Time to get on the TRUMP train

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmick

Yea that's what people are saying. There was no racism, xenophobia, misogyny, bullying etc. before Trump was elected. Oh wait that doesn't sound right. Oh yea, you're the only one that's saying that anyone was saying that because that's the only argument your tiny brain can beat.

3 is bigger number than 2. The fact that 2 isn't 0 really doesn't change anything. It changes so little that non retards generally don't think it's quite worth mentioning.

---

Here's the point many are missing.

In a diverse country of over 300 million people, there are going to be extremists of all kinds. Some of these extremists will be hardcore racists, misogynists, xenophobes, homophobes, Islamophobes, etc.

I don't believe that these extremists thought, "Oh wow! Trump is going to be President! Now that means I can beat up [insert minority here] and it will be totally okay!"

I think we are living in an environment right now where a lot of people on BOTH sides are on-edge about the election results, so people are more likely to get into trouble in relation to their extreme views. So the extreme racist may see a lot of black and Hispanic people demonstrating against Trump, and get angrier than usual, resulting in a quicker willingness to attack people they see of these races. And the extreme white-haters on the other side may be especially mad at white people right now for electing Trump, thus more likely to beat up white people, especially ones they assume are likely to have been Trump supporters.

Does this mean Trump's election has increased bigotry in the US? No. It just means that existing bigotry has been brought to the surface.

I think this will die down soon. I don't see 4 years of attacks on people based upon there race/religion/sexual preference, or at least not more than we had before.

---

A silly straw man argument here would be to point out that you seem to be distributing some of the blame to blacks and hispanics. I know that's not something you're saying.

Something we know about hooliganism is that they have tendency to be more violent when their team wins. Something about winning does something to adrenaline levels that turns scum scummier.

There was a similar rise in hate crimes after brexit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I'm also not usually in the "blame Obama for everything" camp, and in fact it annoys me when Republicans will sometimes do that.

However, I do blame Obama somewhat for the racial divisiveness we have seen in the past 3 years.

When the reports of the white police officers killing black people emerged in the media, Obama very much fueled the fire by validating the claims of the Black Lives Matter movement, thus inciting a lot more racial distrust.

Obama saw himself more as a black man than as President of the United States. His job was to unite the people of America and find solutions to problems, not vilify the police or create racial resentment. Even if Obama truly felt there was a lot of racism in police departments around the country, he should have not fed into the rhetoric, given the catastrophic results from him doing so.

The correct narrative should have been, "This is unacceptable, and we will put out the effort to find the bad apples in police departments like this and take their badges away", rather than vilification of the police and the white race as a whole.

At the same time, Obama was always afraid to use the words "radical Islam" when we had terrorist attacks as a result of (you guessed it) radical Islam.

Strange times we're living in.

---

Pretty much the only stories about radical "insert religion" are about radical islam. White supremacy groups aren't referred to as radical christianity. Actual radical christian groups aren't referred to as radical christians. There are very few stories about christian terrorists even when they out number islamic terrorists.

Media doesn't seem to care too much about the vast number of christian terrorists either is pretty much my point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mintjewlips

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thesidedish

---

:lol2


In before gimmick gives us yet another delusional diatribe. But i guess that's just his gimmick.

---

I'm sure you've already imagined my delusional diatribe and your glorious rebuttal of it showing the whole board that you truly are the Michael Angelo of wordsmiths.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I'm also not usually in the "blame Obama for everything" camp, and in fact it annoys me when Republicans will sometimes do that.

However, I do blame Obama somewhat for the racial divisiveness we have seen in the past 3 years.

When the reports of the white police officers killing black people emerged in the media, Obama very much fueled the fire by validating the claims of the Black Lives Matter movement, thus inciting a lot more racial distrust.

Obama saw himself more as a black man than as President of the United States. His job was to unite the people of America and find solutions to problems, not vilify the police or create racial resentment. Even if Obama truly felt there was a lot of racism in police departments around the country, he should have not fed into the rhetoric, given the catastrophic results from him doing so.

The correct narrative should have been, "This is unacceptable, and we will put out the effort to find the bad apples in police departments like this and take their badges away", rather than vilification of the police and the white race as a whole.

At the same time, Obama was always afraid to use the words "radical Islam" when we had terrorist attacks as a result of (you guessed it) radical Islam.

Strange times we're living in.

---

lolz wtf? Are you joking Druff? Big lol that you think president Obama is more concerned with his black heritage than he is about being president. Holy shit you are a crazy rightwingnut.

A simple google and you could get the Presidents take on why he doesn't say radical islam

When Donald Trump blasted President Obama for failing to make reference to Islam in connection with the Orlando nightclub massacre, the GOP's presumptive presidential nominee was renewing a longstanding criticism of the White House's carefully calibrated rhetoric about terrorism.

Obama "disgracefully refused to even say the words 'Radical Islam'," Trump said in a statement Sunday. "For that reason alone, he should step down. If Hillary Clinton, after this attack, still cannot say the two words 'Radical Islam' she should get out of this race for the Presidency."

Trump repeated his criticism on TODAY Monday morning, saying Obama was "not addressing the issue, he's not calling it what it is."

Although the Orlando gunman pledged allegiance to ISIS, Obama didn't mention Islam in his remarks about the mass shooting Sunday. In televised remarks at the White House Monday, Obama said the killer had been influenced by "extremist ideology," but the president did not use the modifier "Islamic."

He did say that "one of the biggest challenges" is the "propaganda and perversion of Islam that you see on the internet."

PlayOrlando shooters possible relation to ISIS Facebook Twitter Google Plus Embed
Orlando shooters possible relation to ISIS 3:14
Obama and his secretary of state, John Kerry, have said that they don't use terms like "Islamic extremism" or "radical Islam" because they believe doing so would grant undeserved religious legitimacy to terrorist movements such as the Islamic State. Citing Islam as a factor risks framing counterterrorism as a war between the West and Islam, they have said.

"They are not religious leaders -- they're terrorists," Obama said in February. "And we are not at war with Islam. We are at war with people who have perverted Islam."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I'm also not usually in the "blame Obama for everything" camp, and in fact it annoys me when Republicans will sometimes do that.

However, I do blame Obama somewhat for the racial divisiveness we have seen in the past 3 years.

When the reports of the white police officers killing black people emerged in the media, Obama very much fueled the fire by validating the claims of the Black Lives Matter movement, thus inciting a lot more racial distrust.

Obama saw himself more as a black man than as President of the United States. His job was to unite the people of America and find solutions to problems, not vilify the police or create racial resentment. Even if Obama truly felt there was a lot of racism in police departments around the country, he should have not fed into the rhetoric, given the catastrophic results from him doing so.

The correct narrative should have been, "This is unacceptable, and we will put out the effort to find the bad apples in police departments like this and take their badges away", rather than vilification of the police and the white race as a whole.

At the same time, Obama was always afraid to use the words "radical Islam" when we had terrorist attacks as a result of (you guessed it) radical Islam.

Strange times we're living in.

---

Pretty much the only stories about radical "insert religion" are about radical islam. White supremacy groups aren't referred to as radical christianity. Actual radical christian groups aren't referred to as radical christians. There are very few stories about christian terrorists even when they out number islamic terrorists.

Media doesn't seem to care too much about the vast number of christian terrorists either is pretty much my point.

---

White supremacists are often not Christian. They operate from the belief that their race is superior. They hate black Christians as much as black non-Christians.

When there is a Christian terrorist (that is, one who kills or attempts to kill based upon his religion), it's almost always aimed at an abortion clinic or something related. And when that happens, it is reported for what it is -- a Christian fanatic killed people at an abortion clinic because of his extreme religious beliefs. I have not seen any political or media whitewashing of that.

All mass killings in this country recently based upon ideology have been due to radical Islam.

It also goes far beyond cold statistics.

If Christian fanatics are attacking abortion clinics, I still feel 100% safe from them because I will never be in an abortion clinic. Most other Americans won't, either.

Radical Islamists are scary because they just want to kill Americans. They kill in random or semi-random places, to where everyone feels vulnerable. There is a huge psychological element to it, and it's hard for most people to ignore, even if they try to reason with themselves that their chances of being a victim in such an attack is tiny.

It's the same reason the public freaks out when a serial killer is on the loose, but collectively yawns when there are daily murders in the ghetto. You can avoid the ghetto murders by not visiting it. You can't avoid the serial killer if you're unfortunate enough to be picked by him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mintjewlips

:lol2


In before gimmick gives us yet another delusional diatribe. But i guess that's just his gimmick.

---

I'm sure you've already imagined my delusional diatribe and your glorious rebuttal of it showing the whole board that you truly are the Michael Angelo of wordsmiths.

---

Michael Angelo ?

lol please tell me that was intentional

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmick

Pretty much the only stories about radical "insert religion" are about radical islam. White supremacy groups aren't referred to as radical christianity. Actual radical christian groups aren't referred to as radical christians. There are very few stories about christian terrorists even when they out number islamic terrorists.

Media doesn't seem to care too much about the vast number of christian terrorists either is pretty much my point.

---

White supremacists are often not Christian. They operate from the belief that their race is superior. They hate black Christians as much as black non-Christians.

When there is a Christian terrorist (that is, one who kills or attempts to kill based upon his religion), it's almost always aimed at an abortion clinic or something related. And when that happens, it is reported for what it is -- a Christian fanatic killed people at an abortion clinic because of his extreme religious beliefs. I have not seen any political or media whitewashing of that.

All mass killings in this country recently based upon ideology have been due to radical Islam.

It also goes far beyond cold statistics.

If Christian fanatics are attacking abortion clinics, I still feel 100% safe from them because I will never be in an abortion clinic. Most other Americans won't, either.

Radical Islamists are scary because they just want to kill Americans. They kill in random or semi-random places, to where everyone feels vulnerable. There is a huge psychological element to it, and it's hard for most people to ignore, even if they try to reason with themselves that their chances of being a victim in such an attack is tiny.

It's the same reason the public freaks out when a serial killer is on the loose, but collectively yawns when there are daily murders in the ghetto. You can avoid the ghetto murders by not visiting it. You can't avoid the serial killer if you're unfortunate enough to be picked by him.

---

I think you're still more likely to die in a meteor strike than be killed on US soil by an islamic terrorist. That's roughly the ballpark were talking about.

And other muslims is are still the favorite target of muslim terrorists around the world. The whole Sunni Shia thing they have going on. Unified muslim terrorists that are willing to put all differences aside against the rest of the world just don't exist.

Some parts of the media seem to think that when ever a muslim commits an act of terror that it's important to mention radical islam but the same rules don't apply to christians.

Regarding Orlando it was immediately a case of radical islam because he gave a shout out to ISIS. There were plenty of pictures of him wearing NYPD shirts but everyone realized it would have been ridiculous to say it has something to do with police violence. And yes you're perfectly safe against mentally unstable repressed homosexuals if you just avoid gay clubs.

And seriously we had a thread about Dylann Roof. It was in 2015 and if memory serves me correctly you posted in that thread about not making any rash decision regarding gun control.

You don't hear anyone mention the KKK as a christian group like ever. The KKK started as a white protestant group. The later iterations made changes but they still don't have too many non white protestant members to this day.

IRA was a catholic terrorist organization that was often funded by American nationals. I don't think even any wingbats back then were making claims that US Government is funding religious terrorists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tyde

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmick

I'm sure you've already imagined my delusional diatribe and your glorious rebuttal of it showing the whole board that you truly are the Michael Angelo of wordsmiths.

---

Michael Angelo ?

lol please tell me that was intentional

---

You might have missed this mintjewlip post from june...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mintjewlips

You guys are a piece of work lol.

Some of the most sniveling cunt comments and critiques I've ever read, as if you would tell Micheal Angelo how to paint the sisteen chapel. Smh at you nerds.

I will admit i was getting a little lost in all the plots, but brav muthafucking vo.

They tied the last 6 seasons up with a fucking bow.

Just enjoy it and awe.

---

...oh the joy we had on that day.

Lol at gimmick jerking off to typos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmick

There was a similar rise in hate crimes after brexit.

---

This isn't accurate.

The vast majority of these reports were made using True Vision

http://www.report-it.org.uk/your_police_force

Anyone, anywhere, can report anything as a "hate crime" with zero evidence, and then it becomes a statistic. Liberal rags like the BBC/Guardian then overhype this as a huge increase in hate crime and then slap it on a headline. But it's bullshit data and even the National Police Cheifs Council mention this at the bottom of thier press release.

"There has been an of 57% increase in reporting to True Vision since Friday compared to this time last month (85 reports between Thursday 23 –Sunday 26 June compared with 54 reports the corresponding 4 days four weeks ago.) These figures only take into account reports through one mechanism, reports are also made directly to forces and other community groups like Tell Mama and Community Security so this is not an overall national figure. This should not be read as a national increase in hate crime of 57% but an increase in reporting through one mechanism."

http://news.npcc.police.uk/releases/...ces-say-police

So basically, the media ignore this and knows that most people do not understand how this data works. You can't base this shit off anoymous stats, you need actual facts. A conviction rate might help - but that hasn't gone up so they can't use that!!


I've been living in the UK with my girlfriend who is from an EU country - and her collegues (who are also EU nationals) were reporting any old shit anonymously because they actually thought the referendum would be overturned if they kept hammering false reports. She actually fell out with a few of them because she refused to do it because she was actually in favour of leaving the EU.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ply-false.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mintjewlips

Lol at gimmick jerking off to typos.

---

Going from Michelangelo to Micheal Angelo because of a typo. So you fat fingered an extra a when going for an e while missing both w and s with the same key press. Then accidentally pressed spacebar before capitalizing the a from Angelo. Yea this story checks out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

All mass killings in this country recently based upon ideology have been due to radical Islam.

---

Dylann Roof is the most obvious counterexample. Robert Dear is another. Those are off the top of my head. Both were ideology-based, neither via Islam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cupid Stunt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmick

There was a similar rise in hate crimes after brexit.

---

This isn't accurate.

The vast majority of these reports were made using True Vision

http://www.report-it.org.uk/your_police_force

Anyone, anywhere, can report anything as a "hate crime" with zero evidence, and then it becomes a statistic. Liberal rags like the BBC/Guardian then overhype this as a huge increase in hate crime and then slap it on a headline. But it's bullshit data and even the National Police Cheifs Council mention this at the bottom of thier press release.

"There has been an of 57% increase in reporting to True Vision since Friday compared to this time last month (85 reports between Thursday 23 –Sunday 26 June compared with 54 reports the corresponding 4 days four weeks ago.) These figures only take into account reports through one mechanism, reports are also made directly to forces and other community groups like Tell Mama and Community Security so this is not an overall national figure. This should not be read as a national increase in hate crime of 57% but an increase in reporting through one mechanism."

http://news.npcc.police.uk/releases/...ces-say-police

So basically, the media ignore this and knows that most people do not understand how this data works. You can't base this shit off anoymous stats, you need actual facts. A conviction rate might help - but that hasn't gone up so they can't use that!!


I've been living in the UK with my girlfriend who is from an EU country - and her collegues (who are also EU nationals) were reporting any old shit anonymously because they actually thought the referendum would be overturned if they kept hammering false reports. She actually fell out with a few of them because she refused to do it because she was actually in favour of leaving the EU.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ply-false.html

---

Yea media has a tendency to go for the most sensationalist headline they can get away with. There's always false reporting and under reporting with any crime. For the most part these type of statistics are used because they are the best we have for now and it's slightly better than saying "i don't fucking know".

For the Home Office statistics they do remove some reports when they have enough reason to doubt that no crime ever happened.

There are multiple statistics from different sources showing a rise in the number of recorded offenses from that time period combined with anecdotal evidence.

Conviction data lags behind a lot. It's going to be a while before any of that is released.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qEB1r5IUsE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mintjewlips

Lol at gimmick jerking off to typos.

---

jerking off to typos???

These guys are lucky we are being such gracious winners for the most part, haven't quoted too many old posts for them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimmick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

White supremacists are often not Christian. They operate from the belief that their race is superior. They hate black Christians as much as black non-Christians.

When there is a Christian terrorist (that is, one who kills or attempts to kill based upon his religion), it's almost always aimed at an abortion clinic or something related. And when that happens, it is reported for what it is -- a Christian fanatic killed people at an abortion clinic because of his extreme religious beliefs. I have not seen any political or media whitewashing of that.

All mass killings in this country recently based upon ideology have been due to radical Islam.

It also goes far beyond cold statistics.

If Christian fanatics are attacking abortion clinics, I still feel 100% safe from them because I will never be in an abortion clinic. Most other Americans won't, either.

Radical Islamists are scary because they just want to kill Americans. They kill in random or semi-random places, to where everyone feels vulnerable. There is a huge psychological element to it, and it's hard for most people to ignore, even if they try to reason with themselves that their chances of being a victim in such an attack is tiny.

It's the same reason the public freaks out when a serial killer is on the loose, but collectively yawns when there are daily murders in the ghetto. You can avoid the ghetto murders by not visiting it. You can't avoid the serial killer if you're unfortunate enough to be picked by him.

---

I think you're still more likely to die in a meteor strike than be killed on US soil by an islamic terrorist. That's roughly the ballpark were talking about.

And other muslims is are still the favorite target of muslim terrorists around the world. The whole Sunni Shia thing they have going on. Unified muslim terrorists that are willing to put all differences aside against the rest of the world just don't exist.

Some parts of the media seem to think that when ever a muslim commits an act of terror that it's important to mention radical islam but the same rules don't apply to christians.

Regarding Orlando it was immediately a case of radical islam because he gave a shout out to ISIS. There were plenty of pictures of him wearing NYPD shirts but everyone realized it would have been ridiculous to say it has something to do with police violence. And yes you're perfectly safe against mentally unstable repressed homosexuals if you just avoid gay clubs.

And seriously we had a thread about Dylann Roof. It was in 2015 and if memory serves me correctly you posted in that thread about not making any rash decision regarding gun control.

You don't hear anyone mention the KKK as a christian group like ever. The KKK started as a white protestant group. The later iterations made changes but they still don't have too many non white protestant members to this day.

IRA was a catholic terrorist organization that was often funded by American nationals. I don't think even any wingbats back then were making claims that US Government is funding religious terrorists.

---

So you think it was a coincidence that the Orlando shooter was Muslim?

Sure, he wasn't a caricature of a simply-drawn terrorist you would see on TV, but it's pretty clear that his motivation was Islamic extremism, directed at gays. I know there are some rumors that he was a repressed homosexual himself, thus amplifying the anger, but it still had roots in Islamic extremism. Due to his teachings that gays were sinful to the point of deserving death, he might have hated himself for being gay to the point where he wanted to kill as many as possible in a suicide mission. That's still Islamic extremism. I don't believe in coincidences in matters like these. Occam's Razor and all that.

The Obama Administration excuse of, "We don't want to give the terrorists what they want by acknowledging their ideology" is just that -- an excuse. In reality, leftists are so afraid of provoking "Islamophobia" that they bend over backward to avoid telling the American public the truth.

Remember the despicable removal of ISIS references from the Orlando 911 tapes?

That's the type of Administration we just had. Better to lie to the American people about the real reason for terror attacks (and censor any evidence showing it) than allow people to think badly about Muslims.

Awful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RE-uhXKO-nk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crowe Diddly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

All mass killings in this country recently based upon ideology have been due to radical Islam.

---

Dylann Roof is the most obvious counterexample. Robert Dear is another. Those are off the top of my head. Both were ideology-based, neither via Islam.

---

Okay, not all, but most.

And the Islam-related ones dwarf the non-Islam related ones in number of deaths.

Muslims are 1% of the population in the US. They are responsible for most of the mass terror attacks in this country.

Wouldn't you say that's a problem?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crowe Diddly

Dylann Roof is the most obvious counterexample. Robert Dear is another. Those are off the top of my head. Both were ideology-based, neither via Islam.

---

Okay, not all, but most.

And the Islam-related ones dwarf the non-Islam related ones in number of deaths.

Muslims are 1% of the population in the US. They are responsible for most of the mass terror attacks in this country.

Wouldn't you say that's a problem?

---

The pendulum is swinging back and one thing you will feel vindicated by is that you will not be left out in the cold by standing behind facts. Here is a short video that will explain what is happening a bit better. You just have to sit back and watch now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPIMWCCG4fg

Is gimmick some dupe or parody account or something? This guy can't be real.