused liberals (even some confused conservatives). Marxists have successfully co-opted the liberal label. Marxist abolition of private property has transformed into heavy taxation redistribution and heavy bureaucrat regulation of private property. Marxist class warfare has turned into a smorgasbord of identity warfare, mostly race and sex warfare. The tactics are different but the strategy and principles are the same.

    Much of the confusion began when Marxists in Germany were fighting Marxists in Russia, and many in the West thought that must mean they were of different ideology. They were not. They were both socialists and both followed the same Marxist doctrine. The German version (fascism) was just national oriented and the Russian version (communism) was international oriented. Both were deeply Marxist. Marxism and "the left" became naturally intertwined since Marxism is atheist and big government while the Christian God was theist and small government and inhabited the "right".

    If you would like to dissect Black Lives Matter, it is the perfect recent example of the merger of Marxism and leftism in America.
  7. #6832
    CoccoBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,214
    Location
    Finding my game
    Let me summarize. People on the left share ideology with Marxism so they must be violent and bigoted, and they are in cahoots with ISIS to bring down terror and destruction to all of the west?

    Yeah, sounds about right.
    Our brains have just one scale, and we resize our experiences to fit.

  8. #6833
    Let me summarize. People on the left share ideology with Marxism so they must be violent and bigoted, and they are in cahoots with ISIS to bring down terror and destruction to all of the west?
    The extreme left, sure.

    I think wuf is being unkind to the majority left. Assuming these people are inherently violent and bigoted because they are, strictly speaking, Marxists, is to assume modern day Marxists are all in agreement what it means to be Marxist. Some of them may well reject democracy as a means of taking power, certainly those we see on the streets fighting Nazis are of this ilk. However, when I think of modern Marxists, I think of people like Jeremy Corbyn, who is a social democrat. The clue is in the name... there is no call to violent revolution here, not from the established left.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marx
    There is only one way in which the murderous death agonies of the old society and the bloody birth throes of the new society can be shortened, simplified and concentrated, and that way is revolutionary terror.
    I mean yeah he's pretty revolutionary. But you don't have to agree with this statement to agree with his economic model.

    I think the vast majority of modern day Marxists reject violent revolution.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  9. #6834
    Corbyn here is highly critical of Saudi Arabia, and says he would stop our arms trade to them if he won power. The Saudis were so worried about him taking power that they conspired with the Tories to blow up kids at a pop concert. Check out how much the number 22 pops up in that event.

    It's the right here who are in alliance with Islamic terror, not the left. The left might be weak and apologetic, but they're not the ones working with them to make it happen.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  10. #6835
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,665
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    More about charleston

    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  11. #6836
    Since it has the banner "Time for Trump to go", I'll pass.

    Absolute fucking hysteria.

    Who gives a fuck what Trump did or didn't say in whatever fucking time frame? It's a distraction from what actually happened and who is behind it. You are being played. Come on Jack, you're smart.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  12. #6837
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,665
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    Thank you for asking. Inquisitive minds are the best minds.


    It has the same philosophy as Marxism (which it derives from). Marxism is the philosophy that individuals are to be judged by group identity and violence must be used to ensure control and distribution such that no identity is better or worse off than another.


    Many people who today think of themselves as left are not (or just marginally so) and instead are confused liberals (even some confused conservatives). Marxists have successfully co-opted the liberal label. Marxist abolition of private property has transformed into heavy taxation redistribution and heavy bureaucrat regulation of private property. Marxist class warfare has turned into a smorgasbord of identity warfare, mostly race and sex warfare. The tactics are different but the strategy and principles are the same.


    Much of the confusion began when Marxists in Germany were fighting Marxists in Russia, and many in the West thought that must mean they were of different ideology. They were not. They were both socialists and both followed the same Marxist doctrine. The German version (fascism) was just national oriented and the Russian version (communism) was international oriented. Both were deeply Marxist. Marxism and "the left" became naturally intertwined since Marxism is atheist and big government while the Christian God was theist and small government and inhabited the "right".


    If you would like to dissect Black Lives Matter, it is the perfect recent example of the merger of Marxism and leftism in America.

    Isn't this a black or white fallacy?


    I'm black, I'm as left they come, but I'm not violent AFAIK. The fact that you call me violent


    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    Violence and bigotry is at the core philosophy of the left.

    Or that you think that I follow a violent philosophy is appalling to me really


    Also, gun control is a left thing IIRC. That is one of the reasons when I saw your violence quote I thought about Orwellian doublespeak, indoctrination etc.


    I was like “how can you call a group of people who don’t even like guns violent”?








    Sidenote: this girl said it best


    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  13. #6838
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,665
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Since it has the banner "Time for Trump to go", I'll pass.

    Absolute fucking hysteria.

    Who gives a fuck what Trump did or didn't say in whatever fucking time frame? It's a distraction from what actually happened and who is behind it. You are being played. Come on Jack, you're smart.
    Hahahaha

    Ong, what you don't see is that that is a Fox news segment. When Fox turns on a Republican president, you know he done fucked up. Fucked up real bad
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  14. #6839
    Yellow lives matter too.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  15. #6840
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,665
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    Thank you for asking. Inquisitive minds are the best minds.

    It has the same philosophy as Marxism (which it derives from). Marxism is the philosophy that individuals are to be judged by group identity and violence must be used to ensure control and distribution such that no identity is better or worse off than another.

    Many people who today think of themselves as left are not (or just marginally so) and instead are confused liberals (even some confused conservatives). Marxists have successfully co-opted the liberal label. Marxist abolition of private property has transformed into heavy taxation redistribution and heavy bureaucrat regulation of private property. Marxist class warfare has turned into a smorgasbord of identity warfare, mostly race and sex warfare. The tactics are different but the strategy and principles are the same.

    Much of the confusion began when Marxists in Germany were fighting Marxists in Russia, and many in the West thought that must mean they were of different ideology. They were not. They were both socialists and both followed the same Marxist doctrine. The German version (fascism) was just national oriented and the Russian version (communism) was international oriented. Both were deeply Marxist. Marxism and "the left" became naturally intertwined since Marxism is atheist and big government while the Christian God was theist and small government and inhabited the "right".

    If you would like to dissect Black Lives Matter, it is the perfect recent example of the merger of Marxism and leftism in America.

    I'll be doing some research on this. I truly want to see where you are coming from with this opinion
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  16. #6841
    Ong, what you don't see is that that is a Fox news segment. When Fox turns on a Republican president, you know he done fucked up. Fucked up real bad
    Who owns Fox? That wouldn't be Rupert Fucking Murdoch would it? He's a mercenary, he's not even American, you think he gives a fuck about Republicans vs Dems? he gives a fuck about money and power.

    Dude.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  17. #6842
    When are we banning driving? They're doing a pretty good job of killing groups of people in one go. I mean we should at least put some pretty heavy limitations on who can buy a car, especially ones that can do a lot of damage. Who really needs a sports car or a big SUV or a lorry?
  18. #6843
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,665
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by Savy View Post
    When are we banning driving? They're doing a pretty good job of killing groups of people in one go. I mean we should at least put some pretty heavy limitations on who can buy a car, especially ones that can do a lot of damage. Who really needs a sports car or a big SUV or a lorry?

    Because vehicles were made with transportation in mind. Getting you from point A to point B, then perhaps to C or back to A in a time efficient manner as compared to what was before, camels, horses etc.

    And by the way, the limitations are there. Age restriction, have to pass a license for it, heavy ticketing for vehicular mischief (double parking, passing in non passing lanes, going over speed etc.).

    Can't really ban it because of this, or until a new more efficient way is invented to move around. Teletransportation much? Flying massive drones? Who knows?

    In any case, right now, it is heavily regulated as is.

    Also you may have seen these



    Designed to prevent the stray car or the malintentioned driver of either harming or killing pedestrians
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  19. #6844
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,665
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by Savy View Post
    When are we banning driving? They're doing a pretty good job of killing groups of people in one go.
    One question: if your intention is to kill people, and you have a random group of people ready in a single agglomeration, is it more efficient to attempt to do so using a vehicle of any kind (motorcycle, sportscar, SUV, lorry, your pick) or a weapon of any kind (machete, katana, desert eagle, assault rifle, your pick)?

    I take aircraft out of the equation because you would not find the average consumer flying a plane, and then a weaponized plane or with kamikaze intentions and I also take all varieties of bombs out of the equation, because no one buys grenades to kill deers with, and atomic bombs are also out of the reach of the average consumer (even though the ease with which these can be launched is terrifying, at least you got to go to flight school to learn to fly a plane, intention notwithstanding)
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  20. #6845
    Quote Originally Posted by CoccoBill View Post
    Let me summarize. People on the left share ideology with Marxism so they must be violent and bigoted, and they are in cahoots with ISIS to bring down terror and destruction to all of the west?

    Yeah, sounds about right.
    I said nothing about the people, but about the ideology. Most people who think of themselves as on the left are instead confused about what leftism is.
  21. #6846
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I mean yeah he's pretty revolutionary. But you don't have to agree with this statement to agree with his economic model.

    I think the vast majority of modern day Marxists reject violent revolution.
    The economic model requires violence. Most people who think of themselves as Marxists don't understand the ideology and history enough to realize that. Keep in mind that many Marxists who claim to be against violence actually aren't; they just think the kind of violence they support is justified -- it has been a hallmark in Marxist history. When Comrade Sanders said he would force small businesses to provide health insurance even if it were to bankrupt them and they would have to shut the business down, how do you suppose he would get that done? By asking nicely?
  22. #6847
    Well by that same measure, a bank repossessing a house is a violent act of capitalism, which means capitalism is inherently violent.

    Of course, the bank feels justified in using such violence to recover debts, so it doesn't recognise the act as violent.

    When I talk about the violence of Marxism, I'm thinking of violent revolution, the overthrow of government instead of defeating them at the ballots. That isn't a critical aspect of Marx's economic model. It's possible to simply win an election.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  23. #6848
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    Isn't this a black or white fallacy?


    I'm black, I'm as left they come, but I'm not violent AFAIK. The fact that you call me violent





    Or that you think that I follow a violent philosophy is appalling to me really


    Also, gun control is a left thing IIRC. That is one of the reasons when I saw your violence quote I thought about Orwellian doublespeak, indoctrination etc.


    I was like “how can you call a group of people who don’t even like guns violent”?
    You're not violent. The philosophy requires violence. That doesn't mean that you follow the philosophy.

    The gun thing is interesting because Marxist revolution needs guns yet Marxist regimes need gun control. The current gun control stuff going on in the West is more towards the latter. Gun control advocates just don't want guns in the hands of the people anymore, but do want guns in the hands of those who make and enforce the rules.
  24. #6849
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Well by that same measure, a bank repossessing a house is a violent act of capitalism, which means capitalism is inherently violent.
    The world is inherently violent. We're not going to get away from it. The distinction between Marxism and anarcho-capitalism in this regard is that the former requires initiation of violence and the latter does not (it helps defend against initiation of violence too).

    When I talk about the violence of Marxism
    A small portion of its historical violence came from revolution. Most of it was just from standard governing according to the principles.
  25. #6850
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    I'll be doing some research on this. I truly want to see where you are coming from with this opinion
    That's really cool. If you're interested, I came to most of this independent of others, just by piecing together my history and philosophy material in college, and then later I found that I'm not the only one to have put it together this way. Here's an interview covering it that I watched last night.




    One thing I will say is that it can be very easy to disagree with these points due to having different definitions of the terms used. That's a real issue that nobody has solved. Here's an example: a lot of people think of themselves as liberal and Marxist, at least each to some degree. But they're not (at least not coherently so), because those are two totally different frameworks. Liberalism and conservatism are subsets of the Enlightenment, western civilization framework. Liberalism is about the expansion of liberty; conservatism is about the conservation of tradition -- both do so within the Enlightenment framework. Marxism/socialism is outside of that, it's a rejection of it and a response to it.

    Given how there is such lack of skin in the game regarding political claims (naturally), we end up with all sorts of messy, incoherent claims like somebody thinking he's a liberal and a socialist. Those ideals are antithetical.
  26. #6851
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    Hahahaha

    Ong, what you don't see is that that is a Fox news segment. When Fox turns on a Republican president, you know he done fucked up. Fucked up real bad
    FWIW this is Shep. They keep him around for "liberal cred". He's pretty disliked by conservatives and he says silly things few agree with quite a lot.
  27. #6852
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Corbyn here is highly critical of Saudi Arabia, and says he would stop our arms trade to them if he won power. The Saudis were so worried about him taking power that they conspired with the Tories to blow up kids at a pop concert. Check out how much the number 22 pops up in that event.

    It's the right here who are in alliance with Islamic terror, not the left. The left might be weak and apologetic, but they're not the ones working with them to make it happen.
    There are big problems in this area, but this appears to be a different thing than Cernovich's claim. The establishments of the states are deeply corrupt and do corrupt things together.
  28. #6853
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,665
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Bannon is out???
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  29. #6854
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    One question: if your intention is to kill people, and you have a random group of people ready in a single agglomeration, is it more efficient to attempt to do so using a vehicle of any kind (motorcycle, sportscar, SUV, lorry, your pick) or a weapon of any kind (machete, katana, desert eagle, assault rifle, your pick)?

    I take aircraft out of the equation because you would not find the average consumer flying a plane, and then a weaponized plane or with kamikaze intentions and I also take all varieties of bombs out of the equation, because no one buys grenades to kill deers with, and atomic bombs are also out of the reach of the average consumer (even though the ease with which these can be launched is terrifying, at least you got to go to flight school to learn to fly a plane, intention notwithstanding)
    If you're talking like a busy street then I'd assume something like an assault rifle with a large clip is going to do the most damage and then vehicles. If we're talking what vehicles will do the most damage then something with weight behind it but enough power for quick acceleration, if you're able to get up speed before hand then the bigger & heavier the better because a truck going 60+ mph will do a lot more damage than a sports car going 90.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    Because vehicles were made with transportation in mind. Getting you from point A to point B, then perhaps to C or back to A in a time efficient manner as compared to what was before, camels, horses etc.

    And by the way, the limitations are there. Age restriction, have to pass a license for it, heavy ticketing for vehicular mischief (double parking, passing in non passing lanes, going over speed etc.).
    You can buy a car before you can buy alcohol, a lot before in certain places. You can also very easily rob a car, they're literally lined up on the street and if you're not that fussed about how it ends, like these people who are dead aren't, it's not hard to do. You can buy a car before you vote. It's actually very rare that you can't purchase a car, there are some things in place that will stop you driving it, legally, like insurance & bans but once again not an issue at all if you don't care about doing it legally.

    Also in case you missed it I was being somewhat satirical.
    Last edited by Savy; 08-18-2017 at 02:15 PM.
  30. #6855
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Nah, I mean the probability of it being a conincidence is getting into the billions.

    The numbers 11 and 22 are everywhere in these fucking things. I'd prefer to think it's fantasy, but the truth is I believe it's the real world. Orwell wasn't writing fiction.
    The probability of an individual strange event like you've said is astronomical however given the number of events than can be assigned meanings like this and the vast number of events that this can happen in it's actually not that rare for an event that is considered strange to happen.

    You can see this is true because like literally anything that ever happens has some form of conspiracy behind it.

    Also if you put three number together between 000 and 999 that's a lot of options so getting a number like 666 is very rare and that is a number that would be considered strange, but like any trips, variations of xyx, consecutive numbers like 123, any number in that has any connotation with anything such as a date, time, etc. Not that rare.
    Last edited by Savy; 08-18-2017 at 02:22 PM.
  31. #6856
    Quote Originally Posted by Savy View Post
    If you're talking like a busy street then I'd assume something like an assault rifle with a large clip is going to do the most damage and then vehicles.
    Not sure if this was part of your 'satirical' post, but it's wrong nonetheless.

    Not sure if this story made it over the pond, but back in 2012 a deranged psycho brought an assault rifle with a high capacity magazine into a movie theater filled to capacity. He had some kind of teargas, or smoke grenades, a shotgun, and head to toe body armor. He literally had everyone in that theater trapped as the only exits were behind him.

    He shot 90 people. 11 died.

    The van attack in Barcelona.....on an open sidewalk.....killed 13, and injured 130 more.

    I realize it's just two examples, but this demonstrates how much more devastating the vehicle attack can be.

    I'm not expert on the subject of weaponry, but I do remember learning that weapons of war, like assault rifles, take bullets that are designed to shoot through a person. So bullet goes in, bullet goes out, soldier is hurt and can't fight. But his chances of living are pretty high if the bullet doesn't hit a major organ or artery.

    A speeding vehicle is a much greater threat to a crowd than an armed gunman.
  32. #6857
    Quote Originally Posted by BananaStand View Post
    Not sure if this was part of your 'satirical' post, but it's wrong nonetheless.

    Not sure if this story made it over the pond, but back in 2012 a deranged psycho brought an assault rifle with a high capacity magazine into a movie theater filled to capacity. He had some kind of teargas, or smoke grenades, a shotgun, and head to toe body armor. He literally had everyone in that theater trapped as the only exits were behind him.

    He shot 90 people. 11 died.

    The van attack in Barcelona.....on an open sidewalk.....killed 13, and injured 130 more.

    I realize it's just two examples, but this demonstrates how much more devastating the vehicle attack can be.

    I'm not expert on the subject of weaponry, but I do remember learning that weapons of war, like assault rifles, take bullets that are designed to shoot through a person. So bullet goes in, bullet goes out, soldier is hurt and can't fight. But his chances of living are pretty high if the bullet doesn't hit a major organ or artery.

    A speeding vehicle is a much greater threat to a crowd than an armed gunman.
    A few things you should pick up on:

    1) I said damage not deaths
    2) I said with a big clip
    3) A cinema is different to an open crowded area

    You're also a moron so if you ever have an issue with any of my posts you can either ask me, nicely, to clarify it to you in more simple terms or just assume you're wrong and get over it.
  33. #6858
    Also if you wanted clarification

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks (67 kills from gunfire)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woo_Bum-kon
    Last edited by Savy; 08-18-2017 at 03:28 PM.
  34. #6859
    It's funny, upon hearing that Bannon may be out, I went to my four favorite sources of information and interpretation. They all think something different. One thinks this is Trump positioning such that it makes it look like the racism that some opponents believe he has is being expelled. One believes the statement that Bannon resigned two weeks ago, and that the purpose was to signal to North Korea of severe hawkishness. One thinks the news is a facade and that Bannon is out on paper only and will continue with his normal assistance regarding Trump. One is waiting for confirmation because he thinks enough of the news is cheese in the maze.

    My initial reaction was that Trump fires people a lot and I was surprised Bannon lasted this long. He tends to bring people in to accomplish specific set of tasks then once that happens, they go. Examples: three different campaign managers for three different portions of the campaign. And none of them became Chief of Staff, which they often do.
  35. #6860
    Quote Originally Posted by Savy View Post
    A few things you should pick up on:

    1) I said damage not deaths
    2) I said with a big clip
    3) A cinema is different to an open crowded area

    You're also a moron so if you ever have an issue with any of my posts you can either ask me, nicely, to clarify it to you in more simple terms or just assume you're wrong and get over it.
    Tilt much?

    I hope you fall down some stairs bro
  36. #6861
    Quote Originally Posted by Savy View Post
    A few things you should pick up on:.
    1) I said damage not deaths
    I know. 130 > 90 professor.

    2) I said with a big clip
    So did I. "High Capacity Magazine". But those are multi-syllable words, so I can understand why you missed it. Movie Theater-guy could fire over 100 rounds before reloading.

    3) A cinema is different to an open crowded area
    My point exactly!! Movie theater guy had the advantage of having his victims trapped like rats, and he still did less damage than a van plowing through an open sidewalk. You think he could have shot more people if they were all outside?
    Last edited by BananaStand; 08-18-2017 at 04:54 PM.
  37. #6862
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    Bannon is out???
    Tired of winning I guess.
  38. #6863
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,665
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Tired of winning I guess.
    Hahaha


    Assange says "Bannon back as editor-in-chief at @BreitbartNews with a head full of White House and NSC secrets, a grudge, and likely new Mercer cash."
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  39. #6864
    Meanwhile, in Manchester...

    Bunch of old dudes having a cowboy party in some local pub put up a Confederates flag, drinkers tear it down.

    wtf next? Petitioning outside DVD stores selling the Dukes of Hazzard?

    Media doing an oustanding job of getting morons to associate the Confederates flag with white supremacy, even in the UK.

    The vast majority of people who think this have absolutely no fucking idea of the history of the American Civil War. My knowledge on that subject is very poor, which is why I don't sit here saying it's the same as the Nazi flag. I have no idea what the Confederates flag represents. I do respect the right of people to wave it about though. Just like morons can wave about a Nazi flag if they want to tell the world how moronic they are.

    Flags will always offend someone. Fuck people who are offended by flags.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  40. #6865
    If you're going to be offended by a flag, then it's critical that you have an understanding of what that flag represents, and be able to coherently argue your case.

    I can understand people being offended by Nazi or ISIS flags, because everyone knows what these flags mean. It's easy to argue aginst these ideologies.

    And yes, it's easy to argue against slavery. Is that what the Confederates flag represents? I have no idea. All I know is that there are many Confederate flags, the one we commonly see (Dukes of Hazzard) is the Battle Flag of a particular state (Georgia?). That's more than most Brits know. How can anyone place themselves in a position of moral judgement on the issue?

    Because mass fucking media is brainwashing the morons.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  41. #6866
    What I'd like to know is what all the Trumpsters have to say about the revolving door staff he has. Is there any way to spin this other than a WH in chaos?
  42. #6867
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Meanwhile, in Manchester...

    Bunch of old dudes having a cowboy party in some local pub put up a Confederates flag, drinkers tear it down.

    wtf next? Petitioning outside DVD stores selling the Dukes of Hazzard?

    Media doing an oustanding job of getting morons to associate the Confederates flag with white supremacy, even in the UK.

    The vast majority of people who think this have absolutely no fucking idea of the history of the American Civil War. My knowledge on that subject is very poor, which is why I don't sit here saying it's the same as the Nazi flag. I have no idea what the Confederates flag represents. I do respect the right of people to wave it about though. Just like morons can wave about a Nazi flag if they want to tell the world how moronic they are.

    Flags will always offend someone. Fuck people who are offended by flags.
    People who like the Confederate flag like it because it represents freedom from tyranny. History is being revised such that people don't even remember that the union of states was originally a confederation. Many don't like the pseudo-unitary state it is becoming.

    People who don't like the Confederate flag think black people are being held down by white people. They're half right. Black people are being held down by white and black Democrats.
  43. #6868
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    What I'd like to know is what all the Trumpsters have to say about the revolving door staff he has. Is there any way to spin this other than a WH in chaos?
    He operated like this from the very, very beginning and has operated like this the entire time. It would be spin to suggest that this represents the WH in chaos.
    Last edited by wufwugy; 08-19-2017 at 12:05 PM.
  44. #6869
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    He operated like this from the very, very beginning and has operated like this the entire time. It would be spin to suggest that this represents the WH in chaos.
    So because chaos is the norm for Trump it's not really chaos. Ok then.
  45. #6870
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,665
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    People who don't like the Confederate flag think black people are being held down by white people. They're half right. Black people are being held down by white and black Democrats.

    Wuf ...
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  46. #6871
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    So because chaos is the norm for Trump it's not really chaos. Ok then.
    One of my most recent posts ITT explained this in simple terms. It's not chaos. It has always been a strategy he uses for specific purpose.
  47. #6872
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    Wuf ...
    Democrats have had total control of close to all black regions for many decades. Those regions used to not be destitute yet have become destitute. Economics explains in clear terms why that could happen. Investigate Thomas Sowell.
    Last edited by wufwugy; 08-19-2017 at 05:06 PM.
  48. #6873
    Given the definitions of the left-wing as big government socialism and the right-wing as limited government liberalism and conservatism*, here's an example for how that makes the left-wing innately violent: if you do a left-wing thing and make Medicare-for-all and you pay for it with taxes, it is necessarily the case that the government collects the taxes and regulates Medicare using force. If, however, you do a right-wing thing and limit government such that there is "freedom of healthcare" just like "freedom of speech", you are instead prohibiting the government from using force on the matter.

    The US Constitution revolution was essentially the latter. It was the first modern adoption of the idea that government is to be prohibited from using force with regard to the designated things in the Constitution.


    *I use those definitions because that is how the chips have been landing. Marxism and big government ideals have all been congregating on the left-wing. That isn't to say that this is left-wing exclusive. There is an element in the right-wing that carries with it incoherence: religion. I haven't sussed the dynamic out that well yet, but it has something to do with how religion gives legitimacy to the small government idea YET religion can also be big government and akin to modern leftism. Example: the Religious Right working to pass gambling bans. Extreme example: Sharia.
  49. #6874
    When I said that leftism is inherently violent, I had something more specific than what I said above in mind. I tend to revert to principles when attempting to explain, so I reverted to principles. Here's what I had in mind though:

    Leftism (not liberalism) and the core philosophy of the Democrat party is a reorganization of Marxist class warfare into neo-Marxist identity warfare. The class warfare of traditional Marxism was proletariat vs. bourgeoisie, which was essentially laborer without ownership vs. business executive with ownership. The socialist version of Marxism was to eradicate private ownership by force; the fascist version of Marxism was to explicitly control private ownership with strong interventionist government. The fascist version was more nation vs. non-nation than proletariat vs. bourgeoisie.*

    At the core of Marxist philosophy are two key principles: (1) there are oppressors and there are oppressed, and (2) violence must be used to take from the oppressors and give to the oppressed. Neo-Marxism has actualized those key principles through identity groups instead of the binary class groups of traditional Marxism. You've seen it in action. It's about how the rich, white, straight, Christian male patriarchy is responsible for the oppression of each and every type of poor or non-white or non-straight or non-male or non-Christian group**. The tactics have changed but the principles have not.

    If you're interested, think of The Young Turks -- the media company, not the century old genocidal revolutionaries. They're about as mainstream left as it gets. They have scrubbed youtube (with the help of its sponsors, the owners of youtube) of their erstwhile calls to violence. I remember watching the show as a fan years ago and cheering on the vilification of non-leftist and bobbleheading along with the claims that force must be used to fix disparities of inequity and inequality***. It's your run-of-the-mill Marxism and it's rooted in violence.


    *If you believe D'Souza, fascists pulled tactics from Jim Crow Democrats.

    **Except the smallest group there is: the individual.

    ***A few months ago, people started pulling up old videos of their calls to violence. Google swiftly deleted all those videos and the ones referencing them.
    Last edited by wufwugy; 08-21-2017 at 01:04 AM.
  50. #6875
    JKDS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    6,799
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    Democrats have had total control of close to all black regions for many decades. Those regions used to not be destitute yet have become destitute. Economics explains in clear terms why that could happen. Investigate Thomas Sowell.
    You say welfare, I say Republican president Nixon's war on drugs. I guess we'll never know.
  51. #6876
    Quote Originally Posted by JKDS View Post
    You say welfare, I say Republican president Nixon's war on drugs. I guess we'll never know.
    The war on drugs is misguided and often bad policy.

    To note: if it's a war on drugs causing the urban black population problems, it's Democrats doing it. Republicans have barely existed in those areas for near half a century now. Republicans haven't been pushing the edge on putting the drugs in the hands of those they represent, but Democrats have been doing so for those they represent.
  52. #6877
    JKDS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    6,799
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    It's the dems doing it! Of course! It's so simple!

    But...we do have a Republican presidency. And house. And senate. Yet the status quo remains. Damn those dems!!!

    Those dems must also be pretty clever to be putting drugs in the hands of those they represent too. I'm not sure why they'd want to incarcerate and take away the right to vote from their supporters, but I'm not too good at 3d chess.
  53. #6878
    Quote Originally Posted by JKDS View Post
    It's the dems doing it! Of course! It's so simple!
    Ridicule. Tell for cognitive dissonance.

    Yet the status quo remains.
    Not true. Red herring. Tell for cognitive dissonance.

    Those dems must also be pretty clever to be putting drugs in the hands of those they represent too. I'm not sure why they'd want to incarcerate and take away the right to vote from their supporters, but I'm not too good at 3d chess.
    Straw man. Tell for cognitive dissonance.
  54. #6879
    JKDS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    6,799
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Claim to be a victim and claim your opponents argument is full of fallacies. Never reach the merits.

    Got any new strategies?
  55. #6880
    Quote Originally Posted by JKDS View Post
    Claim to be a victim
    Straw man. Cognitive dissonance.

    and claim your opponents argument is full of fallacies.
    No argument was presented.
  56. #6881
    JKDS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    6,799
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    All I see is you not liking what you've heard. The only points you make are ones which paint the dems as bad guys and the Republicans as good guys. You argue an unsupportable position, which relies entirely on cherry picking information and sources. While others rightfully concede points, you do not. While others seek the truth, you beat the drum. It's a game.

    No, the Republicans have not "barely existed in the drug war for decades." You can only reach that position by doing what I outlined above. You cannot argue that the dems are spoonfeeding drugs to their supporters while refraining from acknowledging that such an act would result in less supporters. Yes yes yes, the "welfare state" may (it's just a may) also contribute to bringing minorities down. But it is disingenuous to the extreme to ignore the many other factors while you go on beating your drum.

    -----

    You know, maybe I'm just taking my irritation out on you. One of my Facebook friends just made a post about how she's talking to her very almost newborn, and how he's gonna be born a white male and "what that means". My android Google feed is full of blog posts from one liberal idiot to one conservative idiot, each cherry picking point's and each ignoring the other side completely. I'm sick of it. It's all garbage, fueling whatever they want to fuel. Here comes a blogger talking about why nazis are bad, look out. I bet that'll get clicks, but dare touch the protester's actual platform. Focus on the worst. Paint them all as evil, wear the white hat. It's all just intellectual junk.

    I think I expect better here. This forum was a huge source of growth for me. I never had the drive to be a pro, but learning the theory has redefined how I view pretty much everything. That only happened because this was a site with smart people posting smart things.

    But now, all I see when I log in is yet another partisan post. There's no actual discussion, no learning of new information. Just the drum.

    It makes me sad. In a very sincere way. And I don't really know where to go for a discussion like what used to happen here.
  57. #6882
    Quote Originally Posted by JKDS View Post
    All I see is you not liking what you've heard. The only points you make are ones which paint the dems as bad guys and the Republicans as good guys. You argue an unsupportable position, which relies entirely on cherry picking information and sources. While others rightfully concede points, you do not. While others seek the truth, you beat the drum. It's a game.

    No, the Republicans have not "barely existed in the drug war for decades." You can only reach that position by doing what I outlined above. You cannot argue that the dems are spoonfeeding drugs to their supporters while refraining from acknowledging that such an act would result in less supporters. Yes yes yes, the "welfare state" may (it's just a may) also contribute to bringing minorities down. But it is disingenuous to the extreme to ignore the many other factors while you go on beating your drum.
    I'm no fan of Republicans. Democrats aren't feeding people drugs. Republicans haven't been a sizable part of policy in black communities for decades.

    You know, maybe I'm just taking my irritation out on you. One of my Facebook friends just made a post about how she's talking to her very almost newborn, and how he's gonna be born a white male and "what that means". My android Google feed is full of blog posts from one liberal idiot to one conservative idiot, each cherry picking point's and each ignoring the other side completely. I'm sick of it. It's all garbage, fueling whatever they want to fuel. Here comes a blogger talking about why nazis are bad, look out. I bet that'll get clicks, but dare touch the protester's actual platform. Focus on the worst. Paint them all as evil, wear the white hat. It's all just intellectual junk.

    I think I expect better here. This forum was a huge source of growth for me. I never had the drive to be a pro, but learning the theory has redefined how I view pretty much everything. That only happened because this was a site with smart people posting smart things.

    But now, all I see when I log in is yet another partisan post. There's no actual discussion, no learning of new information. Just the drum.

    It makes me sad. In a very sincere way. And I don't really know where to go for a discussion like what used to happen here.
    I'm sorry for this.

    You do get better here. If you ever see me (or others) make a post you think is wrongly partisan, point it out (outside of the Trump shitposting, I guess, which I hardly do anymore but have in the past).

    You are correct that the debates are pretty much about each participant focusing on how to best represent his preferred idea. It's kinda always been like that.
  58. #6883
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    Republicans haven't been pushing the edge on putting the drugs in the hands of those they represent, but Democrats have been doing so for those they represent.
    BTW I said this which was wrong. It was an editing mistake. I meant that Democrats have been putting welfare into the hands of those they represent, not drugs.

    Republicans love their welfare too*. Yet when it comes to black communities, Republicans have little part in what goes on.

    *Trump's support of a type of welfare and Cruz's emphatic stance against it was one of the big reasons I voted Cruz and did not like Trump much at the time.
  59. #6884
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,665
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Re: alt-left



    The establishment democrats are the greatest allies the entire Republican party can have
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  60. #6885
    "The most impressive thing a president's ever done."

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/sc...-a7906476.html
  61. #6886
    Tucker working on his shitposting.
  62. #6887
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post

    The establishment democrats are the greatest allies the entire Republican party can have
    Do you think the focus on identity politics comes from the party or from progressives?
  63. #6888
    The dude brings up a very important topic in the video regarding neoliberalism.

    Think of socioeconomic structures as existing from total absence of government intervention to total government control. In order, the terms associated with those positions are along the lines of classical liberalism -- neoliberalism -- progressivism -- socialism. By far the most popular notion is that before the Great Depression, we lived in a classically liberal (weak government) society and the GD was caused because of it. The interpretation has been that lack of government intervention in the economy was at fault. So then we moved towards neoliberalism (strong government but not too strong), and at each new time of economic calamity, we have interpreted it as being caused by lack of government intervention, and so we have moved gradually more progressive (even stronger government) and more socialist (super strong government).

    The attribution of cause I just described is wrong. Why? Because we weren't classically liberal before the Great Depression. The Federal Reserve was given monopoly power by government over money and finance before the GD. Then the Fed fucked up and caused the GD. It wasn't until the 1960s that economists explained how the Fed caused the GD. It took until 2002 for the Fed to finally admit that it caused the GD.
  64. #6889
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    Tucker working on his shitposting.
    Trump trying to be the first blind president.
  65. #6890
    Probs looked near the sun. Probs laid more cheese in the maze for the mice to chase.
  66. #6891
    What cheese, what maze? Why read so much into it? All he did was make himself look like an idiot. There's no 3d chess going on here, sorry.
  67. #6892
    I know about cheese in the maze because the administration and several with inside information said they put it out. Cheese in the maze is exemplified by The Independent reporting like you cited.
  68. #6893
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    I know about cheese in the maze because the administration and several with inside information said they put it out. Cheese in the maze is exemplified by The Independent reporting like you cited.
    Ya right that's what happened. 'Cause Trump cares a lot about what the Independent reports.
  69. #6894
    Quote Originally Posted by wuf
    Then the Fed fucked up and caused the GD
    Yeah right like these people are too stupid to know what they're doing.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  70. #6895
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Yeah right like these people are too stupid to know what they're doing.
    What do you mean?
    Last edited by OngBonga; 08-23-2017 at 09:52 PM.
  71. #6896
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    What do you mean?
    oops, sorry edited instead of quoted!

    I'm saying that when something happens that screws over the masses, it probably wasn't an accident.

    I'm deep in the rabbit hole here. Economic manipulation has been going on for, well since the invention of money.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  72. #6897
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    oops, sorry edited instead of quoted!

    I'm saying that when something happens that screws over the masses, it probably wasn't an accident.

    I'm deep in the rabbit hole here. Economic manipulation has been going on for, well since the invention of money.
    Ah, I see.

    I'll be charitable to the controllers of money and say that at times central bankers have failed due to flawed ideas. The idea that they must manufacture recessions because things are "too good" is certainly something a portion of them have thought in the past (fuck you, John Calvin). It's a wrong and bad idea, but they have thought it nonetheless.

    What I think characterizes central bankers more astutely is that they too often let their politics inform their economics, and this leaves for pretty big gaps between reality and the models they use. Using the 08 financial crisis and subsequent Great Recession as an example, the failure of the Fed was almost exactly the same failure that Milton Friedman popularized back in the 60s and the Fed admitted to regarding the Great Depression in the 00s. But emotional and political pressures are against that interpretation; thus the Fed eventually made the same mistake a second time.

    It is appearing that my capstone will involve the claim that the 08 crisis and Great Recession are inevitable outcomes of the flawed models of consensus monetary economics at the time. Those models are still the framework of today, but there are some subtle shifts away from them. So that's good.
  73. #6898
    On another note...

    "Freedom cannot exist if our people are not safe." - Trump.

    I've been thinking about this and I have come to the conclusion he is talking out of his arse. What is freedom? It's not the same as safety. If anything, safety comes at the cost of freedom. Anarchy is freedom. Any other system is not freedom, because it imposes rules, and enforces them.

    Freedom cannot exist while government exists. Say that you fat faced cunt.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  74. #6899
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    On another note...

    "Freedom cannot exist if our people are not safe." - Trump.

    I've been thinking about this and I have come to the conclusion he is talking out of his arse. What is freedom? It's not the same as safety. If anything, safety comes at the cost of freedom. Anarchy is freedom. Any other system is not freedom, because it imposes rules, and enforces them.

    Freedom cannot exist while government exists. Say that you fat faced cunt.
    FWIW he is speaking to an American crowd that doesn't believe in absolute freedom and he himself likely does not believe in absolute freedom. "Freedom" as defined by Americanism is something along the lines of "being 80% free".

    The point he is making is similar to a point I have made, and it comes from an area of uncertainty. The idea of free markets might actually fall apart when there is not sufficient enough security.
  75. #6900
    fwiw I do not believe anarchy can work. Cartels happen because government is too weak to stop them.

    I just think that our idea of "freedom" is far from what freedom actually is.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •