Upload
Login or register

adrenalinbbq

Last status update:
-
Date Signed Up:4/16/2013
Last Login:9/25/2016
Stats
Comment Ranking:#9626
Highest Content Rank:#5853
Highest Comment Rank:#4690
Content Thumbs: 141 total,  253 ,  112
Comment Thumbs: 1719 total,  3175 ,  1456
Content Level Progress: 90% (9/10)
Level 15 Content: New Here → Level 16 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 40% (40/100)
Level 213 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 214 Comments: Comedic Genius
Subscribers:0
Content Views:26947
Times Content Favorited:6 times
Total Comments Made:1362
FJ Points:1279

latest user's comments

#71 - So let's say I knew military tactics we use which are classifi…  [+] (11 replies) 08/15/2016 on HILLARY TOOK BRIBES!!! -5
User avatar
#72 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
Because you just revealed the true military tactics of the United states and are now a fugitive?

Im not understanding your argument here. I won't deny his treason, but I also won't deny his validity as a source for information.
#73 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
If you're a criminal on the run, you're not a trustworthy source. It's reeeeeaaaaaaally simple.
User avatar
#94 - workinganimations (08/15/2016) [-]
you have that backwards man
User avatar
#74 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
How? Does the truth somehow become less truthful just because you're a criminal?
#75 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
Yes.

And to expand on that, when you're presenting evidence against claims against you in court, your claims are taken for what they're worth since the justice system finds you innocent before proven guilty.
User avatar
#76 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
So let's say I murder a man. I'm proven a murderer. Woopsie me im a criminal now.

If I tell you my name you wouldn't believe me?
#77 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
It doesn't matter if someone believes you or not, it matters what can be used for or against any case regarding similar incidents afterwards.
User avatar
#78 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
But we aren't a court system. We're laymen and voters. We don't need to reason according to the same rules as the justice system.
#79 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
You're ignoring the issue we're talking about here. The issue is whether or not the evidence presented by Assange will be used to convict Hillary of fraud.
User avatar
#80 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
I thought the issue was whether assange is a credible source for information for a layman.
#81 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
That ties into whether his evidence is credible or not. If it counts as credible, it will be used. If it's not, then it won't. My point is that since he's not a credible source for evidence in this case, it won't be.

I don't like Hillary, and I believe 100% she is a snakey fuck who lies and cheats as much as possible to get votes. That doesn't matter unless Assange can somehow allow access to this evidence at the source so someone else can present it.
#68 - Would someone taking refuge in another country to hide from pe…  [+] (13 replies) 08/15/2016 on HILLARY TOOK BRIBES!!! 0
User avatar
#70 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
Yes. Because he wouldn't need to hide if he was giving information that wasn't true.
#71 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
So let's say I knew military tactics we use which are classified as top secret and I shared them with Russia and then took refuge there. Why would I hide if I just told the truth?
User avatar
#72 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
Because you just revealed the true military tactics of the United states and are now a fugitive?

Im not understanding your argument here. I won't deny his treason, but I also won't deny his validity as a source for information.
#73 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
If you're a criminal on the run, you're not a trustworthy source. It's reeeeeaaaaaaally simple.
User avatar
#94 - workinganimations (08/15/2016) [-]
you have that backwards man
User avatar
#74 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
How? Does the truth somehow become less truthful just because you're a criminal?
#75 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
Yes.

And to expand on that, when you're presenting evidence against claims against you in court, your claims are taken for what they're worth since the justice system finds you innocent before proven guilty.
User avatar
#76 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
So let's say I murder a man. I'm proven a murderer. Woopsie me im a criminal now.

If I tell you my name you wouldn't believe me?
#77 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
It doesn't matter if someone believes you or not, it matters what can be used for or against any case regarding similar incidents afterwards.
User avatar
#78 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
But we aren't a court system. We're laymen and voters. We don't need to reason according to the same rules as the justice system.
#79 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
You're ignoring the issue we're talking about here. The issue is whether or not the evidence presented by Assange will be used to convict Hillary of fraud.
User avatar
#80 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
I thought the issue was whether assange is a credible source for information for a layman.
#81 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
That ties into whether his evidence is credible or not. If it counts as credible, it will be used. If it's not, then it won't. My point is that since he's not a credible source for evidence in this case, it won't be.

I don't like Hillary, and I believe 100% she is a snakey fuck who lies and cheats as much as possible to get votes. That doesn't matter unless Assange can somehow allow access to this evidence at the source so someone else can present it.
#65 - It doesn't matter how legitimate the claim, or proven the fact…  [+] (15 replies) 08/15/2016 on HILLARY TOOK BRIBES!!! -2
#66 - illcomrade (08/15/2016) [-]
#68 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
Would someone taking refuge in another country to hide from persecution by means of treason count as a trustworthy source to you?
User avatar
#70 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
Yes. Because he wouldn't need to hide if he was giving information that wasn't true.
#71 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
So let's say I knew military tactics we use which are classified as top secret and I shared them with Russia and then took refuge there. Why would I hide if I just told the truth?
User avatar
#72 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
Because you just revealed the true military tactics of the United states and are now a fugitive?

Im not understanding your argument here. I won't deny his treason, but I also won't deny his validity as a source for information.
#73 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
If you're a criminal on the run, you're not a trustworthy source. It's reeeeeaaaaaaally simple.
User avatar
#94 - workinganimations (08/15/2016) [-]
you have that backwards man
User avatar
#74 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
How? Does the truth somehow become less truthful just because you're a criminal?
#75 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
Yes.

And to expand on that, when you're presenting evidence against claims against you in court, your claims are taken for what they're worth since the justice system finds you innocent before proven guilty.
User avatar
#76 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
So let's say I murder a man. I'm proven a murderer. Woopsie me im a criminal now.

If I tell you my name you wouldn't believe me?
#77 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
It doesn't matter if someone believes you or not, it matters what can be used for or against any case regarding similar incidents afterwards.
User avatar
#78 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
But we aren't a court system. We're laymen and voters. We don't need to reason according to the same rules as the justice system.
#79 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
You're ignoring the issue we're talking about here. The issue is whether or not the evidence presented by Assange will be used to convict Hillary of fraud.
User avatar
#80 - Sethorein (08/15/2016) [-]
I thought the issue was whether assange is a credible source for information for a layman.
#81 - adrenalinbbq (08/15/2016) [-]
That ties into whether his evidence is credible or not. If it counts as credible, it will be used. If it's not, then it won't. My point is that since he's not a credible source for evidence in this case, it won't be.

I don't like Hillary, and I believe 100% she is a snakey fuck who lies and cheats as much as possible to get votes. That doesn't matter unless Assange can somehow allow access to this evidence at the source so someone else can present it.
#93 - I don't like Hillary, and I know she's a slimy ****. Lies and …  [+] (13 replies) 08/08/2016 on Trumper Comp3 +16
User avatar
#297 - thegamepixel (08/08/2016) [-]
But she claimed not to do just that.
User avatar
#261 - elsanna (08/08/2016) [-]
#286 - anon (08/08/2016) [-]
You know, I'm starting to suspect that snopes has a liberal bias.
User avatar
#296 - thegamepixel (08/08/2016) [-]
Yeah, definitley. So does politifact.
User avatar
#321 - elsanna (08/08/2016) [-]
>>#286, Prove it.
User avatar
#322 - thegamepixel (08/08/2016) [-]
Snopes or politifact?
User avatar
#323 - elsanna (08/08/2016) [-]
Either/or.
User avatar
#324 - thegamepixel (08/08/2016) [-]
In another thread I proved bias in the first 8 of this list from Politifact. www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jul/06/17-things-donald-trump-said-and-then-denied-saying/

"1. Trump said he's only a war hero because he was captured. That is admitting that he's technically a war hero even though he disagrees that he should be one.

2. eh, I can accept this. I don't know the exact quote, but its fine. There is a surprising amount of slander here, where they mention the lawyer who was going to pump breastmilk during a trial. It was pumping not feeding and during the proceedings, too. That's really unprofessional and frankly, kinda gross to have to watch.

3. Again, another one with virtually no context and I wasn't even aware he said this, so I can't really refute it without research, but I don't have the effort to do so for such a small issue.

4. There is the possiblity of other countries joining the TPP such as China. This isn't wrong.

5. He said he didn't want to debate if Kelly was there. That's not the same as saying she should be removed. How politifact can think these two things are the same is beyond me.

6. He said it was terrible. He clearly denied it. Obviously he may have actually agreed but said that so the statement could not be used by the press against him. So technically he didn't say it. He's right.

7. HE claimed a faulty earpiece. It genuinely seemed like he had trouble hearing and if not it's still not beyond reasonable doubt.

8. If we're gonna call him condemning the woman who called Cruz a pussy mock then why not when he tells people to knock the crap out of people who throw tomatos. Throwing tomatos is on a technical level, assault, so I think it's justified. I mean, Obama says punch back twice as hard. He never promised to pay the legal fees. He said he was considering it. It wouldn't be rewarding violence, since a reasoning could be that he strongly believes in that cause and is expressing it and Trump may stand up for that frustration in the American people. "
#352 - anon (08/09/2016) [-]
Haha fantastic. If you were more self-aware you'd realize you're playing yourself here. Thanks for confirming politifact's impartiality.
User avatar
#359 - thegamepixel (08/09/2016) [-]
I happened to just post some content with politifact in it, so if you're still not convinced, here: /channel/politics/Trying+to+stump+the+trump/gLjkLtY/
User avatar
#258 - EventHorizon (08/08/2016) [-]
Dude can you actually see the air wasted when you express reasonable opinions like that on this website?
#366 - adrenalinbbq (08/10/2016) [-]
Lol. Yes I can, and it pains me to see baseless rumors being more popular because you get white knights who spread the 'truth' to all their friends, thinking that they are helping. Just feeding the machine, though...
#129 - anon (08/08/2016) [-]
Fareed Zakaria is a generic american pundit who has frequently appeared on ABC, PBS and CNN, among others. He was born in India but graduated from Yale and Harvard and has lived in the US since. He's not hoping america falls. He's talking about what the future will look like as the massive populations of Asia develop into first world countries and how that will reduce the US's ability to dominate global politics. Pretending Zakaria is some sort of radical Muslim is straight-up looney tunes.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fareed_Zakaria
#21 - I'm thinking the save files didn't get deleted at all. After t…  [+] (2 replies) 08/01/2016 on GET THE WATER NIGGA +5
#47 - anon (08/02/2016) [-]
Reinstalling the game fixes the "losing all data" issue. trust me, I work in IT and all we do is mess around with this game and its coding and stuff.
User avatar
#54 - sebalt (08/02/2016) [-]
are you the hacker known as 4chan?