trump junior and his twitter fail

a reply to: UKTruth

Is it considered brilliant to pull something off of message boards that has been circulating around for years? I always thought that was just being unoriginal, but hey its politically incorrect and your hero's son said it so praise away!

a reply to: Byrd

I know exactly where they are, you know the point I was making, I hope.

Seems a lot of people can get radicalized rather quickly.

then there is this

www.persecution.in...

Four-year old Asra, a Christian refugee from SyriaThis article first appeared on the Council on Foreign Relations site. The headline for this column—The U.S. Bars Christian, Not Muslim, Refugees From Syria—will strike many readers as ridiculous.But the numbers tell a different story: The United States has accepted 10,801 Syrian refugees, of whom 56 are Christian. Not 56 percent; 56 total, out of 10,801. That is to say, one-half of 1 percent. he BBC says that 10 percent of all Syrians are Christian, which would mean 2.2 million Christians. It is quite obvious, and President Barack Obama and Secretary John Kerry have acknowledged it, that Middle Eastern Christians are an especially persecuted group.So how is it that one-half of 1 percent of the Syrian refugees we’ve admitted are Christian, or 56, instead of about 1,000 out of 10,801—or far more, given that they certainly meet the legal definition? The definition: someone who “is located outside of the United States; is of special humanitarian concern to the United States; demonstrates that they were persecuted or fear persecution due to race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group.” Four-year old Asra, a Christian refugee from Syria, stands in front of a Christmas tree at a refugee shelter in an evangelic church in Oberhausen, Germany, on December 22, 2015. When up to a million Syrian Christians have fled Syria, why has the U.S. accepted only 56? Elliott Abrams asks. INA FASSBENDER/REUTERS Somewhere between a half million and a million Syrian Christians have fled Syria, and the United States has accepted 56. Why?

EXCLUSIVE: New York 'bomber' pictured in Pakistan on 'radicalization' trip as his brother and SISTER revealed to have posted jihadi messages online Ahmad Rahami was pictured in Pakistan with his brother, Mohammad Khan Rahami, as the pair cooked kebobs The 2013 trip was one of a series of lengthy visits he made to the country and to Afghanistan which are now under FBI scrutiny It is unclear exactly where picture was taken but he is known to have spent time in Quetta, a hotbed of fundamentalism His brother and sister have both posted what appear to be pro-jihadi material, with his sister Masood posting: 'No to democracy.' Married sister, who has lived in Quetta, also posted video from pro-ISIS website showing destruction of New York Ahmad's mother and Pakistani wife both left the country in recent weeks Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... NOaL Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Father said he told FBI two years ago his son was a terrorist.

originally posted by: pryingopen3rdeye
a reply to: stinkelbaum
a reply to: AnkhMorpork

Neither of you two have a clue what these people are really like, you say you want to accept them with arms wide open but you surely would change your tune if you had to interact with them directly especially in a business setting.
There are many immigrating to my town and they have only brought problems, they treat our rules of the road like bad suggestions, even frequently driving the wrong way on one way streets, they mistreat employees of services they utilize, from the poor cashiers they ridicule and verbally attack at the store to the housing they destroy and the landlords can do nothing or else he's branded a bigot.
Whenever they have an event like a wedding the cops show up immediately rightly anticipating inevitable fights that break out, not to mention how many of them are shoplifters stores are often afraid to stop them, again for fear of being branded a bigot.

You hypocrites talk about welcoming them like these are kind generous people but the fact is most of them are deplorables!
You should welcome some into your home go interact with them wherever they live then see if you still feel these are people you want in your community, 90% are getting government subsidies (welfare) so even if you think they are kind they are still adding a tax onto our system that the rest of us have to bear...

I simply don't believe you.

originally posted by: Stormdancer777
The latest terrorist attack that happened in New York, carried out by a man who only recently went to Afghanistan to get "religion"

What's that tell you?

It tells me that you are one of the people who lump all of the Middle East as one big country. Makes it more scary that way eh? Rather than try to learn the different cultures and countries and people from that region. Syria, Afghanistan....it's all the same right? They are all just skittles.

You people...so scared. Like children.

Dumbest analogy ever.

It would be like trying to compare skittles to gun owners. If you have a million gun owners, with 100 of them going out and shooting a bunch of innocent people - shouldn't we just ban all gun owning? Just to be safe. Even if it only stopped one mass shooting, it would be worth it, wouldn't it?

Trump Jr is just following his daddy's habit of giving simple answers for simple people. Anyone who understands anything about the world or geopolitics realizes nothing is ever simple, and there are no simple answers or simple correct analogies. Trump supporters like it because they don't have to think. This way of speaking is nothing more than propagating a lie by omitting all the other facts from whatever he's talking about.

a reply to: kaylaluv

Based on the skittles analogy we should definitely ban all gun, cars, and airplanes.

a reply to: spiritualzombie

And people in general. There's always a few bad ones in the bunch. Best to throw them all away.

Three people are going to die in a car crash in your city today. Following Trumpet Jr's logic we should ban all driving right?

originally posted by: kaylaluv
Dumbest analogy ever.

It would be like trying to compare skittles to gun owners. If you have a million gun owners, with 100 of them going out and shooting a bunch of innocent people - shouldn't we just ban all gun owning? Just to be safe. Even if it only stopped one mass shooting, it would be worth it, wouldn't it?

I assume you also found it dumb when feminists used m&m's as a metaphor for rapists?

www.breitbart.com...

And why were all of the people that were outraged by Trump Jr's comments surprisingly silent when feminists used this metaphor?

a reply to: Grambler

Yes that is equally stupid.

a reply to: Grambler

Not a fan of using inanimate objects to compare to people, HOWEVER, I don't believe the women using the m&m analogy were advocating not allowing men to come into this country or kicking all men out of this country, or ignoring men's human right to life and relief from the horrors of war-torn areas.

a reply to: kaylaluv

No they were implying that we should look at all men as potential rapists. The seems much more humane.

a reply to: Grambler

That's a disingenuous response. That wasn't the point of the campaign at all. The point was, women have to be on their guard at all times - they can't assume every guy out there is harmless. They have to be aware of their surroundings, avoid being in areas not very populated, carry pepper spray in their purse, etc., etc. A little like defensive driving. You must be prepared for the other driver to do something stupid so that when they do, you have a plan on how to react (my 15-year-old is taking driver's ed so this is current teaching).

What it doesn't mean is that all men should be put in jail, or that all men should be pepper-sprayed or shot on sight, or that all men should have their rights taken away.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Agit8dChop

People aren't skittles.
It is nothing more than an over simplified analogy for people to look at say how simple it is.

No one is saying that people are skittles. The situations are similar. We have a karge group of people. Most are legit, but some are not and we have no way of knowing which are not. We do know that the ones who aren't want to do lovely things like shoot many people or drops bombs in random publiuc locations or aid anbd abet those who would.

Do we take all the people knowing some are like this but knowing which ones?

Or do we hold off until we can weed out the bad ones taking only the honest ones?

I guess you took candy from strangers all the time?

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Grambler

That's a disingenuous response. That wasn't the point of the campaign at all. The point was, women have to be on their guard at all times - they can't assume every guy out there is harmless. They have to be aware of their surroundings, avoid being in areas not very populated, carry pepper spray in their purse, etc., etc. A little like defensive driving. You must be prepared for the other driver to do something stupid so that when they do, you have a plan on how to react (my 15-year-old is taking driver's ed so this is current teaching).

What it doesn't mean is that all men should be put in jail, or that all men should be pepper-sprayed or shot on sight, or that all men should have their rights taken away.

Is that what the skittles comment was saying? Wow, you really read into that!

Please show me Trump Jr. or Trumps comments where he suggests shooting Syrian refugeses or throwing them in jails or pepper spraying them. I can't wait to see that link.


I thought he was saying America needs to be on their guard about Syrian refugees, and perhaps we shouldnt take them all in until we are sure they are not "poisonous"


Wouldn't the m&m feminism thing also say, be wary of letting men in your house? How is this different than saying be careful of letting Syrian refugees into your country.

a reply to: kaylaluv

What do you think of this analogy then? If you think a woman should be ready to treat any man like an attacker, then you must agree with Trump Jr.

a reply to: ketsuko

Do we allow people to have guns knowing that some of them are going to go on shooting rampages and kill innocent people?

Or do we allow no one to have guns until we can figure out how to stop the bad ones?

a reply to: ketsuko

Who said to treat every man like an attacker? Who said that all men should go to jail because some of them might attack women? Who said that no men should ever be allowed in any public space ever again because some of them might attack women? I don't see that anywhere.