Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search
hide menu

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Show:   Highest Rated Top Rated Newest
auto-refresh every 1 2 3 5 seconds


Per page:
Order:
Latest users (2): undeadwill, youregaylol, anonymous(18).
Anonymous commenting is allowed
0
#22151 - byposted has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #22148 - roliga (01/27/2013) [-]
Biden has no fucking idea what he's talking about...

www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCWYuxo01lM
User avatar #22130 - airguitar (01/27/2013) [-]
Ok, I am a libertarian (socially liberal and fiscally conservative) and am studying economics in university. I like to think that I am very open minded. Concerning the gun issues which everyone loves to dwell on, I don't really have strong feelings either way. However, when I scrolled below and read people saying "niggers" and "shitskins" are responsible for *whatever percent of crime*... that completely invalidated your argument to me.

Not because it is necessarily untrue that blacks are responsible for high murder rates (which is a hugely complex issue in the first place, tied to terrible inner-city public schooling and poor public policy, such as minimum wage, which further disadvantages blacks). That's not the issue, the issue is the obvious racism you have, which is clearly exposed with such language. Do you really expect me, or others for that matter, to respect your opinions when you cannot even hide your racial bias? I am not one who is "sensitive" to the language, it is just that in an environment which is ideally supposed to involve the discussion of politics, world news, and economics I am surprised this garbage is being posted.

I have had conversations with people I 100% disagree with on this board before and always tried to respond with class and an open-mind (even when they had no clue what they were talking about). If you want others to respect your opinion, I advise you to do the same. Otherwise, just keep slinging feces at whoever you want, I prefer to act civilized though. Lastly, I am very white myself.

This board seems different and more immature since I posted often on it (this past summer). Criticize me if you wish, just my thoughts.
User avatar #22331 to #22130 - arisaka (01/29/2013) [-]
There you fucking are. It's been forever since I've seen one of your posts.

I missed ya!
User avatar #22333 to #22331 - airguitar (01/29/2013) [-]
Haha, how is it going man? I just got kind of ticked off so wrote this rant of a post. Fun stuff.
User avatar #22393 to #22333 - arisaka (01/29/2013) [-]
That's basically half my posts here. You usually end up drowning in a sea of red thumbs (if you're a part of the left, anyways) but the relief of frustration is nice.
User avatar #22439 to #22393 - airguitar (01/30/2013) [-]
I was out-of-favor when I made huge posts back in the summer. You usually don't get down voted if you present your ideas in a well-planned way. The board wasn't quite as idiotic then though.
User avatar #22446 to #22439 - arisaka (01/30/2013) [-]
Yeah, true.

either way you could see why people would shit in my face
User avatar #22456 to #22446 - airguitar (01/30/2013) [-]
Your face is safe with me, sir!
#22150 to #22130 - byposted (01/27/2013) [-]
However, when I scrolled below and read people saying "niggers" and "shitskins" are responsible for whatever percent of crime... that completely invalidated your argument to me.
You're denying reality? I love how you try to make an excuse for black crime by, of all things, mentioning public schooling and "White Privilege." I was raised very poor, in a black ghetto, in one of their schools. I am not a criminal. Further, definitely not a "social liberal" like you.

Black schools seem to have the highest spending per capita in the US, like those in the District of Columbia, yet they still fail. Blacks just have a culture outside of institutionalized education. You can pour as much money into their edumacasion as you want, though that is not proven to solve a thing.

Ok, I am a libertarian
Oh, I see.
User avatar #22161 to #22150 - Ruspanic (01/27/2013) [-]
If it's all about inherent racial capabilities, why do black immigrants from Africa and the Caribbean have higher achievement rates and lower crime rates than American-born blacks?
Especially considering that most American blacks have some white ancestry.
User avatar #22174 to #22161 - byposted (01/27/2013) [-]
Do you have a source? I am not denying, just asking.

African immigrants that come from the US are the most wealthy and well-off people in that region, you understand? Nobody claims that environment has nothing to do with social-behavior. Crime in correlation with poverty is something like 0.28.
User avatar #22184 to #22174 - Ruspanic (01/27/2013) [-]
Here's one source from the Population Reference Bureau:
www.prb.org/pdf07/62.4immigration.pdf
"Black immigrants have more education and have higher incomes than foreign-born Americans in general, or than U.S.-born African Americans. They are less likely to be in poverty or unemployed."

"Caribbean immigrants—who have well-established communities in a few U.S. cities—were referred to as a “model minority,” because they appeared to surpass U.S.-
born blacks: earning more money, entering more prestigious jobs, and experiencing less crime and unemployment." -though later research challenged these findings

"Interviews with second-generation West Indian children in New York revealed that the children’s attitudes about whites, their parents’ culture, and their future prospects often reflected their parents’ socioeconomic situation. Children from poor immigrant families identified most closely with U.S. black culture, felt racial prejudice more acutely, and were less optimistic about their futures than children from middle-class families."
Nothing too surprising here, but it does suggest that cultural environment and poverty play a very significant role. Most black immigrants did not actually live through segregation in America, and neither did their families, yet they if they live in poor black neighborhoods they internalize the feelings of victimization prevalent in those communities.
Consider black American families who have been living in such neighborhoods for generations. The poverty and underachievement began as a result of racial policies like segregation, and eventually that incorporates itself into the ghetto culture and becomes a self-propagating cycle of poverty and underachievement and crime and so on.
User avatar #22178 to #22174 - byposted (01/27/2013) [-]
to the US*
0
#22173 to #22161 - byposted has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #22156 to #22150 - airguitar (01/27/2013) [-]
In no way did I assert that was the main reason society is the way it is, it is likely not even a major cause. I merely brought it up to show it is a very complex issue. I did not say that the said "percentages" were incorrect, I said that using hateful language merely exposes your/others bias and instantly portrays yourself as lacking maturity.

My grandfather came from a very poor family as well in Philadelphia. He was the only of twelve children to go to college and eventually became a dean in a highly respected University. I understand that environment and poor education does not decide one's fate. Instead, I brought up this point as a knock on public policy. I don't think there should be nearly as much government action, however if there is (inevitably) going to be some government action, it absolutely should be beneficial. My point is that is often not the case and public policy is complete crap, which in many cases makes life harder for those it is trying to benefit. I don't say this for any particular group's defense, I say it because it has empirically been found to be true.

Whatever your motive be, whether it is trolling, spreading hate, or you just love arguing, I don't really care for these kind of conversations. This board used to be wonderfully open-minded many months ago and I was just shocked to read your comments in contrast.
User avatar #22177 to #22156 - byposted (01/27/2013) [-]
I said that using hateful language merely exposes your/others bias and instantly portrays yourself as lacking maturity.
Codewords tend to make people pay attention and respond stupidly. Thus their fictitious sacraments of egalitarian rebuttal can be trampled on.

You do not try to disprove reality, which is great. I do not understand what you were going into with the "public policy" inquiry. What were you speaking of? Giving money to schools and minimum wage are not beneficial...?
User avatar #22190 to #22177 - airguitar (01/28/2013) [-]
Yes, but what is the point in trying to summon weak arguments? Political discussion, in my opinion, is the most enlightening when your positions are strongly challenged. This kind of debate is what helps you create better counter-arguments.

Concerning the latter point, I will address minimum wage as an example. Would you not agree that the stated goal of a minimum wage is to help the poorest citizens in any society? However, it has been proven time after time that increasing minimum wage also increases unemployment. This is a simple microeconomic trend. Since employers are required to pay their workers more, they have to hire less (or fire some current workers).

To be successful in the work force you must have human capital (made up of education and work experience). This makes life tough for those that attend inner-city schools. Many do not even deserve to be considered "schools". So from the get go, anyone who attends inner city public schools is disadvantaged in the work force because they lack human capital which was not provided to them but was to others. To make up for this disadvantage, those who attend these schools must gain real work experience if they want to climb the corporate ladder and be successful. In many cases, teenagers in this situation are willing to work for extremely low pay to gain experience and increase their status in life.

However, as I mentioned, minimum wage increases the unemployment rate. Data shows that the groups with the highest unemployment are #1, teenagers with disabilities and #2, black teenagers. Focusing on the latter group, it is well known that blacks make up a large portion of those who attend inner city schools. A higher minimum wage rate makes finding a job much harder for them since they received poor education. In this case, as is the case with a lot of public policy, those who were supposed to be helped ended up being the hardest hit.
User avatar #22191 to #22190 - airguitar (01/28/2013) [-]
I am NOT saying that this is a huge factor in the social status of blacks, whites, or whoever. I am using it as an example slightly related to what we were previously speaking about. Does this mean that bad schooling/minimum wage is responsible for higher black crime rates? No. Do I consider it one (of many) factors contributing to high black unemployment/crime rates? Yes, I think that is a safe assertion.
User avatar #22141 to #22130 - Ruspanic (01/27/2013) [-]
The racist stuff is mainly the same two users. I don't think they're trolls, but they're also not terribly concerned with their credibility because they're open about their racism and those views inform many of their political opinions. It's not just a bias.
User avatar #22158 to #22141 - airguitar (01/27/2013) [-]
What amazed me though, which I forgot to mention, is that his comments were thumbed up.. I just felt like the entire board has been losing credibility.
User avatar #22114 to #22107 - paintbucket (01/27/2013) [-]
how wonderfully depressing.
debt per taxpayer $145,000
User avatar #22189 to #22114 - mexicandudeinsd (01/28/2013) [-]
184k now ........... i kept looking at the numbers then realized they kept going up and it never stop :(
User avatar #22195 to #22189 - paintbucket (01/28/2013) [-]
they won't stop for a long time.
User avatar #22129 to #22114 - eight (01/27/2013) [-]
What sucks the most is that we are paying taxes still...we are essentially paying to be screwed in the end as we will never recover from this debt.
#22110 to #22107 - duudegladiator (01/27/2013) [-]
havent checked that baby since my computer broke and i had to wipe it..    
   
Goddamit U.S.A.
havent checked that baby since my computer broke and i had to wipe it..

Goddamit U.S.A.
User avatar #22078 - syrenthra ONLINE (01/26/2013) [-]
Not trying to cause TOO BIG of a shitstorm but here are some facts for everyone www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ooa98FHuaU0
#22083 to #22078 - byposted (01/26/2013) [-]
He should have taken it further and presented the fact that 90% or so of gun-crime is committed by shitskins.

www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/15/ann-coulter-gun-white-populations_n_2479240.html

Ann Coulter: Gun Crime Is 'Demographic Problem'

It's a shame how libtards still can't get this down their throat. They, when presented with the fact that their precious non-Whites commit a large plurality of gun-crime, immediately re-watch Micheal Moore's A Day in Columbine and blame White people for it.
User avatar #22085 to #22083 - syrenthra ONLINE (01/26/2013) [-]
those people (not Ann) piss me off and make we want to punch someone.. if you think demographics have nothing to do with it, you are a retard, think of how many white people are in gangs.... no where near as many as black people (among other races too)
#22086 to #22085 - byposted (01/26/2013) [-]
80 percent of murders in Nebraska in 2012 courtesy of North Omaha residents

Nebraska has a population of a 1.8 million people, of which 81.8 percent are white and 4.7% are black. According to an incredible story out of the Journal-Star, the state of Nebraska saw 51 people murdered in 2012; 80 percent of those slain occurred in North Omaha, which is almost ¾ black.
That right, 80% of murders in the whole fucking state of Nebraska are niggers killing niggers:
You need to login to view this link rcent-of.html

The article tries to blame it on "poverty" and a "number of different factors."

A number of factors — from poverty and high unemployment to gangs and poor housing conditions — play into Omaha's high homicide rate, experts agreed.
White homicide among the the most impoverished is very much lower than that of Blacks and Hispanics.

When will the "experts" perhaps look at IQ-differences and make the hypothesis that niggers continuing to be in poverty generation after generation, while continuing to commit crime, is because they're more inclined to do so?
#22076 - krizz (01/26/2013) [-]
This image has expired
kay, this is the first and last question im going to ask here...

ITT:Some Americans
Some of you say you need guns to protect yourselves from the government and/or fight back when riots and stuff accure... Take a look at Syria and other shit countries where riots and "freedom" fighting happens every day (with no fucking sign of things going better)
Do you really want to be like your good ol' enemy middle east?

If you're rioting against the government (when something bad happens and you feel like it) it causes terrorism, that means you're terrorists, double morale, you hate yourselves

no offence to anyone this "question" mentioned
#22098 to #22076 - paintbucket (01/26/2013) [-]
when gun bans start happening, it's a good indication of oppression.
i can already tell you're an idiot.
there is a huge difference between terrorism and revolution.
revolutionaries are not terrorists.
they have a goal, like an army, to defeat an enemy, and not kill innocents.
terrorists kill indiscriminately to make their demands.

also the entire middle east is not our enemy.
certain cells within are.
User avatar #22099 to #22098 - krizz (01/26/2013) [-]
terrorism and revolution is the same, but you say you do it for another reason
User avatar #22175 to #22099 - techketzer (01/27/2013) [-]
They are not even strictly related.
Revolution means to overthrow a hierarchy.
Terrorism means to target civilians and innocents to reach your goals.

You can be a revolutionary without terrorizing people, and you can be a terrorist without revolutionizing anything.
User avatar #22180 to #22175 - krizz (01/27/2013) [-]
no terrorism just means that u do things to scare people.

>terror

spread terror
User avatar #22108 to #22099 - eight (01/27/2013) [-]
Terrorism - The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

Revolution - A forcible overthrow of a government or social order for a new system.
(in Marxism) The class struggle that is expected to lead to political change and the triumph of communism.

There is a major difference between 'political aims' and 'political change'. There is a major difference between violence and intimidation compared to overthrow and triumph.
A terrorist is not a traitor. A terrorists longs for fear, death and destruction. A revolutionary longs for change for the betterment of society. 'Change for the betterment of society' is a certain perspective. Usually it is two conflicting perspectives between a Government and the people. Usually the people believe that the government is opressive and corrupt. And lets face it, there is NO GOVERNMENT without THE PEOPLE. The people are ALWAYS right. If they are not happy, something is wrong. If the people are not happy the government is out of line.
User avatar #22100 to #22099 - paintbucket (01/26/2013) [-]
terrorism has never achieved an overturn in a government.
User avatar #22101 to #22100 - krizz (01/26/2013) [-]
that's because if it does, they call it revolution...

think mon
User avatar #22106 to #22101 - moser (01/27/2013) [-]
This is actually true, the victors get the privileged of writing history after all. Unfortunately for you this board is full of extremism on the issue of guns so as soon as you say anything that doesn't agree with their borderline anarchistic views, they stop listening.
User avatar #22102 to #22101 - paintbucket (01/26/2013) [-]
no you fucking dumbass
take the irish republican army for example
they were revolutionaries fighting england
until they started bombings
then they became terrorists
they lost public support and gave up

TERRORISTS KILL INNOCENTS
REVOLUTIONARIES DO NOT
User avatar #22104 to #22102 - arisaka (01/27/2013) [-]
>revolutionaries do not kill innocents

Mao's guerrilla army would like to have a word with you
User avatar #22105 to #22104 - paintbucket (01/27/2013) [-]
not saying there isn't instances of it
but it's not the objective
User avatar #22109 to #22105 - arisaka (01/27/2013) [-]
The objectives of terrorism isn't to kill civilians either. Terrorism is a medium that can be used in order to enact social change. It's political violence.

The goal of the RAF was not to kill random people. It was to establish Leninism. The ALF is classified as a terrorist organization and they have not killed a single person to my knowledge.

Also, I should note: In an urban environment, terrorism is pretty much the only thing revolutionaries can do.
User avatar #22111 to #22109 - paintbucket (01/27/2013) [-]
do i have to repeat?
revolutionaries are not terrorists.
they have a goal, like an army, to defeat an enemy
terrorists kill indiscriminately to make their demands.

terrorists achieve goals by creating terror.
revolutionaries achieve goals by fighting and taking objectives.
like any army.
User avatar #22112 to #22111 - arisaka (01/27/2013) [-]
In urban environments you are forced to mix the two.
User avatar #22113 to #22112 - paintbucket (01/27/2013) [-]
not true.
it's more likely the opposing force (ie the oppressive government) is likely to kill innocents.
as revolutionaries use guerrilla tactics, and mix with the civilian population.
User avatar #22115 to #22113 - arisaka (01/27/2013) [-]
Guerrilla tactics are found almost always in rural environments, which is why the urban struggle resembles terrorism more than open war. If you look at how 'guerrilla' tactics were used in the Vietnam War against the GI's in urban settings, you'll see that things such as bombings, traps, assassinations, etc, are much more common.

Terrorism can be used by revolutionary forces, but a struggle in a metropolitan area is one that is very difficult to not only wage, but to cultivate. They rarely devolve into civil war.

During the course of an open-revolutionary conflict, it is not uncommon for 'revolutionaries' to raid and plunder rural people.
User avatar #22116 to #22115 - paintbucket (01/27/2013) [-]
how do i explain this an a way you can possibly understand
revolution doesn't work without support from the population.
this is why the IRA failed when they resorted to terrorist tactics.

the Vietnam War was not a fucking revolution, it was a war between the capitalist south, and mostly the US, and the communist north.
revolution is the overthrow of a government, not a war between two governments.
User avatar #22118 to #22116 - arisaka (01/27/2013) [-]
And I think I more than you would know what a fucking revolution is buddy
User avatar #22120 to #22118 - paintbucket (01/27/2013) [-]
yeah? and how the fuck is that?
User avatar #22122 to #22120 - arisaka (01/27/2013) [-]
Because I spend my free time reading the works of various 'revolutionaries' for kicks.
User avatar #22124 to #22122 - paintbucket (01/27/2013) [-]
right
and that makes you an expert.
i have yet to see proof of that.
User avatar #22117 to #22116 - arisaka (01/27/2013) [-]
You were talking about Guerrilla tactics. So I described how a fighting force used them in an urban environment because you can't grasp the fact that in metropolitan area revolution and terrorism basically become the same fucking thing
User avatar #22119 to #22117 - paintbucket (01/27/2013) [-]
i'm talking about the differences between revolutionaries and terrorists you fucking moron.
terrorism:
political violence: violence or the threat of violence, especially bombing, kidnapping, and assassination, carried out for political purposes
revolution:
overthrow of government: the overthrow of a ruler or political system

end of argument
User avatar #22121 to #22119 - arisaka (01/27/2013) [-]
And during revolution, revolutionaries are not able to use terrorist tactics when they appear in an area where open warfare would lead to their destruction?

You know - like destroying railways or blowing up specific buildings?
User avatar #22123 to #22121 - paintbucket (01/27/2013) [-]
to achieve military objectives.

not create terror.
User avatar #22125 to #22123 - arisaka (01/27/2013) [-]
Terrorists use the terror they create to achieve goals, too. Terrorism is a means - more often than not people who engage in terrorism have a GOAL. They don't just blow shit up for shits and giggles - some do, maybe, but not most.

Do you even RAF?
User avatar #22126 to #22125 - paintbucket (01/27/2013) [-]
god damn it
revolutionaries are not terrorists
and terrorists are not revolutionaries.
sometimes the line blurs, like the IRA, but it is not common.
that's it
that's all.
User avatar #22127 to #22126 - arisaka (01/27/2013) [-]
That was my fucking point you dumb fuck

but it happens much more often than you claim that it does, the RAF is a prime example, and the FLQ, IRA and ELF are other examples. The entire concept of propaganda of the deed exhibits this synthesis.
User avatar #22077 to #22076 - krizz (01/26/2013) [-]
I ments Middle east as in other countries
User avatar #22072 - eight (01/26/2013) [-]
There are rallies going on supporting gun rights and against them. I smell Civil War in our future.
User avatar #22073 to #22072 - roliga (01/26/2013) [-]
As ridiculous as it sounds I think that if Obama ever used an executive order to ban all firearms there would be another civil war.
#22074 to #22073 - feelythefeel ONLINE (01/26/2013) [-]
I'll bet ten dollars that you're wrong (Petty partisan warfare or less doesn't count).   
   
   
As a side note, if the rebels end up getting a Lelouch level leader, I would gladly eat my words, hat and other assorted household objects in both atonement and gratitude.
I'll bet ten dollars that you're wrong (Petty partisan warfare or less doesn't count).


As a side note, if the rebels end up getting a Lelouch level leader, I would gladly eat my words, hat and other assorted household objects in both atonement and gratitude.
#22056 - devout feminist (01/26/2013) [-]
Someone here explain to me this Sandra Fluke business. She wants insurance to cover contraception? From what I can tell Liberals are for it because of the health risks of unprotected sex but Conservatives are against it because they think the government shouldn't need to pay for your sex. Thoughts?
User avatar #22061 to #22056 - duudegladiator (01/26/2013) [-]
republicans view. basically
+4
#22046 - kanade **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#22049 to #22046 - duudegladiator (01/26/2013) [-]
Having difficulties processing this. If you are joking around, then why do you make so many comments that are true of the American Liberal philosophies. If you are telling the truth, then why are you focusing on this one man...?

Brain...Cramping..
0
#22051 to #22049 - kanade **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #22052 to #22051 - duudegladiator (01/26/2013) [-]
oh. ok..
#22038 - annoos ONLINE (01/26/2013) [-]
Ask a Syrian citizen anything.
Ask a Syrian citizen anything.
User avatar #22103 to #22038 - lufieh (01/27/2013) [-]
1.What is your opinion on the rebels?
2.Are the Syrian military forces really as brutal as the mass media portrays them?
3.Who do you blame for what's happening?
4.Do you support Assad?
User avatar #22138 to #22103 - annoos ONLINE (01/27/2013) [-]
1- I used to support the opposition at the beginning, when it was just some protests, we thought they were lying about smuggled weapons... but then it turned out to be true, and even the peaceful protestors left, and all what is left is the people who want to avenge their dead, plus some allahu akbar faggots, which i cannot deny many of them have come from afghanistan and egypt and tunis (they send videos to TV's and we can tell from their accents)
2-The millitary has a hard job right now, having a warfare against street fighters in your own country isn't easy... they try to "invade" areas that the rebels control with the infantry and tanks, and they mostly succeed , but sometimes they have total control of big areas, in which the destroy tanks and infantries and take over some vehicles maybe... that's why they use brutal force sometimes.
3-When you see allahu akbar faggots holding M16's and bellzpups and american weapons pft i blame the supporters of the rebellion.. Qatar and tarkey mainly are leading this thing.
4- nope, no one wants the safety of syria , not the president nor the rebels, i support neither of them... it is a meaningless fight for power...
User avatar #22097 to #22038 - comradegeneral (01/26/2013) [-]
On wich side are you standing on the side of the rebels or on the side of the goverment?
PS Sorry for my bad english.
User avatar #22139 to #22097 - annoos ONLINE (01/27/2013) [-]
As i mentioned above just now, it is just silly standing with two sides who are totally fucked up people reaching for power. both sides are shit, and i want a leader to rise out of the people... not some allahu akbar faggot...
User avatar #22142 to #22139 - comradegeneral (01/27/2013) [-]
I see, thanks for your answer.
Maybe you wanted to know, i live in europe, and the medias put the rebels as "Heroic Freedom Fighters".
User avatar #22144 to #22142 - annoos ONLINE (01/27/2013) [-]
Ye, and they are like "PEOPLE WERE DRINKING TEA AND ASSAD BOMB OMG! :(((" right?
User avatar #22146 to #22144 - comradegeneral (01/27/2013) [-]
Exactly.
User avatar #22147 to #22146 - annoos ONLINE (01/27/2013) [-]
ye it's bullshit, but don't believe he was an angel himself though, he and his relatives robbed the fuck out of syria
#22075 to #22038 - feelythefeel ONLINE (01/26/2013) [-]
What is Zero's secret identity?
What is Zero's secret identity?
User avatar #22137 to #22075 - annoos ONLINE (01/27/2013) [-]
He is the Rainbow dash from MLP.
#22071 to #22038 - devout feminist (01/26/2013) [-]
Who's the fat kid?
User avatar #22136 to #22071 - annoos ONLINE (01/27/2013) [-]
Some gif i have on my reaction folder... for the fact that people ALWAYS read whats next to gifs ,dunno why...
User avatar #22050 to #22038 - duudegladiator (01/26/2013) [-]
Have you been bombed and/or been near a bombing?
User avatar #22053 to #22050 - annoos ONLINE (01/26/2013) [-]
Thankfully , my city is one of the 3 unharmed cities, i'm on the coast (Latakia)
But almost one year ago, the army went into nearby neighborhoods (which were rebel colonies) and they striked with tanks and artillery and infantry, that's the only ones we've seen, except for some sound bombs (they break windows and shit, we had to change our windows once)
User avatar #22054 to #22053 - duudegladiator (01/26/2013) [-]
Thats good news. I have one more question, if you dont mind. Are you muslim? and do you think that Islam needs to "modernize" and get with the present times?
User avatar #22057 to #22054 - annoos ONLINE (01/26/2013) [-]
Yes i am a muslim, but i actually do not believe in islam or anything...
And of course i think it should, because those radical idiots follow shariaa rules which were made for life 1400 years ago, they do not realize it is different now....
But i tell you, i once knew this radical guy, beard and everything, he is fighting somewhere now but 3 years ago, he was just a really nice guy who didn't talk to girls or stuff.. and minded his own business most of the time.. the problem is they believe their "sheikh"'s and those are uneducated idiots who say what you pay them to say....
#22058 to #22057 - duudegladiator (01/26/2013) [-]
Thank you good sir.
#22059 to #22058 - annoos ONLINE (01/26/2013) [-]
You're welcome, i did this post because i wanted to be asked questions anyway, to clear the public view and stuff.
User avatar #22045 to #22038 - lufieh (01/26/2013) [-]
How are you hoping it will all end?
User avatar #22048 to #22045 - annoos ONLINE (01/26/2013) [-]
How *I* or *We* as the majority, would like it to end with a peaceful change of the government, from our current to someone we will have an election for INSIDE SYRIA.
because many people now are just sitting in Duha (Qatar) and forming parties which leader will becomes a president, well that's not democracy if someone from outside syria comes and does this...
Oh and by the way, it doesn't matter what we hope because it is a fight for power after all, and only those radicals will arise to take control, damn our future is dark >.>
User avatar #22043 to #22038 - threeeighteen (01/26/2013) [-]
How bad is the fighting in Syria? Are we talking full on warfare, or just sporadic fighting between the rebels and military?
User avatar #22044 to #22043 - annoos ONLINE (01/26/2013) [-]
Full on warfare, sometimes becomes unfair because it's mostly street fighters Vs millitary... but the millitary wins most of the time, but they still get outnumbered and stuff by the radicals, and i tell you, those rebels ARE radicals.... even the muslims in my city which i thought were uptight , turned out to hate the rebels for they are radicals..
#22036 - devout feminist (01/26/2013) [-]
It should be forbidden for bureaucrats to put pork into disaster relief legislation. It's essentially holding the victims hostage and telling those who oppose the pork, "If you want to help these people, you have to give into these demands. Otherwise, we'll just blame you for the victims not getting help."
#22033 - devout feminist (01/26/2013) [-]
ISLAMIC GOMMUNISM
#54796 to #22033 - devout feminist (01/02/2014) [-]
islamic gommunism,
User avatar #22031 - mayormilkman (01/26/2013) [-]
Solution to gun problem: Grow bullet-proof skin.
#22042 to #22031 - feelythefeel ONLINE (01/26/2013) [-]
Counter to gun problem solution: Develop anti-bulletproof skin bullets.
0
#22030 - nigalthornberry has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #22019 - krizz (01/25/2013) [-]
why the hell is this here, it's admons attempt to breed smart people on FJ, silly admon...
0
#22055 to #22019 - swiftykidd **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
+2
#22029 to #22013 - nigalthornberry has deleted their comment [-]
#21988 - byposted (01/25/2013) [-]
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wt1Zy_ASNyA

Trending video. Leftist politicians and media moguls refuse to put, "this home is gun free" signs in their yards because, get this, they have guns.
#21989 to #21988 - byposted (01/25/2013) [-]
also, if they don't have guns and post the sign, they're afraid of being robbed by niggers.

fucking lel, hypocrites.
User avatar #21990 to #21989 - byposted (01/25/2013) [-]
2:35

"Is that not an invitation for somebody with a gun?"
User avatar #21987 to #21984 - codyxvasco (01/25/2013) [-]
YOU POSTED SOMETHING

WE GET IT
User avatar #21991 to #21987 - SenatorSnowe (01/25/2013) [-]
He didn't post anything. It's my post. This is a troll pretending to be me, and he's spamming links to my content so it'll be thumbed down.
User avatar #21992 to #21991 - codyxvasco (01/25/2013) [-]
Oh my God! That's hilarious!!!
#21993 to #21992 - SenatorSnowe (01/25/2013) [-]
I wonder if you would think it's hilarious if it was ever done to you.
User avatar #22008 to #21993 - codyxvasco (01/25/2013) [-]
It would suck majorly....I'm sorry.
 Friends (0)