Page 19 of 19 FirstFirst ... 9171819
Results 181 to 190 of 190
Thanks Tree250Thanks

Thread: David Hogg admits he was not at school that day....

  1. #181
    Junior Member WisconsinCheeseNip's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,012
    Thanks
    189

    From
    WI
    And of course - the Government and the police were aware of who the Florida shooter was beforehand ...





    FBI admits it failed to investigate a tip from person

    close to Florida shooter warning of his desire to conduct a school shooting


    New York Post, The Sun and staff writers, News Corp Australia Network,


    February 17, 2018


    "THE FBI knew about gunman Nikolas Cruz’s ‘desire to kill people’ and disturbing social media posts — but failed to investigate him.


    The Federal Bureau of Investigation received the information on January 5 but they failed to investigate Cruz, who killed 17 when he opened fire at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School on Wednesday.

    “On January 5, 2018, a person close to Nikolas Cruz contacted the FBI’s Public Access Line (PAL) tipline to report concerns about him,” the FBI’s statement read.

    “The caller provided information about Cruz’s gun ownership, desire to kill people, erratic behavior, and disturbing social media posts, as well as the potential of him conducting a school shooting.”


    http://www.news.com.au/world/north-a...66511565834797

    _________________________________________________

    Sheriff's Office Confirms 23 Nikolas Cruz Encounters Before Shooting

    Sheriff's Office Confirms 23 Nikolas Cruz Encounters Before Shooting


    All the Times Authorities Were Warned About Nikolas Cruz


    "On Feb. 5, 2016, an anonymous caller told a Broward County Sheriff's Office deputy that then-17-year-old Nikolas Cruz had threatened to shoot up his school on Instagram. Cruz had posted a photo of himself with a collection of guns."


    All the Times Authorities Were Warned About Nikolas Cruz





    ...

  2. #182
    Junior Member WisconsinCheeseNip's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,012
    Thanks
    189

    From
    WI
    Quote Originally Posted by boontito View Post
    It's not insane. It's purposeful trolling. He knows it isn't true.


    No purposeful trolling is what you do, along with your clique of Dittoheads.


    What do we have a Director of Central Intelligence, Homeland Security, or an FBI for ?

    If the U.S. can't assimilate an obvious threat warning -

    get the hell out and close up shop.

    ________________________________________________

    SEPT. 11 TH WARNINGS

    FROM ALLIES - RUSSIA, GERMAN, BRITAIN, EGYPT, JORDAN

    ________________________________________________

    Warnings the Attack Will Come from the Air

    Many warnings specifically mentioned a threat coming from the air.

    In 1999, British intelligence gave a secret report to the US embassy. The report stated that al-Qaeda had plans to use “commercial aircraft” in “unconventional ways,”“possibly as flying bombs.” [Sunday Times, 6/9/02] On July 16, 2001, British intelligence passed a message to the US that al-Qaeda was in “the final stages” of preparing a terrorist attack in Western countries. [London Times, 6/14/02] In early August, the British gave another warning, telling the US to expect multiple airline hijackings from al-Qaeda. This warning was included in Bush’s briefing on August 6, 2001. [Sunday Herald, 5/19/02]

    In June 2001, German intelligence warned the US, Britain, and Israel that Middle Eastern terrorists were planning to hijack commercial aircraft and use them as weapons to attack “American and Israeli symbols which stand out.” Within the American intelligence community, “the warnings were taken seriously and surveillance intensified” but “there was disagreement on how such terrorist attacks could be prevented.” This warning came from Echelon, a spy satellite network that is partly based in Germany. [Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 9/11/01, Washington Post, 9/14/01]

    In late July 2001, Egyptian intelligence received a report from an undercover agent in Afghanistan that “20 al-Qaeda members had slipped into the US and four of them had received flight training on Cessnas.” To the Egyptians, pilots of small planes didn’t sound terribly alarming, but they passed on the message to the CIA anyway, fully expecting Washington to request information. “The request never came.” [CBS, 10/9/02] Given that there were 19 hijackers and four pilots (who trained on Cessnas) in the 9/11 plot, one might think this would now be a big news item. But in fact, the information has only appeared as an aside in a CBS “60 Minutes” show about a different topic.

    In late summer 2001, Jordan intelligence intercepted a message stating that a major attack was being planned inside the US and that aircraft would be used. The code name of the operation was Big Wedding, which did in fact turn out to be the codename of the 9/11 plot. The message was passed to US intelligence through several channels. [International Herald Tribune, 5/21/02, Christian Science Monitor, 5/23/02]

    Russian President Vladimir Putin publicly stated that he ordered his intelligence agencies to alert the US in the summer of 2001 that suicide pilots were training for attacks on US targets. [Fox News, 5/17/02] The head of Russian intelligence also stated, “We had clearly warned them” on several occasions, but they “did not pay the necessary attention.” [Agence France-Presse, 9/16/01] The Russian newspaper Izvestia claimed that Russian intelligence agents knew the participants in the attacks, and: “More than that, Moscow warned Washington about preparation for these actions a couple of weeks before they happened.” [Izvestia, 9/12/02]


    ...

  3. #183
    Junior Member WisconsinCheeseNip's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,012
    Thanks
    189

    From
    WI
    Quote Originally Posted by TennesseeRain View Post
    It's not a fact. This is pure, unadulterated, tin-foil hat, "CHEMTRAILS ARE REAL" bullshit you are spouting here. It's insane with a cherry on top.


    Yeah right -


    The U.S. Government knew about the Florida shooter, the Boston Bombers, and Sept. 11 th just to name a few.



    If you wanna feel safe in your own country, move to Nova Scotia, Canada.



    The DHS, the Director of Central Intelligence, the CIA, and the FBI, are God damed useless.


    The last 5 pages ganging up, trolling on B'man you guys did was disgraceful, he is always reasonable and patient.







    ...

  4. #184
    Human Bean KnotaFrayed's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    14,192
    Thanks
    11725

    From
    Here
    Quote Originally Posted by WisconsinCheeseNip View Post
    Yeah right -


    The U.S. Government knew about the Florida shooter, the Boston Bombers, and Sept. 11 th just to name a few.



    If you wanna feel safe in your own country, move to Nova Scotia, Canada.



    The DHS, the Director of Central Intelligence, the CIA, and the FBI, are God damed useless.


    The last 5 pages ganging up, trolling on B'man you guys did was disgraceful, he is always reasonable and patient.







    ...
    Meanwhile those who are conned into fearing the federal government and believe conspiracies are more than willing to pay tax dollars to an out of sight defense budget that goes toward the very military that's going to come after their guns, as soon as the man they voted for, usurps the the government from control of the people that elected him.

    Makes sense, doesn't it? Your "proof" of all you say, comes from where? You have vetted their honesty, how and via what means and methods?

    As far as 9/11 is concerned? Any thinking person could figure out numerous ways a terrorist attack might come. Why? Because when terrorist attacks took place prior to 9/11, everyone sat around and talked about all our vulnerabilities.

    I bet in addition to any warnings any agency got, that did come to fruition, there were hundreds that didn't and never have. If the federal agencies charged with protecting every American from every threat received, American tax payers would be paying a lot more than they do in taxes currently to pay for the personnel, much less the training. They can't be everywhere in force, every place intelligence finds, may be subjected to a potential attack.

    Aside from Pearl Harbor and 9/11, the most deadly attack in this nation did NOT come from foreign terrorists OR the government.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing

    Gotta love the people that fear the things that actually do more to protect them than not, then run around cutting budgets to "save" money because they "promised" to cut taxes in order to get elected.

    Maybe if more Americans recognized their hypocrisy and their contradictory behavior and stopped fearing and attacking the very things that are helping them or electing the kind of people that have been ripping them off, we might live in a nation that looks less like a combat zone and more like a nation that God, might actually find a reason to bless.

    I don't think that is going to happen when the same people that try to promote a belief in Christ, are suggesting Christ should have "armed" himself in self defense and blown away all the people that called for his crucifixion.

    Where are the hats that say "Make America Sane Again", "Make America Think Again" or "Make America Intelligent Again"? As it is now, we have some people that seem to think making America great again is all about being stupid, unthinking and kicking themselves in the butt.

    We have a segment of the population that would rather lose their children than lose their firearms, that elected an adulterer to be President so he'll stop homosexual marriage, a billionaire to be President so he'll drain the swamp of a money corrupted government......They elected to cut taxes, then whine about how lousy protection for the American people is, they continue to feel fine about paying taxes to spend more on defense than the next three top powers in the world combined, but they won't give those who teach their children a raise. They think the government is intrusive into their lives, but not when they claim women should have no say as to whether they can be pregnant or not and they use the law to make it more difficult for women to safely terminate an unwanted pregnancy, if they so decide. They use the very government they hate to gerrymander districts to their own political favor and then fear a tyrannical (single party) government coming from "liberals".........

    The list, goes on and on and on about where America has gotten to and how it is unlikely to get out of, until people begin to think, beginning with their own actions, the ones that come back and kick them in the butt, because they didn't stop to think in the first place, about such things or about the simple ethic of reciprocity that says, do unto others as you want them, to do unto you. If you want others to kick you in the shins, then kick them in the shins. if you don't then don't do to them what you wouldn't do to yourself or want them or anyone else, to do to you. It's not rocket science, but it does require expending a minute amount of energy to actually engage one's brain to think of those things and of how what they are doing could and very well might, come back and haunt them, if not hurt them more than help them, in the long run.

    When someone consistently debunks most of what one puts forward and articulates why, but those consistently debunked continue to claim they are right and that those that provided evidence that debunks their claims are wrong and this happens over and over, it is time for those constantly debunked to check out whether it is they, who are the one's that are wrong. That would be reasonable, unless constantly tossing out BS as a means to troll, is their mission.

    Trolling would be more about constantly making claims that are constantly debunked than those who are debunking the consistently false claims floated, perhaps with an intent to troll and inflame others. Constant flooding of a site with BS is not reasonable and not patience. It is not those who provide evidence which debunks the BS droppings left here by the same posters constantly which are trolling and the debunkers can be just as patient in their debunking and providing facts, figures and evidence to back their debunking up than those constantly trolling with their BS, to both anger and inflame other posters and try to catch a few others in their nets with their snake oil sales jobs.
    Last edited by KnotaFrayed; 17th April 2018 at 12:59 AM.

  5. #185
    Happiness is a warm gun Blues63's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    8,547
    Thanks
    6011

    From
    In a Yellow Submarine
    Reprinted with permission. Owing to the forum rules, I cannot supply a link, however I have permission to reprint the essay in full.

    Conspiracy Theories as Examples of Pure Dogma

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dogma may be defined as established opinion, a doctrine put forth without evidence, or as a body of doctrines supported authoritatively by a church. But when you consider a combination of all three--an established opinion without evidence, supported by the authority of supernatural beliefs--you have a summation of everything that the [skeptic] is opposed to. As it so happens, religion is the largest central distributor of dogma, but you can find it within other circles of opinion as well.

    Theology is defined as "faith justified by reason." But this is another way of saying "A conclusion in search of a justification." This was the dominant philosophical approach of the dark ages, and it was this habit that kept them in the dark. Beliefs were fortified and communicated, supported only by citations of other beliefs, forming a circle of opinion with no means of objective correction. Theology remained a circle jerk, somewhat like partisan bloggers, who reinforce their mutual preconceptions by echoing them back and forth, referencing each other, accepting only what evidence confirms their beliefs and ignoring the rest (when they reference evidence at all.) This is the modus operendi of dogmatists, and it can become a prison which is difficult escape. This is what made science impossible in the dark ages, and it was only when a central dogmatic authority of the Catholic Church was shattered that science and philosophy could flourish.

    This same hermetically sealed community of belief can also be found amongst political ideologues, proponents of various pseudo-sciences and occult dogmas, and amongst conspiracy theorists. Conspiracy theorists are notorious for this tendency to form communities of the deluded, for in their case the opinions they hold are often so outrageously wrong that conspiracists often appear genuinely insane. The internet has been instrumental in the rise of new conspiracy theories because it provides the opportunity to form the kind of closed, circular, and mutually reinforcing groupthink which was previously available only to close knit religious communities or tightly structured political groups. This means that conspiracists should be properly considered as a species of dogmatic believer similar to members of a religious sect.

    Religious and political philosophies, however, may incorporate valid ethical and social observations, which may attract followers with different motivations, diluting the purely dogmatic elements. Consumers of pseudo-science make common cognitive mistakes which requires research to dispel; many may simply have not taken the time to know better, and may not have much at stake (those who pay thousands to psychics and faith healers are another matter). Their entertainment of nonsense may be casual and not a central feature of their personality; when the stakes are high, they go to a doctor, not a homeopath. Conspiracy theorists, on the other hand, are usually quite dedicated and quite vociferous in what they believe. But most importantly, conspiracists are barking mad--pure dogmatists. Examination of conspiracists will throw light on the nature and habits of purely dogmatic believers of all kinds.

    Conspiracists share in common with other dogmatic believers the following traits:

    1) Epistemological Incompetence. Conspiracists lack basic tools of comprehension concerning the way the world works. These include a poor understanding of logic, science, and human nature. They have little or no grasp of what James Flynn calls shorthand abstractions (SHA's). SHA's include the concepts of the market, percentage, natural selection, random samples, control groups, the naturalistic fallacy, the charisma effect, placebo effect, falsifiability and tautology, and the tolerance school fallacy. Some of these you may recognize by name, and I'm not going to go into a full explanation of all of them. Flynn's work is stellar. He is best known for the Flynn effect, the measured gradual rise in IQ over the last century. His conception of the SHA's is a must read; Flynn believes that the acceptance of scientific ways of thinking is responsible for the Flynn effect. You can find it here. This is where he lists and describes the SHA's and several anti-SHA's, the latter being common misperceptions leading to false conclusions.

    The important point is that these are tools needed to understand the modern world. Without them, conspiracists literally do not understand how the world works. This is the root cause of all of their other problems. The conspiracy theory not only exploits this weakness, but reinforces it. Acceptance of conspiracy theories may in the long term actually impair the ability for critical thinking. One conspiracy theory leads to another, and all seem to lead, eventually, to the moral and cognitive black hole of anti-semitism.

    2) Epistemological Relativism. Since conspiracists do not understand the methods for reaching a correct conclusion, all conclusions are equal and based solely upon the weight of authority. In short, there is no truth, only opinion. It is a sad fact that someone can acquire a scientific or technical degree without ever fully understanding the scientific method. It is possible to take the results of science as received wisdom, and parrot it back successfully on exams, without understanding how it was derived. Dogmas are conclusions, cues to stop thinking, rather than means of arriving at conclusions. There are some that will learn science in this way, and never move beyond the dogmatic mindset.

    3) Confirmation Bias. Conspiracists disregard arguments that refute their thesis, usually by relying on the Genetic Fallacy--the source is in on the conspiracy, and therefore cannot be trusted. There is no truth, only opinion, and only the right opinion is acceptable. The Grand Cabal "got to them", or their interests are somehow served by the conspiracy. Their motives are therefore impure, and nothing they say can be considered worthy to discredit the conspiracy theory. Since conspiracists consider all arguments to be arguments from authority, the choice is not between correct methodologies, but correct authority.

    4) Selective Bias. Conspiracists emphasize only those snippets of fact that confirm their beliefs, and disregard or dismiss the bulk of evidence which refutes their thesis. A common practice is quote mining, where a single statement (or even a portion of a statement) is quoted out of context as evidence for the theory. When the original source objects to the interpretation of the quote, the conspiracists fall back on the Genetic Fallacy, claiming that the source has been compromised since the original statement. Conspiracy theories are therefore unfalsifiable.

    5) Exceptionalism. Conspiracists grant their own theories exception from logical or methodological principles that they routinely apply in the rest of their lives. Occam's Razor is a good example of an abandoned principle; it is hard to believe that a qualified engineer would not be familiar with this logical tool, yet there are many engineers amongst "Truthers", whose theories concerning the events of 9/11 multiply entities on a grand scale while the real explanation is remarkably simple.

    6) 'Gaps' Arguments. Rather than provide a comprehensive argument, backed by evidence, conspiracists rely on a false dichotomy, attempting to argue that there are inconsistencies in the accepted explanation, and then presenting their own as the only alternative. When these gaps are filled the conspiracists pretend not to hear the new evidence, and continue to point to gaps that have in fact been filled. Since this new information contradicts their claims, it will not appear in discussions amongst the conspiracists, and will be blithely ignored when presented by someone else. This additional information is, in their mind, intended to refute what they have already decided is true and therefore obviously ideologically based and not worthy of consideration.

    7) Theory of Agency rather than Process. For the conspiracist, there are no coincidences. Everything happens for a reason, and that reason is always an intentional agent. Any large scale, frequent, or dramatic events must be the product of deliberate planning, and carried out by an commensurately powerful organization. If those events are negative, a vast malevolent agency or cabal is at work. Small criminal groups or sole individuals cannot be responsible. Ignorance, incompetence, poor planning, or impersonal forces cannot play a role. For those who do not understand how the world works, the question is not how, but who, a systematic misapplication of intentional explanations.

    8) Magic. For those who understand nothing about the world, all is magic. The agency is both supernaturally intelligent and powerful, and yet strangely inept. The cabal has virtually complete control of nearly all powerful institutions--economic, political, legal, social, criminal, and journalistic--yet somehow cannot prevent the conspiracists from uncovering their plot. They can, however, hide all the evidence, an ability which would require the cabal to command power that rivals the divine. Benjamin Franklin said that "Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead." The conspiracists believes that plots involving thousands can operate without detection, thanks to the near omniscience and virtual omnipotence of the conspiracy, whose members are all unswervingly loyal to the cause.

    9) Occult Knowledge. Despite the fantastic powers of the enemy, the conspiracists have uncovered the Hidden Truth, marking them as in some way the champions of divine providence. This too is no accident; the conspiracist possesses a rare and special virtue. The conspiracist is thus cast in a heroic light, often an overcompensation for the mundane reality of their personal lives. They alone have broken through the web of illusions created by the cabal, and it is their destiny to free the world. Their Truth trumps all lesser truths, so outright and deliberate lies are acceptable. The objective is not truth (which does not actually exist unless it is theirs--relativists always make exceptions for what they believe, otherwise the relativist argument itself would collapse) but victory.

    10) Mutation, Adaptation, and Cross Breeding. As conspiracists meet contrary evidence, they continue to invent and share counter arguments in a piecemeal fashion. Exposure to reason and evidence, rather than correcting the theory, actually forces it to adapt to become a more reason-resistant strain. In effect, criticism acts as a form of natural selection, weeding out the rational proponents and isolating the loons, while at the same time forcing the theory itself to evolve into something which cannot be falsified by any means. Many conspiracist arguments actually contradict other arguments presented by the same conspiracist, because they are pieced together from variant conspiracy theories. Since conspiracy theories rely on gaps arguments, consistency is not important, and this is why one conspiracy theory leads to another--they share common elements indiscriminately. The only thing that is important is that the real explanation be refuted so that the conspiracist alternative may be offered in its place.

    11) Evangelism. Spreading belief in the conspiracy theory is of the utmost importance. The conspiracist believes himself to be the sworn enemy of an immensely powerful malevolent enemy, which must be defeated. Telling others what he knows will make him a less appealing target for the enemy. But in spreading the word, he also becomes the hero in a grand cause, a paladin in gleaming armor against the dragon. Converting others to his beliefs will not only lessen his cognitive dissonance (he is, after all, often told that he is crazy), but will also convince others of his heroic stature. In the eyes of converts, he will go from zero to hero in one easy step.


    Although details of justification may vary amongst dogmas, these traits appear to be common to all systems of dogma. Consider Stalinism and National Socialism, both political dogmas. Both employed conspiracy theories of their own. Their biases, and general aversion to truth and the means of establishing truth, are fairly obvious. More suprising, as supposedly secular dogmas, both were notorious dabblers in the occult and wholesale distributors of pseudo-science. In their support for Lysenkoism, the Stalinists apparently thought they were in the position to legislate the laws of science. Hitler railed against "Jewish science". Fortunately for us this included nuclear physics, and led the Nazis to abandon the development of nuclear weapons.

    Some invocation of magic and the occult seems to be required to protect any dogma from empirical challenge. Freudian psychology claimed to be able to recover repressed memories which even the patient didn't know about. This eventually led to the inanity of mutiple personalities, past life regression, and tales of vast satanic conspiracies. No evidence for any of this was ever found, and the entire charade has left the cult of Freud in ruins. But at the time it was claimed that only the psychotherapist had the knowledge, and ability, to reach these hidden truths. In the aftermath of these scandals, Freudian psychology was stripped of its scientific disguise and revealed to be an occult practice.

    You may have noticed memetic elements at work here. I'm not completely convinced that the memetic model is coherent. For that matter, neither is Richard Dawkins, who merely proposed the idea of memes as the extension of the idea of simple replicators into another domain. But there does seem to be some organic, evolutionary process at work here. Dogmatic systems consist largely of false and irrational beliefs. They are dogmatic precisely because they are not rationally or empirically defensible. As such, a dogmatic belief system appears to be a viral agent which bypasses rational defenses and hijacks the mind. The problem with the concept of the meme is that it is too simple; if a meme is to be considered as a viral agent, we must remember that viruses are not simple gene snippets floating in the blood stream. They are packages of genes contained within a delivery system which includes defensive and offensive adaptations. They must be able to avoid detection and elimination, and they must be able to gain entry into the cell.

    By analogy, systems of dogma must, in addition to their main ideological payload, be able to slip past or destroy critical defenses, must encourage evangelism, and must at first approach be attractive enough for consideration. This is no simple meme, but a compex system of mutually reinforcing ideas. The attraction can take many forms. The dogma may offer a seemingly simple solution to a difficult problem, be consistent with existing beliefs, be ethically compelling, make wonderful promises, appeal to the listener's pride, or come from a person loved or trusted. Yet the attraction is not the main problem. It is quite possible to consider nonsense without being convinced by it. It is at this point that the dogmatic defenses kick in.

    In a free market of ideas, the dogmas that survive are those that are most resistant to reason and evidence--in short, those that that best resist falsification. No dogma is completely unfalsifiable, as virtually all dogmas make claims regarding the physical world. The solution is not to deal with contrary evidence or arguments piecemeal, but to embrace a broad strategy which undermines the legitimacy of inductive reasoning itself. This is best seen in the Wedge strategy, which seeks first to undermine methodological materialism, the basis of science, before advancing religious dogma in its place. Here we have, exposed for all to see, an element that is hidden in most dogmatic systems. Having found the population too smart for the dogmatists own good, they are actually seeking to reverse the Flynn effect and return us to a pre-modern way of thinking. In doing so, they would cut the thread upon which our prosperity, freedom, and even our very survival hang. Their success would lead to a staggering body count.

    We are for rationalism and the scientific method. If we are to put everything that we oppose under a single umbrella, dogma would be the best choice. The New Atheists--whom I heartily applaud--chose religion in general as the target, but I think this is both too narrow and badly aimed. I suspect that this is where Sam Harris was going when he says we shouldn't call ourselves atheists, and when he supported methodological rather than dogmatic religions. From reading their books I can see that their target was dogmatic religion. But the choice of religion in general is too narrow because it misses the Stalinists, Nazis and fascists, pseudo-scientists and psychics, the postmodernists, and the conspiracy theorists. It is badly aimed because it includes non-dogmatic forms of religion, including deism. Hal Bidlack, the talented and wonderful host of every TAM meeting, is a deist. So were Thomas Jefferson and most of the American founding fathers. We can live with the deists. It's the dogmatists that are the problem.

  6. #186
    Junior Member WisconsinCheeseNip's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    1,012
    Thanks
    189

    From
    WI
    Quote Originally Posted by bmanmcfly View Post
    https://www.cbsnews.com/video/39-day...s-documentary/

    AT 4:45 in, Hogg tells the world that he was at home when the shooting started. Rode to the school on his bike...

    This means that he had to work his way INTO the school, while the shooting was going on, find his way into a closet where he began interviewing fellow students.

    Did the story just fall apart?



    Did you read any of these interviews w/ Hogg ? Saying f bombs, f___ this and f __ that ?

    I mean, where he says, "why can't you f___ing use Facebook" ( as if social media solves everything )?

    I mean, I 'm not scoffing at the guy. I truly sympathize with him, there was another school gun protest today, the kids are scared, they're protesting, they're not dumb.

    But do they think they can just use Facebook and legislate morality, right?

    If we collected every hand gun away from the American people who had registered them, took it away and say melted it down and built Pres. Trumps wall across Mexico with the metal and plastic, would it work?

    If they banned handguns, there'd be huge smuggling rings to get more, right?

  7. #187
    Veteran Member bmanmcfly's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    19,008
    Thanks
    2979

    From
    C-A-N-A-D-A-Eh
    Quote Originally Posted by Blues63 View Post
    What a fucking stupid response. Furthermore, I have already established that you're dishonest so there's no need for any further evidence on that score.



    I knew you wouldn't answer my questions. Fuck me, you follow the conspiracy theorist manual to the letter.

    Again, and no dumb attempts to dodge the point this time, please.

    What does this mean to you? How does this prove whatever hypothesis you haven't yet stated, or how could he have been stopped with contemporary laws?

    Come on, it's not difficult.
    You are literally doing what you are accusing others of doing... That takes some hutzpah. A term which means intense hubris, like killing ones parents and demanding sympathy over becoming orphaned.

  8. #188
    Veteran Member HenryPorter's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    20,451
    Thanks
    10895

    From
    N48 51.489 E2 17.67119
    Quote Originally Posted by bmanmcfly View Post
    Lmao... so they changed the story after the fact...

    Now we have 2 irreconcilable stories.

    Hogg is a discredited source.

    Of course some LOVE defending liars if the want to rob you of freedom.
    You're the discredited source. You blindly ran with bullshit and now you're defending why you're going to hang with the bullshit. You're sad.

  9. #189
    Veteran Member HenryPorter's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    20,451
    Thanks
    10895

    From
    N48 51.489 E2 17.67119
    Quote Originally Posted by WisconsinCheeseNip View Post
    Did you read any of these interviews w/ Hogg ? Saying f bombs, f___ this and f __ that ?

    I mean, where he says, "why can't you f___ing use Facebook" ( as if social media solves everything )?

    I mean, I 'm not scoffing at the guy. I truly sympathize with him, there was another school gun protest today, the kids are scared, they're protesting, they're not dumb.

    But do they think they can just use Facebook and legislate morality, right?

    If we collected every hand gun away from the American people who had registered them, took it away and say melted it down and built Pres. Trumps wall across Mexico with the metal and plastic, would it work?

    If they banned handguns, there'd be huge smuggling rings to get more, right?
    Banning and confiscating hand guns would do a lot more to reduce gun deaths and injuries that banning and confiscating assault style rifles.

  10. #190
    Veteran Member bmanmcfly's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    19,008
    Thanks
    2979

    From
    C-A-N-A-D-A-Eh
    Quote Originally Posted by HenryPorter View Post
    You're the discredited source. You blindly ran with bullshit and now you're defending why you're going to hang with the bullshit. You're sad.
    Right... I only pointed to his own words on tape.

    My god, pointing out someone's own words against them, how discrediting.

Page 19 of 19 FirstFirst ... 9171819

Similar Threads

  1. David Hogg defends LEO who ran away
    By Darkman in forum Current Events
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 28th February 2018, 07:49 PM
  2. David Hogg Suggests Spring Break Boycott
    By Mister B in forum Current Events
    Replies: 83
    Last Post: 28th February 2018, 08:38 AM
  3. Replies: 58
    Last Post: 5th April 2015, 06:07 PM
  4. Barack Obama Admits He Cannot Do High School Math
    By Crusher in forum Current Events
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: 28th October 2012, 09:40 AM
  5. Biden Admits Plagiarism in School But Says It Was Not 'Malevolent'
    By Notmyrealname in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 4th September 2008, 04:49 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed