I mean cool? I guess I dunno.

look brah, my whole point, from the beginning, is that far more ppl in america prefer the democratic party and by extension liberal policies. my point was that a minority is in control of the decision making of this country.

that it. thats simple fact.

yall come in here and try to twist that around but you cant distort that simple effin mathematics.

so? is this a negative?

so? I mean is this more important than the electoral college? or the straight popular vote? how bout you rank them?

no dont.

bc it doesnt matter.

I mean, ffs, you post a lot of words and make factual statements and they dont mean a gd thing.

honestly, I think the dems and the left would have crushed a ton harder if that were the case. I really dont think that is close.

I just wonder why antifa violence isn't the fault of fascists, but like, bog-standard "SJW" racism caused non-fascists to turn to fascism. So weird that only the left wing has agency in this country.

FoldN isn't yelling at Milo to stop doing bizarre racist **** like encouraging his fans to out undocumented students. Almost as if, and sit down guys, he's a dishonest hack just throwing bull**** at the wall to justify what he wants to happen because he's too much of a ****ing coward to own up to his own beliefs.

Y'all notice that's another difference here? Liberals are pretty up front and honest about what they want. I wonder why wil et al. feel the need to lie about it.

well, we don't like punching kids in the face or torturing people, I feel pretty good about that.

So... is this good for neo-fascism, or is it bad for neo-fascism? It's all so confusing !!!1! Seriously, this is very good news. More practice with our favorite tackling dummy: M.Yiannopoulos. Bring it on.

You know, people say three folks join an Antifa group every time the fool sells another book.

Believe it or not, I actually think the E.C. system is outdated and should be changed to a popular vote system.

But until that happens the E.C. is what decides the election and people vote accordingly. I believe people are putting too much weight on the popular vote result in an election where it is not a determining factor. It's a bit like saying playing poker for play money is the same as playing for real money. The popular vote has nothing riding on it so how can you attach too much importance to it.

If you guys are really serious abut doing something constructive (rather than destructive) campaign and protest about changing the electoral system.

P.S. My 1000th post. Yeeha!

"Congratulations Broadway". Thankyou, thankyou.

Amen

But in the same vein I think it would be much better to get to the bottom of why something like that would be aloud to happen.

But see, we are too busy fighting each other to rise against whats really going on.

Sheeple gonna sheep

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/so...uminati_21.htm



Also,



NSFW or SJW snowflakes





P.S. LOL @ Luminati amirite?? I agree, silly made up name Haha....No such thing as NWO, League Of Nations or U.N. either you nerds!!

What are your opinions regarding stacking silver?

Super glad Az had to make an alt for that post. Such courage.

I'm sure you have no experience or knowledge about either.

so anyway, since this is the free speech thread, kinda

are any of the resident free speech warriors gonna stand up for this women that was recently not only silenced but also lost her job due to participating in the womens march and making a speech that called for ppl to come together and putting forth a non-partisan message?

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-w...r-womens-march

What does this even mean? Like literally are you saying I can't be against either until I've done both? Are you that ****ing stupid?

She doesn't support the leader of her party. I see no reason why you'd defend her in this regard.

I'm saying you are a moron who doesn't think about things before running your bitch mouth about them. Sam Harris did an interesting thought experiment about torture being a morally justified, and even the only moral choice, in certain scenarios.

As always, you just don't know what the **** you're talking about. That's because you are an idiot.

So did we ever decide if milo's targeted harassment of vulnerable students was free speech?

It doesn't take much thought to realize that there is no reason to punch a child in the face ever and that torture doesn't work. Please show any evidence that torture works.

I've already told you why the child was punched. It was an angry reaction to him almost killing his sister. While not a good behavior, I understand why it happened. I laughed at the story, as did the person who got punched as he said he deserved it.

As far as torture, or "enhanced interrogation techniques", I'm sure the experts have effective means at their disposal. Whether that is sleep deprivation or slapping the person around, I don't know what techniques they use or what is effective. In a documentary about finding bin laden they described their techniques as grabbing the person forcefully, getting in their face, etc.

The thought experiment was a child being in the back of a car that was stolen and the thief being identified on camera. The theif was in a position where they wouldn't admit he stole the car or admit where it was. The child's life is at stake. Another scenario would be if a bomb or massive weapon were in position to cause widespread destruction and the information was critical in order to prevent it. In both cases it very well may be morally superior to use "torture".

I grow tired of explaining how life works to you.

Milo on Judge Jeanine tonight.

And this is still dumb and wrong.


So you have nothing but movie plot logic, meanwhile our government determined it wasn't effective even with the CIA lying about it. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...tee-found.html

You are being overly simplistic about this. It seems like people on your side talk about deeper levels of understanding and nuance when statistics go against you yet you are simpletons when something extremely complicated like this is under discussion. We would have to define what exactly is torture and figure out which levels of what type of techniques are actually effective. Also, human beings are complicated and have different levels of conviction. While people very similar to us have certain expected moral logic others may not. For example, religious zealots are irrational and what level of coercion may be needed may be something that would make us uncomfortable. Again, I am not an expert, I will leave it to the discretion of the people involved. Simply saying 'im against torture" is a simpleton approach and not good enough of an answer.

This whole torture debate is pure semantics and useless.

Does torture work? It some cases it very well may work.
As applied in aggregate? Maybe not. Probably not.

Geneva conventions state clearly, the west does not torture. End of story.

But we can drop as many bombs as we want in sovereign countries.

No Wil, being against torture as a general principle isn't a simpleton approach. Any more than being against punching kids in the face is a simpleton approach. It's an easy stance to take. Particularly considering the literature indicating it isn't effective.

Again, it is more complicated than that. You are a simplistic person.

No Wil, it really isn't that complicated. Not torturing prisoners is moral stance that has long been a pillar of American philosophy. Not only is it demonstrably the wrong thing to do it doesn't work.

I'm sure you have no idea what techniques work or don't work other than what you've read publicly.

In general, I agree with the overall position. In practice, it may sometimes be necessary. I feel the same way with countries spying on their own citizens. It's obvious that American intelligence agencies are listening to and keeping records of our conversations and metadata. I don't like it, but I'm OK with it due to what is at stake. I feel the same way towards torture.

nobody puts willy in the corner