Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!
cornholio25% of americans are stupid
CampeadorFrom the Abu Dhabi Center (since closed), no wonder it paints Muslims so positively.
However, thinking on it a little more, the results do make perfect sense. Given the context of the people currently being bombed, it makes sense that Muslims in the U.S. would be against bombing civilians since those civilians are much more likely to be Muslims, given current world conflicts. Just further shows where there loyalties lie.
And, as someone already mentioned, 19-20% of Democrats also supported bombing Agrabah. I remember this bullshit story clogging up my FB news feed for at least a week.
S.J.Wyou said it not me.
cornholioFor fun you should look up the poll on how many democrats said we should accept refugees from agrabah.
S.J.W"for fun". Man you must have the shittest life ever if that's what you classify as fun...but each to their own I guess
CampeadorSee, all the Christian references fall flat, because those Christians that you claim exist only exist in your own fantasies. The numbers, if any, are negligible.
Meanwhile, here's some UK Sharia for you (courtesy of Sharia-apologists like you):
Health authorities have recorded 5,702 new cases of female genital mutilation in just one year, official figures show, equivalent to more than 100 cases every week.
http://www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB21206
And somehow the KKK and WBC are more evil than people who mutilate the genitals of little girls.
californiagrownYes, we know that if we present facts that disagree with your opinion the fall flat. It's tough to have a discussion with someone who refuses to acknowledge facts and reason.
36ChambersOfWuWhy don't you two libtards gtfo of the trump thread go talk in the the Hillary 2016 thread
Oh wait
36ChambersOfWuWhy don't you two libtards gtfo of the trump thread go talk in the the Hillary 2016 thread
SFBv420.0holy fuckin fear mongering
with a side of hypocritical homophobe bullshit
only the donald and frenchy can save us now
onenerdykidIf people only posted in the thread of their political affiliation, then the Sanders 2016 thread would only be about 10 pages long, rather than 50+ (looking at you, Campeador haha)
But that would be dull and no one would interact with other view points. It would be a bunch of like-minded people high fiving each other, rather than an exchange of ideas that people might actually learn something from.
FYI, here are 5 different Hillary threads from the past year:
https://www.newschoolers.com/forum/thread/825114/Hillary-Clinton-To-Be-the-First-Female-and-LGBTQ-President-
https://www.newschoolers.com/forum/thread/820056/Hillary-Clinton-Vs--the-GOP--Can-You-Tell-the-Difference-
https://www.newschoolers.com/forum/thread/819160/Hillary-Clinton-is-already-the-next-president--by-default
https://www.newschoolers.com/forum/thread/812360/Federal-Investigation-of-our-lord-Hillary-Clinton-
https://www.newschoolers.com/forum/thread/807848/It-s-Happening---Hillary-2016
.MASSHOLE.FYI, for the umpteenth time, I am not a registered Democrat,
californiagrownYes, we know that if we present facts that disagree with your opinion the fall flat. It's tough to have a discussion with someone who refuses to acknowledge facts and reason.
.MASSHOLE.I want to preface this by saying what the DNC did with their preemptive bias towards Clinton is both unacceptable and a big disgrace, and frankly reinforces the notion to many that politics in the US is a rigged system.
That being said, I am curious to hear people's opinion, based on the facts presented, about the theory that Russians are behind the DNC's leaked emails.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/25/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-emails.html?_r=0
It is not a large jump from Manafort to Putin, and it is not crazy to suggest that Putin has an interest in seeing someone like Hillary, who is clearly anti-Putin, not elected.
CampeadorWhich candidate has taken in 145 million dollars in exchange for selling U.S. uranium mining rights to the Russian government?
You'll want from 49:10 onward, but the whole film is worth watching.
CampeadorAnd this one, probably Islamic inspired terrorism as well:
German police have arrested a 16-year-old Afghan friend of the
German-Iranian gunman who killed nine people in Munich on Friday. There
is suspicion he may have been an accomplice and failed to report the
gunman's plans.
http://www.dw.com/en/police-arrest-afghan-friend-of-munich-gunman-over-possible-role-in-shooting/a-19424491
.MASSHOLE.I had a feeling you'd post that.
In return, read this.
That whole book is a pile of steaming crap. Are there valid sections? Certainly. Is it, on the whole, factually correct? It certainly doesn't seem like it.
.MASSHOLE.or put them under surveillance.
CampeadorDo you ever get dizzy from all the spin?
Now in your desperation you're even using Media Matters as a source. George Soros cannot die soon enough.
Left-leaning Time Magazine, May 12th, 2016:
"The individual facts are largely true and based on widely reported events and public documents."
Whether you agree with all the conclusions or not.
http://time.com/4328254/clinton-cash-movie-hillary-clinton-peter-schweizer-breitbart/
CampeadorWhy not?
I was under the impression that the FBI already does.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/27/elite-fbi-surveillance-teams-tracking-48-isis-susp/
Why are these fuckers still allowed to remain in the country? Those who are not citizens should be deported immediately, they have no claim to "human" or "refugee" rights.
.MASSHOLE.Wait, you forgot something.
"The individual facts are largely true and based on widely reported events and public documents. The conclusions, however, are not as cut-and-dried as the film makes them out to be when assembled together. In general, the film’s reasoning is that if one thing followed another, it was a case of cause-and-effect.
No doubt, there are many places where dotted lines are smudged into solid ones, and some assumptions are made where concrete evidence of quid pro quo is impossible to prove."
And talking about biased sources when you're taking a movie from the editor of Right-Wing Brietbart? That is precious.
And it is not a source, but rather a gathering of ACTUAL sources that dispute the scenarios (including the one you presented about Russia) from book itself.
Man, you just grasp onto anything you can and try to switch the subject when you are wrong.
.MASSHOLE.Not every Muslim is affiliated with ISIS/extremist Muslim ideologies. And to think that American intelligence agencies only track Muslims is both naive and frankly wrong.
The 1951 Refugee Convention would disagree with you, and the 140 some-odd countries who have signed onto it.
http://www.unhcr.org/3b73b0d63.html
Let me guess, now you want to pull out of the UN and its agreements too?
CampeadorHahahaha, you're pathetic!
"At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One."
"Amid this influx of Uranium One-connected money, Mr. Clinton was invited to speak in Moscow in June 2010, the same month Rosatom struck its deal for a majority stake in Uranium One.
The $500,000 fee — among Mr. Clinton’s highest — was paid by Renaissance Capital, a Russian investment bank with ties to the Kremlin"
"experts and former committee members say Russia’s interest in Uranium One and its American uranium reserves seemed to warrant attention at the highest levels."
Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20150423&_r=0
CampeadorI would venture a guess and say that they mostly track Muslims, with good reason.
Why not? The UN has become about as useful as the League of Nations, and it is a drain on the public treasury.
.MASSHOLE.Not every Muslim is affiliated with ISIS/extremist Muslim ideologies.
.MASSHOLE.So, we have direct evidence of people saying she had no input including interviews from people involved in the actual negotiations, and the former owners of the company versus an investigative piece that is now thoroughly refuted.
.MASSHOLE.Well, for one, it involves keeping Russia and China in check on the security council because we are one of 5 permanent members who have veto powers, but I don't expect someone as poorly nuanced as you in international affairs to understand that.
CampeadorSharia is an "extremist" ideology. Except for the fact that Sharia is not "extreme" at all in Islamic doctrine, it's rather mainstream.
In which case you could say that not every Muslim is affiliated with mainstream Muslim ideologies, which I would agree with. A minority exists that rejects Sharia outright.. Unfortunately, they are given very little voice as compared to the Sharia Islamists, which increasingly seem to speak for Muslims around the globe.
CampeadorWeren't you also arguing before that there was "no evidence" that Clinton every sent or received classified and top secret emails on her private server?
For all the effort you put in, the Clintons really should be paying you.
.MASSHOLE.I know it is tough for a kid who went to CC to grasp this
CampeadorHow's that been working out?
CampeadorAnd yet, for all your parent-funded education, you only made it as far as being a cubicle drone who spends all day on NS on the company's dime.
Well done.
.MASSHOLE.They've vetoed our initiatives, we have vetoed theirs. It goes both ways. It is a balance of power, hence why it is imperative we stay in the UN.
You really should take a few courses at your CC in International Relations and basic economics.
CampeadorAh, now you're like a broken record because you think you've hit on something.
I hate to disappoint, but you haven't. In all likelihood I have more education that you do and went to a better university. But no need for a pissing contest.
How are those UN initiatives working out for the South China Sea and the Ukraine?
The "security council" is a joke, and just further proves that the UN serves no real purpose. In fact, it mostly serves to advance an Islamist and globalist agenda under the guise of "international cooperation".
.MASSHOLE.More education =/= better education, nor does a better school result in a better education, but how did Tahoe CC turnout for you? You clearly didn't learn how to formulate a solid argument, that is for sure.
The UN Tribunal just completed their ruling on the S. China Sea, so the results of the likely pressure from UN members has yet to be seen.
And in regards to Ukraine, the UN cannot do anything because of Russia's veto power...Should be relatively self explanatory but I guess I need to teach you more.
CampeadorI never went there unfortunately, but it would've been good fun. Even if I had gone there, I wouldn't care what a pretentious, pathetic cubicle drone like you thought of it.
Oh no, not the UN Tribunal! What ever will they do?
And, lastly, thank you for unwittingly proving my point that the UN is useless, "the UN cannot do anything", I agree!
.MASSHOLE.Well you seemingly were searching for roommates at local CCs...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
You'd be shocked what political pressure can accomplish...only the past 60 years have seen almost zero conflicts between first world countries despite the Cuban Missile Crisis among other events.
Way to selectively interpret what I said. Can't fix stupid.
CampeadorYou Sharia-sympathizing piece of shit, you cannot even post a link correctly. Not to mention the thread you're trying to link is nearly a decade old. In the here and now, you're still a cubicle drone.
Whether it's because of Russia or China, it doesn't matter, it's like you said, the UN cannot do anything. Therefore, it's useless.
You idiot, first world country is a term created during the Cold War to refer the United States and its developed allies. The Soviet Union and its allies were referred to as second world countries.
But according to you, thanks to the UN, the US did not get into any conflicts with its allies. What an achievement!
.MASSHOLE.They've vetoed our initiatives, we have vetoed theirs. It goes both ways. It is a balance of power, hence why it is imperative we stay in the UN.
You really should take a few courses at your CC in International Relations and basic economics.
