Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Petros said:

Snopes.com has always been a respected and legitimate fact checker since as long as I can remember. The far right hate snopes, since they report on the truth. Can't you guys provide any reliable sources for your baseless claims?

No. At one time Snopes got a rep for checking email memes. It was a married couple running it and they made a bundle. Then the old story happened. Fame and fortune ruined them. In the meantime disingenuous clingers of the Progressive Socialist variety had been hanging around places like some forum the original Snopes used to run and they volunteered to contribute.

So Mr. and Mrs. went off to waste their fortune and Snopes became a leftist political site that worked off the couples rep as an actual fact-checking site until people got wise and started realizing they knew what these new political Snopes posters were going to say about whoever they were talking about before they read the post and it was always going to swing hard left. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 135
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The people who argued that posting a picture of yourself holding an effigy of the president's severed head are now trying to convince us that creating political memes is worthy of jail time.  A g

You. Are. So. Desperate.  Trump and his goons incited the violence from his  deplorable sum-of-the-earth supporters. He told them to march on the capitol. I never said that was a verbatim quote    

If someone says that....and then immediately proceeds to throw the president from the aircraft at 30,000 ft cruising altitude, prosecutors will definitely use those words against him in court to show

Posted Images

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Look here’s an example:  if Someone says “Kill” the president, “assassinate” the president, or “murder” the president....those different words that sometimes have a different connotation but they all mean the same thing, dummy. I’m not a liar if I claim you said one but your actual verbatim quote was one of the others.  
 Just as sad and desperate and pathetic attempts on your part. 

Look, here's an example: If someone says, "I'm gonna off the president on the plane", or they say "I'm gonna help the president get off the plane" those sentences sound similar because they use almost all the same words, but they have wildly different meanings, and almost everyone in North America knows the difference.

If you accuse someone of saying one of those things, when they said the other, it's a lie. 

If you say those sentences basically mean the same thing, that's also a lie. 

When I quoted the dictionary to show you how what the terminology that you used meant, you coulda just said "my bad". 

 

FYI the amount of lying and disinformation about this president is legendary. Ukrainian collusion is a perfect example of the President's words being right there in black and white, meaning one exact thing, and CNN and their trolls here try to make it sound as if he said something completely different.

This of "march on Washington" was the exact same thing. If he didn't say that, and you accuse him of saying that, it's not just a minor faux pas. It's a huge lie, and it's the kind of lie that leftists love to tell.

 

Why do you find yourself in the position of having to lie so often? Don't you get sick of it? Don't you think that there's something wrong if you're always in a position where you need to lie?

 

Believe it or not I don't actually like pointing out the fact that people are lying all the time, but it's really important to point out when people are lying or being hypocritical. I'd much rather have a more polite, factual exchange but that seems to be a thing of the past. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Infidel Dog said:

No. At one time Snopes got a rep for checking email memes. It was a married couple running it and they made a bundle. Then the old story happened. Fame and fortune ruined them. In the meantime disingenuous clingers of the Progressive Socialist variety had been hanging around places like some forum the original Snopes used to run and they volunteered to contribute.

So Mr. and Mrs. went off to waste their fortune and Snopes became a leftist political site that worked off the couples rep as an actual fact-checking site until people got wise and started realizing they knew what these new political Snopes posters were going to say about whoever they were talking about before they read the post and it was always going to swing hard left. 

The far right websites often take direct aim at snopes.com, since it has been the most popular fact checking website. It's no secret what motivates them to do so.  They are mainly full of shit, and an easy way to distort the truth in America is to attack fact-checking websites, as being "leftist" havens, which most intelligent people can pick up on.

Edited by Petros
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Petros said:

The far right websites often take direct aim at snopes.com, since it has been the most popular fact checking website. It's no secret what motivates them to do so.  They are aminly full of shit, and an easy way to distort the truth in America is to attack fact-checking websites, as being "leftist" havens, which most intelligent people can pick up on.

Sorry bud. Not impressed by the shiniest turd in the turd pile.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

I'm gonna help the president get off the plane"

If someone says that....and then immediately proceeds to throw the president from the aircraft at 30,000 ft cruising altitude, prosecutors will definitely use those words against him in court to show his actions were premeditated. People will understand based on what actually happened next that when he said those words what he really meant was that he was going to kill the president. Get it?

And uh. Walk to / march to / march on are much more similar to each other than your example. 

Edited by BeaverFever
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Petros said:

Snopes.com has always been a respected and legitimate fact checker since as long as I can remember. The far right hate snopes, since they report on the truth. Can't you guys provide any reliable sources for your baseless claims?

Snopes is 'reliable' to people who want to believe what they see there, but it's BS.

If you try to look up whether or not Elizabeth Warren lied about her native heritage they'll dance around the topic 7 ways from Sunday, but the fact is that she made the claim that she was a native and it was a lie. Snopes will not say that. If Trump claimed to be a native to get into Harvard or wherever and it was found that he had an ancestor 6-10 generations back it would be a big fat LIAR!!!!!!!!!

Snopes says that it's "Unproven" that Kamala Harris's recent ancestor owned slaves. That's bogus. Her dad said that they did, and his dad is one generation removed from that ancestor, so he of all people should know. Birth records weren't kept back then in Jamaica, it can't be conclusivelyy proven either way. He's not just some random dude either, he's a man of serious social standing. The onus isn't on anyone to prove what her dad said, the onus is on someone to disprove it. The official status of that could be no lower than "Not Disproven".

Basically every story that you look up on Snopes, you can guess what their 'answer' will be: the most heavily spun concoction imaginable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

If someone says that....and then immediately proceeds to throw the president from the aircraft at 30,000 ft cruising altitude, prosecutors will definitely use those words against him in court to show his actions were premeditated. People will understand based on what actually happened next that when he said those words what he really meant was that he was going to kill the president. Get it?

 

Lol. Good one. 

You still know what I meant, but I'll give you a point nonetheless. 

Quote

And uh. Walk to / march to / march on are much more similar to each other than your example. 

"March on" has only one interpretation only, and it's 100% militant.

Edited by WestCanMan
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

BLM rioting killed a lot more than 1 person every 523 days. 

Perhaps you have an exact figure of people the BLM deliberately targeted, and murdered. Please enlighten us.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Infidel Dog said:

Here's what your hero did, Petros:

And you and the SPLC want to demonize Front Page Magazine, not because you allege what they say is untrue, but because they told us the story.

Getting harder and harder to take you seriously man.

 

You call this murderer a "Muslim Martyr," for unknown reasons. I have no idea why you refer to this person as my "hero" but perhaps it is a continuation of your Islamophobia, which is frowned upon in Canada.  

I have no idea what your racist websites say about Domineque Hakim Marcelle Ray, but having been briefed about the case, he was requesting a stay of execution in order to find an Islamic Iman, instead of a Christian Pastor to read him his last rites, before being put to death, which I would have no problem with.  However, the state of Alabama ultimately rejected this, and put him to death without an Iman present.

Of course, this has virtually nothing to do with the BLM movement,as his crime occurred in 1995, not 2020. Howeve, you never pass up a chance to voice your hatred of Muslims

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Snopes is 'reliable' to people who want to believe what they see there, but it's BS.

If you try to look up whether or not Elizabeth Warren lied about her native heritage they'll dance around the topic 7 ways from Sunday, but the fact is that she made the claim that she was a native and it was a lie. Snopes will not say that. If Trump claimed to be a native to get into Harvard or wherever and it was found that he had an ancestor 6-10 generations back it would be a big fat LIAR!!!!!!!!!

Snopes says that it's "Unproven" that Kamala Harris's recent ancestor owned slaves. That's bogus. Her dad said that they did, and his dad is one generation removed from that ancestor, so he of all people should know. Birth records weren't kept back then in Jamaica, it can't be conclusivelyy proven either way. He's not just some random dude either, he's a man of serious social standing. The onus isn't on anyone to prove what her dad said, the onus is on someone to disprove it. The official status of that could be no lower than "Not Disproven".

Basically every story that you look up on Snopes, you can guess what their 'answer' will be: the most heavily spun concoction imaginable.

Everything on the the internet is BS, isn't it WestCan.

Unless, of course, it fits your far right narrative. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Petros said:

You call this murderer a "Muslim Martyr," for unknown reasons. I have no idea why you refer to this person as my "hero" but perhaps it is a continuation of your Islamophobia, which is frowned upon in Canada.  

The sack of stink raped and murdered 15 year Tiffany Harville. Why you're so desperate to defend him or call anybody who dares to know about the horrors he perperated racist is baffling and getting more than a little bit creepy.

I don't think the repugnant diseased mind in a flesh puppet is any kind of martyr but apparently there are those who do. The article you call racist disagrees with them. Would that be what you find racist?

"Hakim had buried Tiffany in a field, with no word to her mother where she could visit her daughter. GoFundMe, which has frequently deplatformed conservatives, had no problem with helping Imam Maisonet raise money to keep Hakim from being “buried in the prison cemetery with no ritual or care or love.”

“In grief for Domineque, in anger at our cruel system of ‘justice,’” the GoFundMe missive by Jen Marlowe, a “human rights activist” concluded. There was no mention of Tiffany or grief for her.

Shortly thereafter, Sarsour crowed that the funding goal had been met. “Thank u 4 reminding me of the goodness left in this world.”

Linda Sarsour had repeatedly praised her prophet, Mohammed. Hakim had raped a 15-year-old girl. Mohammed had raped a 7-year-old, among many other girls and women. Hakim had killed three people. Mohammed had massacred thousands. This is what “goodness” looks like in Islam.

CAIR had campaigned extensively for Hakim. “It was a Muslim whose rights were tragically violated,” CAIR’s Alabama board chair complained."

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites

And did you know this guy you're defending also did this?

Quote

A year before murdering Tiffany, Hakim had shot and killed Reinhard Mabins, a 13-year-old boy, and Ernest, his older brother. He was convicted of all three murders. The killing of the Mabins boys earned Hakim life in prison, while Tiffany’s rape and murder put the monster on Death Row.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Infidel Dog said:

The sack of stink raped and murdered 15 year Tiffany Harville. Why you're so desperate to defend him or call anybody who dares to know about the horrors he perperated racist is baffling and getting more than a little bit creepy.

I don't think the repugnant diseased mind in a flesh puppet is any kind of martyr but apparently there are those who do. The article you call racist disagrees with them. Would that be what you find racist?

I have no idea what goes through your mind, but you may want to learn to comprehend the English language.  Nobody is defending him. Your hero Trump was a habitual liar, who duped millions of Americans. You trying to emulate his acts, is beyond pathetic. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

And did you know this guy you're defending also did this?

 

picard-facepalm.jpg

Earth to Infidel Dog:

There are Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, etc that also commit heinous crimes. One guy that happens to be Muslim (out of 2,000,000,000 followers), murders someone, should the 99% of Muslims who DON'T commit murder be painted with the same brush? 

Edited by Petros
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Infidel Dog said:

As to you accusing me of Islamophobia...

To quote a great thinker, "Islamophobia is a word created by fascists and used by cowards to manipulate morons."

Many of the internet sites you obtain your news from, are well known purveyors of hate speech, Islamophobia, anti-Immigrant sentiment, and run by, and/or sympathetic to White Supremacists

If the shoe fits.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Petros said:

Perhaps you have an exact figure of people the BLM deliberately targeted, and murdered. Please enlighten us.

How many stores did they loot "peacefully"? Dunno. 500? 1,000? 5,000? It's a lot.

How many of those business owners were completely destroyed financially? Probably less than 1,000 small business owners. No big deal, right Petros?

How many stores and low-income housing units did they burn down "peacefully"? Just a couple hundred I guess.

The number of cops they assaulted "peacefully"? No idea. Maybe 3,000? Maybe just 200, I dunno. Don't care.

The number of retarded people that they tortured "peacefully"? Maybe just one, I dunno, but one's a lot. Islamic state and the Nazis killed some retarded people but I dunno if even those filthy pieces of shit just tortured any.

How many people did they hold hostage in their cars, and threaten them, or pull them out and beat them up "peacefully"? They held up thousands. They probably beat up less than 100 of those people, but they did kill at least one. Is that too much to be considered "peaceful".

 

I'm not even done here, the list goes on, I just don't care to talk to you anymore, it's making me sick.

I just need to know why you think that destroying those families who lost their businesses or lost a loved one is so much better than inconveniencing some Senators. 

Honestly, the Dems revelled in all the BLM violence that killed so many people, why do you care if they hid in the Senate basement for 95 minutes? How is it that all the murders were peaceful but what happened to the Senators is so bad? Is killing regular folk better than inconveniencing Senators? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

How many stores did they loot "peacefully"? Dunno. 500? 1,000? 5,000? It's a lot.

How many of those business owners were completely destroyed financially? Probably less than 1,000 small business owners. No big deal, right Petros?

How many stores and low-income housing units did they burn down "peacefully"? Just a couple hundred I guess.

The number of cops they assaulted "peacefully"? No idea. Maybe 3,000? Maybe just 200, I dunno. Don't care.

The number of retarded people that they tortured "peacefully"? Maybe just one, I dunno, but one's a lot. Islamic state and the Nazis killed some retarded people but I dunno if even those filthy pieces of shit just tortured any.

How many people did they hold hostage in their cars, and threaten them, or pull them out and beat them up "peacefully"? They held up thousands. They probably beat up less than 100 of those people, but they did kill at least one. Is that too much to be considered "peaceful".

 

I'm not even done here, the list goes on, I just don't care to talk to you anymore, it's making me sick.

I just need to know why you think that destroying those families who lost their businesses or lost a loved one is so much better than inconveniencing some Senators. 

Honestly, the Dems revelled in all the BLM violence that killed so many people, why do you care if they hid in the Senate basement for 95 minutes? How is it that all the murders were peaceful but what happened to the Senators is so bad? Is killing regular folk better than inconveniencing Senators? 

you cite no evidence.

you constantly ask people to look up words in the dictionary and yet replace the meanings of words to meet your own zealot narrative needs. in fact, you're completely mixed up and think that Left-wing means Fascism and Right-wing mean Liberalism.

Left-wing politics

"Left-wing politics supports social equality and egalitarianism, often in critique of social hierarchy.[1][2][3][4] Left-wing politics typically involves a concern for those in society whom its adherents perceive as disadvantaged relative to others as well as a belief that there are unjustified inequalities that need to be reduced or abolished."

Liberalism

"Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on liberty, consent of the governed and equality before the law.[1][2][3] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but they generally support free markets, free trade, limited government, individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), capitalism, democracy, secularism, gender equality, racial equality, internationalism, freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of religion."

Right-wing politics

"Right-wing politics embraces the view that certain social orders and hierarchies are inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable,[1][2][3] typically supporting this position on the basis of natural law, economics, or tradition.[4]:693, 721[5][6][7][8][9] Hierarchy and inequality may be seen as natural results of traditional social differences[10][11] or competition in market economies.[12][13][14] The term right-wing can generally refer to "the conservative or reactionary section of a political party or system"."

Fascism

"Fascism (/ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a form of far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism[1][2] characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy[3] which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe."

but your confusion is understandable if all you do is consume propaganda all day.

Propaganda

"Propaganda is communication that is primarily used to influence an audience and further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be selectively presenting facts in order to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language in order to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is being presented."

Loaded language

"Loaded language (also known as loaded terms, emotive language, high-inference language and language-persuasive techniques) is rhetoric used to influence an audience by using words and phrases with strong connotations associated with them in order to invoke an emotional response and/or exploit stereotypes."

Edited by godzilla
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

How many stores did they loot "peacefully"? Dunno. 500? 1,000? 5,000? It's a lot.

How many of those business owners were completely destroyed financially? Probably less than 1,000 small business owners. No big deal, right Petros?

How many stores and low-income housing units did they burn down "peacefully"? Just a couple hundred I guess.

The number of cops they assaulted "peacefully"? No idea. Maybe 3,000? Maybe just 200, I dunno. Don't care.

The number of retarded people that they tortured "peacefully"? Maybe just one, I dunno, but one's a lot. Islamic state and the Nazis killed some retarded people but I dunno if even those filthy pieces of shit just tortured any.

How many people did they hold hostage in their cars, and threaten them, or pull them out and beat them up "peacefully"? They held up thousands. They probably beat up less than 100 of those people, but they did kill at least one. Is that too much to be considered "peaceful".

 

I'm not even done here, the list goes on, I just don't care to talk to you anymore, it's making me sick.

I just need to know why you think that destroying those families who lost their businesses or lost a loved one is so much better than inconveniencing some Senators. 

Honestly, the Dems revelled in all the BLM violence that killed so many people, why do you care if they hid in the Senate basement for 95 minutes? How is it that all the murders were peaceful but what happened to the Senators is so bad? Is killing regular folk better than inconveniencing Senators? 

I asked a very simple question, and you respond with a word salad.  What else is new?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

10 hours ago, Petros said:

Earth to Infidel Dog:

There are Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, etc that also commit heinous crimes. 

Yes, and many of their stories are often also told. You are objecting to this one being told because it has the additional angle of the conservative haters at GoFundMe, the Social Justice Warrior, Jen Marlowe, the Anti-Semite Mohammedan Prog ally Linda Sarsour and the religious operatives at CAIR martyring the child killer you object to anybody knowing about.

All this began while poor little Tiffany Harville was laying raped, murdered and forgotten in a ditch.

Give up, for God's Sakes. Your needy sounding defense of this murdering filth is crossing the border from dumb into nuts. 

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Yes, and many of their stories are often also told. You are objecting to this one being told

Actually, I could not care less.  You are the one who has been going on about it for two pages. Why not go to the US, and write the local Congressmen if you are so obsessed with the crime. 

As for making a murder of a small child political, while that is typical of right wingers trying to push racist or xenophobic agendas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nonsense. 2 pages ago I began countering your crazy idea that any media noticing the martyring of a murdering rapist was racist and therefore false.

You're trapped into defending the scum and you seem to believe you can get out of it by calling anybody who notices what you're doing a racist.

You can't, Dummy. It's not working. Calling racist to anybody who disagrees with you doesn't work anymore in general. I'm baffled as to why you can't figure that out. You haven't got the word yet from high command? Is that it?

Edited by Infidel Dog
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

Oh bloody Hell...we all know what a meme is.

Meme, unit of cultural information spread by imitation. The term meme (from the Greek mimema, meaning “imitated”) was introduced in 1976 by British evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins in his work The Selfish Gene.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, godzilla said:

you cite no evidence.

I don't need evidence when I'm referring to things that are common knowledge, get a grip.

Quote

you constantly ask people to look up words in the dictionary

No, I educate people on the proper usage of words that they use incorrectly, and I provide the definition for them.

Quote

and yet replace the meanings of words to meet your own zealot narrative needs. in fact, you're completely mixed up and think that Left-wing means Fascism and Right-wing mean Liberalism.

That's just stupidity on your part. I never said that all LWs are fascists. I said that fascism has come to mean.... extreme governmental control over the media, police, judiciary, speech and literature without regard to which side of the political spectrum they are on. 

The Dems operate as fascists from top to bottom. They use the FBI like the KGB, they appoint AGs & judges who disregard the constitution and rule in favour of Dem party policies, they are against freedom of speech, etc. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...