This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Alternative Facts
Pages: 1 ... 216217218 219220 ... 306
6511
« on: December 16, 2014, 11:13:51 PM »
Yup, that's enough of this.
Locking, going through and reading this, warnings are being given out. If you don't like it, PM me, LC, or Cheat.
6512
« on: December 16, 2014, 11:11:51 PM »
>edits my posts
>does not edit Nuka's idiotic posts
Should have seen that coming.
Because your posts have been attacks. His, while petty for continuing this, are not. Final chance.
6513
« on: December 16, 2014, 11:10:10 PM »
Everyone - enough with the personal attacks, enough with the fighting, enough.
Cut the shit, or warnings are going out. To anyone involved.
Except for Nuka, as always.
If Nuka's been involved (Which, aside from posting reaction images, he hasn't), then yes. He'll get a warning as well. However, unless you want to add to your percentage, I do suggest cutting this out.
6514
« on: December 16, 2014, 11:08:15 PM »
Everyone - enough with the personal attacks, enough with the fighting, enough.
Cut the shit, or warnings are going out. To anyone involved.
6515
« on: December 16, 2014, 06:10:50 PM »
You're trying too hard to make this positive.
6516
« on: December 16, 2014, 05:28:18 PM »
Alright, this thread has been cleaned out of it's pointless bickering and is going to be unlocked.
Anymore arguments that start here will be dealt with a warning penalty to the participants. If you have comments or concerns, post here. If you want to start shit, go elsewhere.
You are a bit too eager to try out your moderating tools, and need a bit more experience in dealing with issues.
Considering the entire staff was annoyed with the arguing, there were no complaints about giving warnings, and I was actually told to lock the thread and remove the comments...
You can take your complaints somewhere else, please and thank you.
WORLDSTAR WORLDSTAR
Thank you for splitting open my sides, I'm abusing my Privilege to post this.
But this made me laugh too much.
Psy pls.
6517
« on: December 16, 2014, 05:22:45 PM »
Aaaaand locking.
6518
« on: December 16, 2014, 05:10:16 PM »
Alright, this thread has been cleaned out of it's pointless bickering and is going to be unlocked.
Anymore arguments that start here will be dealt with a warning penalty to the participants. If you have comments or concerns, post here. If you want to start shit, go elsewhere.
You are a bit too eager to try out your moderating tools, and need a bit more experience in dealing with issues.
Considering the entire staff was annoyed with the arguing, there were no complaints about giving warnings, and I was actually told to lock the thread and remove the comments... You can take your complaints somewhere else, please and thank you.
6519
« on: December 16, 2014, 05:04:16 PM »
This is appropriate for the holidays.
Thanks Sandy.
6520
« on: December 16, 2014, 05:02:59 PM »
Augustus.
I consider him the better Caesar. Plus, I'm sure he'd love the salad dressing.
6521
« on: December 16, 2014, 05:02:05 PM »
change it you fucking faggot cocksucker that should be nailed to a cross for homosexual deeds
too long, i tried.
6522
« on: December 16, 2014, 04:56:57 PM »
Change it to "Worst Mod 2014"
Someone swallowed too much saltwater.
6523
« on: December 16, 2014, 04:53:32 PM »
I am torn on this suggestion.
6524
« on: December 16, 2014, 04:49:51 PM »
The Tea Party really stemmed from the passing of Obamacare, and the far right Republican's anger over the Democrats in Congress.
What? No way.
I've no doubt that broadened its support base but it certainly wasn't created in response to Obamacare.
Hmm. You're partially correct, in that a Fox News contributor said it came from Ron Paul's campaign failure. Of course, this is Fox News, so anything they said should be looked at. The actual modern Tea Party didn't really begin to gain shape and focus until 2009 - once again, over anger at Democrats and Congress. It actually become recognized in 2010.
6525
« on: December 16, 2014, 04:43:05 PM »
Because Ron Paul's views, in general, only catered to a very minor, extremely hardcore, group.
Well the guy's failed bid did spawn the Tea Party, I don't know if I'd characterise them as "minor" or "extremely hardcore".
Ron Paul's failed bid is not what spawned the Tea Party. >.>
Wrong word.
Galvanised would be a better word. The Tea Party certainly wasn't created as a result of Paul's bid.
I would hardly say Paul had must impact on the creation. The Tea Party really stemmed from the passing of Obamacare, and the far right Republican's anger over the Democrats in Congress.
6526
« on: December 16, 2014, 04:41:54 PM »
Alright, this thread has been cleaned out of it's pointless bickering and is going to be unlocked.
Anymore arguments that start here will be dealt with a warning penalty to the participants. If you have comments or concerns, post here. If you want to start shit, go elsewhere.
6527
« on: December 16, 2014, 04:34:45 PM »
Because Ron Paul's views, in general, only catered to a very minor, extremely hardcore, group.
Well the guy's failed bid did spawn the Tea Party, I don't know if I'd characterise them as "minor" or "extremely hardcore".
Ron Paul's failed bid is not what spawned the Tea Party. >.>
6528
« on: December 16, 2014, 04:25:18 PM »
Well, that's depressing.
Although, how come Ron Paul didn't pull through with his conservative credentials? He criticised Reagan for his budget deficits - now that's pretty fucking conservative. Or did his foreign policy ideas shut him out of the opportunity?
Because Ron Paul's views, in general, only catered to a very minor, extremely hardcore, group. Rand's views, while Conservative, are not nearly as divisive as his father's. He'll have a strong chance in the primaries - however when it comes to the general elections in the fall, he's going to struggle if he gets the nomination. Of course - all this also depends on the invisible primary.
6529
« on: December 16, 2014, 04:20:11 PM »
2006 Ford Taurus SE.
His name is George.
6530
« on: December 16, 2014, 04:16:00 PM »
I'm welcome to explain why if you like.
Sure, had the election dates been a bit different, we probably would've studied the invisibles in more detail in my politics class but unfortunately I haven't >.>
On a piece of work where I hate to collate the views of potential runners, though, Rubio struck me as a rather nice chap. Why won't he succeed?
Primaries in the United States, especially Presidential, tend to run more conservative (or liberal) than the general elections. When you are running against people in the same party for party votes and donor support, they want to see why you stand out from the pack - this, generally, forces candidates to swing further right or left than they would in a general. Rubio is a moderate Republican - in a primary that requires one to swing conservative, he's going to be clobbered by critics for his support of immigration reform (namely), and other moderate proposals he has backed. He also lacks name recognition that Ted Cruz/Rand Paul/Chris Christie do have. If anything, and he does run, he's going to be out by Super Tuesday.
6531
« on: December 16, 2014, 04:08:00 PM »
I hope, if he runs in the GOP primaries, Rubio pulls it through.
Zero chance in that happening. Actually, probably less than a zero percent chance. I'm welcome to explain why if you like.
6532
« on: December 16, 2014, 03:58:48 PM »
I see the two of you are not going to convince me otherwise, nor will I convince you.
That's a bad mindset with which to enter a debate, man. It should be about gathering information and personal knowledge, as much as convincing other people. My goal isn't to dominate you, but to understand how you think.
Not how I entered this debate. But we are essentially going in circles now on this argument.
6533
« on: December 16, 2014, 03:54:58 PM »
Likewise, blaming Islam for the Taliban is like blaming Catholicism for the IRA.
Except the Taliban quite explicitly identifies as Muslim. In the same way ISIS identifies as a caliphate-founding organisation - hence the name.
Yet the Taliban does plenty of shit that Islam prohibits: drugs, prostitution, gambling, etc.
You're welcome to call it a "glorified mafia ring" if that'll make you feel better, but they are just as pick and choosy with what they want to follow as Catholic extremists are.
They have to be picky and choosy. Trying to literally follow scripture absolutely will turn you into a straight-up hypocrite. The problem is that such fundamentals exist to be latched onto in the first place, and doesn't diminish the fact that their beliefs are primarily motivated by their religion.
You'll never find a fundamentalist Jain who murders people for his religion.
I see the two of you are not going to convince me otherwise, nor will I convince you.
6534
« on: December 16, 2014, 03:53:34 PM »
can one of you fags tell me why this isn't a pinned post across all the boards? how are people going to know about this if it's under 5 pages of threads in here?
It's been stickied.
6535
« on: December 16, 2014, 03:49:02 PM »
Likewise, blaming Islam for the Taliban is like blaming Catholicism for the IRA.
Except the Taliban quite explicitly identifies as Muslim. In the same way ISIS identifies as a caliphate-founding organisation - hence the name.
Yet the Taliban does plenty of shit that Islam prohibits: drugs, prostitution, gambling, etc. You're welcome to call it a "glorified mafia ring" if that'll make you feel better, but they are just as pick and choosy with what they want to follow as Catholic extremists are.
6536
« on: December 16, 2014, 03:23:38 PM »
That's the thing though, this shit is going on in 2014. It's embarrassing to the human race.
And? Less developed regions of the world are going to be slower at hitting this reformations/revolutions/whatever you want to call them than areas like Europe/America/etc.
Everything ties together. Wealth and prosperity of a nation, religious beliefs, political strife, social conditions, historical problems.
Yet Islamic nations are some of the only nations with this problem.
Not quite. It's the most noticeable because it's spread over such a vast region - from Morocco to Pakistan, but plenty of other nations are having their own problems.
Sri Lanka, recently, had it's civil war over ethnic problems and is still facing tensions. There's still plenty of ethnic problems in sub-Saharan Africa, along with political corruption, strife, and borderline genocide in places. Latin America is also facing problems, again - not religious.
There are dozens of countries facing problems with extremists - they just aren't all Islamic. Hell, even Eastern Europe is still having growing pains following the Soviet Union dismantling twenty years ago.
Less developed countries, countries that have been marginalized, ignored, or used negatively - they ARE going to be slower at having these changes. Of course, that doesn't show why Euro Muslims are so odd, but it helps display the constant problems in countries like Pakistan.
Again, none of it is because of religion.
And what part of
Everything ties together. Wealth and prosperity of a nation, religious beliefs, political strife, social conditions, historical problems.
didn't translate that you cannot solely blame religion?
Religion is one of the leading causes for all the trouble in the Middle East. Fact.
Religion is one of the leading causes
I know... I just said that.
Emphasizing the "ONE" portion of it - whereas this thread makes it seem like it's the only and biggest issue. Likewise, blaming Islam for the Taliban is like blaming Catholicism for the IRA.
6537
« on: December 16, 2014, 02:55:03 PM »
I just come here because I'm a massive fgt.
Oh, and someone pass the popcorn please.
6538
« on: December 16, 2014, 02:26:21 PM »
That's the thing though, this shit is going on in 2014. It's embarrassing to the human race.
And? Less developed regions of the world are going to be slower at hitting this reformations/revolutions/whatever you want to call them than areas like Europe/America/etc.
Everything ties together. Wealth and prosperity of a nation, religious beliefs, political strife, social conditions, historical problems.
Yet Islamic nations are some of the only nations with this problem.
Not quite. It's the most noticeable because it's spread over such a vast region - from Morocco to Pakistan, but plenty of other nations are having their own problems.
Sri Lanka, recently, had it's civil war over ethnic problems and is still facing tensions. There's still plenty of ethnic problems in sub-Saharan Africa, along with political corruption, strife, and borderline genocide in places. Latin America is also facing problems, again - not religious.
There are dozens of countries facing problems with extremists - they just aren't all Islamic. Hell, even Eastern Europe is still having growing pains following the Soviet Union dismantling twenty years ago.
Less developed countries, countries that have been marginalized, ignored, or used negatively - they ARE going to be slower at having these changes. Of course, that doesn't show why Euro Muslims are so odd, but it helps display the constant problems in countries like Pakistan.
Again, none of it is because of religion.
And what part of
Everything ties together. Wealth and prosperity of a nation, religious beliefs, political strife, social conditions, historical problems.
didn't translate that you cannot solely blame religion?
Religion is one of the leading causes for all the trouble in the Middle East. Fact.
Religion is one of the leading causes
6539
« on: December 16, 2014, 02:18:47 PM »
That's the thing though, this shit is going on in 2014. It's embarrassing to the human race.
And? Less developed regions of the world are going to be slower at hitting this reformations/revolutions/whatever you want to call them than areas like Europe/America/etc.
Everything ties together. Wealth and prosperity of a nation, religious beliefs, political strife, social conditions, historical problems.
Yet Islamic nations are some of the only nations with this problem.
Not quite. It's the most noticeable because it's spread over such a vast region - from Morocco to Pakistan, but plenty of other nations are having their own problems.
Sri Lanka, recently, had it's civil war over ethnic problems and is still facing tensions. There's still plenty of ethnic problems in sub-Saharan Africa, along with political corruption, strife, and borderline genocide in places. Latin America is also facing problems, again - not religious.
There are dozens of countries facing problems with extremists - they just aren't all Islamic. Hell, even Eastern Europe is still having growing pains following the Soviet Union dismantling twenty years ago.
Less developed countries, countries that have been marginalized, ignored, or used negatively - they ARE going to be slower at having these changes. Of course, that doesn't show why Euro Muslims are so odd, but it helps display the constant problems in countries like Pakistan.
Again, none of it is because of religion.
And what part of Everything ties together. Wealth and prosperity of a nation, religious beliefs, political strife, social conditions, historical problems.
didn't translate that you cannot solely blame religion?
6540
« on: December 16, 2014, 02:17:46 PM »
Are we all broken? Currently, no.
However, I do think many of us have had similar experiences - coincidentally or not.
Pages: 1 ... 216217218 219220 ... 306
|
Show Posts