First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
How President Obama & Hillary Clinton Created I.S.I.S. -This is really big, I mean, really BIG.
15947 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Cold and High
Offline
Posted 1/4/16

ShawnZ11 wrote:
world war 3 is close by!
yeah when you see china, russia and north korea goes toughter then yeah...

10228 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / United Kingdom
Offline
Posted 1/4/16


Grauger wrote:


eclair-lumiere wrote:

If you're going to post a link to prove a point, it might help to post a link to a page that actually exists

Works just fine



Thank you. And that looks legal and legit to me
926 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
15 / F / Murica
Offline
Posted 1/4/16
*sigh*
10228 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / United Kingdom
Offline
Posted 1/4/16


PhantomGundam wrote:


eclair-lumiere wrote:

I can't see the link because the page supposedly doesn't exist.

I'm not trying to defend mass surveillance. I would tell you to read my posts properly but since you've been unable to twice now that would be a wast of time.

Maybe not every piece of information is in that one article, but it's definitely been reported in the news that he has been helping terrorists by giving them information. Exposing corruption is fine, but rebelling against a corrupt government by killing innocent people is just disgusting.


I don't understand why you always have such a difficult time reading my posts. I'm not asking you to perform brain surgery. I write my posts as simple as possible just to make it easier for you to understand. Maybe I should just write everything in giant colorful letters so you don't miss it. I'll say this one final time. If you still refuse to read anything, this conversation is over.

As I've said a million times already, Edward Snowden has never helped terrorists and he has never killed anyone. I don't know what so called "news" has been telling you this, but that's completely inaccurate. I highly recommend getting your information from real news sources or at the very least wait until something has been proven before believing every outrageous statement you hear. Like I said before, if you would read beyond the misleading headline of that article you posted, you would know that it's about a single angry man throwing false accusations at Snowden without any proof.

Apparently you don't even know what you're saying since you claim you're not defending mass surveillance, even though your entire argument has been you saying that it's necessary to keep you safe, which isn't even true. There has never been a single terrorist caught by spying on ordinary citizens indiscriminately. Your entire reason for supporting mass surveillance is built on lies. Taking it away will not increase the likelihood of someone getting blown up by a jihadist. You're just denying facts because you don't like being proven wrong. So far your only reason for hating Snowden is because you easily believe whatever lie you hear.



Also, you Americans seem to have a very weird idea of what the UK is like. You mentioned something about "big brother" earlier. How about you stop basing your ideas of what the UK is like from a reality tv show? And an obviously staged one at that. We don't all live in the Big Brother house and have cameras watching us.


What in the world are you talking about? What "reality tv show" do you think I'm getting my ideas from? I'm getting my ideas from proven facts in the real world and actual statistics. Everything you're saying shows just how ignorant you are about your own country. It's commonly known that the U.K. generally (I use this word because I know there are many exceptions) supports mass surveillance and even believe it's necessary, much like what you've been telling me this whole time. I suppose this crazy phenomenon can be partly explained by the fact that your government keeps you ignorant on this subject. Even within the government, only a handful of people are fully informed about the capacity that you're being spied on, even after the Snowden leaks.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/05/nick-clegg-cabinet-mass-surveillance-british-spying

I suppose the same can be said about our government here in the U.S. but at least there's some outrage among our citizens and lawmakers. Anyways, you really should do your own research on what is going on within your own country before spreading misinformation and pretending you know everything. It only makes you look childish right now.


Good grief...was it really necessary to put your comment in such massive font?

I am not defending mass surveillance. You just think I am because you can't seem to read my posts properly. I never said Edward Snowden has killed anyone but he has helped people who aim to kill. How thinking that is bad equates to defending mass surveillance in your mind, I don't know.

The news I heard it from was the BBC. And don't bother saying "the BBC is all lies and everything the British government says is lies!" because I've heard all that racist crap before.

As for the reality tv show, I am referring to Big Brother which you mentioned. Unless when you say Big Brother you mean Big Borther in the book 1984 which is a work of fiction. If you don't know what FICTION means, it means it's not actual events.
51215 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M
Offline
Posted 1/4/16

eclair-lumiere wrote:

Good grief...was it really necessary to put your comment in such massive font?

I am not defending mass surveillance. You just think I am because you can't seem to read my posts properly. I never said Edward Snowden has killed anyone but he has helped people who aim to kill. How thinking that is bad equates to defending mass surveillance in your mind, I don't know.

The news I heard it from was the BBC. And don't bother saying "the BBC is all lies and everything the British government says is lies!" because I've heard all that racist crap before.

As for the reality tv show, I am referring to Big Brother which you mentioned. Unless when you say Big Brother you mean Big Borther in the book 1984 which is a work of fiction. If you don't know what FICTION means, it means it's not actual events.


I used such massive font so you wouldn't miss it. Looks like it partially worked since you only bothered reading some of it, but conveniently ignored all the points I made.

You are defending mass surveillance. You're saying that it's necessary to have it because more terrorist attacks would happen without it. What you're doing is called defending mass surveillance. And you're citing Snowden and the Paris attack as your example, even though I've been telling you this entire time that Snowden has no connection to any terrorist attack and you're grossly misinformed about that. Are you just going to blame Snowden for every breach of security that has ever happened in a system that has never worked?

If you're getting such delusional details from the BBC, maybe you're just misunderstanding what's actually being reported, just like how you understood nothing about that article you posted yourself. In which case, maybe it's not your news sources that's the problem, but perhaps the problem is that your mind is conveniently distorting the details to fit your own narrative so you can have an excuse for your bizarre beliefs. It would explain why you always refuse to read any point I bring up against your arguments.

When I said "Big Brother" earlier, I wasn't referring to fiction. I wasn't talking about a t.v. show or a book (which I know the name originates from). I was referring the actual surveillance state your county has. I know Big Brother isn't what it's called in real life. That's just a nickname based on the work of fiction that you brought up. Have you never heard anyone call it Big Brother before?
10228 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / United Kingdom
Offline
Posted 1/4/16



I used such massive font so you wouldn't miss it. Looks like it partially worked since you only bothered reading some of it, but conveniently ignored all the points I made.

You are defending mass surveillance. You're saying that it's necessary to have it because more terrorist attacks would happen without it. What you're doing is called defending mass surveillance. And you're citing Snowden and the Paris attack as your example, even though I've been telling you this entire time that Snowden has no connection to any terrorist attack and you're grossly misinformed about that. Are you just going to blame Snowden for every breach of security that has ever happened in a system that has never worked?

If you're getting such delusional details from the BBC, maybe you're just misunderstanding what's actually being reported, just like how you understood nothing about that article you posted yourself. In which case, maybe it's not your news sources that's the problem, but perhaps the problem is that your mind is conveniently distorting the details to fit your own narrative so you can have an excuse for your bizarre beliefs. It would explain why you always refuse to read any point I bring up against your arguments.

When I said "Big Brother" earlier, I wasn't referring to fiction. I wasn't talking about a t.v. show or a book (which I know the name originates from). I was referring the actual surveillance state your county has. I know Big Brother isn't what it's called in real life. That's just a nickname based on the work of fiction that you brought up. Have you never heard anyone call it Big Brother before?



And I'm sure everyone else in the forum is absolutely thrilled to have to scroll through all of that.

I never said it was NECESSARY. I said if I had to pick one of the two, I would pick being spied on. Surely even you would rather be spied on then be blown up? But then again there's so many people dying in the US at the hands of other Americans that ISIS would probably be wasting their time attacking.

Well you insulted ME personally rather than the BBC. I suppose that's a step-up from the usual shit I hear on here.

And no, I have never heard of it being referred to as Big Brother. But I really do not care what Americans call it.
51215 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M
Offline
Posted 1/4/16

eclair-lumiere wrote:

I never said it was NECESSARY. I said if I had to pick one of the two, I would pick being spied on. Surely even you would rather be spied on then be blown up?


The fact that you keep repeating this proves that you're not paying attention to what I'm saying. Being spied on doesn't keep you safe from getting blown up. Mass surveillance doesn't stop terrorists attacks.
10228 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / United Kingdom
Offline
Posted 1/6/16 , edited 1/6/16



The fact that you keep repeating this proves that you're not paying attention to what I'm saying. Being spied on doesn't keep you safe from getting blown up. Mass surveillance doesn't stop terrorists attacks.



WOW! JUST WOW!

You really cannot read can you? I AM NOT SAYING MASS SURVEILLANCE STOPS TERRORIST ATTACKS!

Don't know why I bothered putting that in capitals, you probably still won't bother to read it properly and will still insist that everyone in the UK is brainwashed into thinking mass surveillance is awesome. Yeah...we totally do. We love it! We've all got over 100 cameras in a our house! Some of us even forward all our emails and text to the police willingly! *huge amount of sarcasm in case you're too thick to understand*

Do you know what I think is really hilarious? When Edward Snowden first revealed all the corrption, the USA absolutely hated him and treated him like the world's worst criminal. Now he is genuinely acting like a criminal, suddenly the USA wants to defend him. Probably because they don't want to admit they majorly fucked up by letting him go. Not to mention the USA just loves disagreeing on anything the UK says because us brits are so evil aren't we?! All that stuffed that happened in the 1800's over a century ago...yeah, let's all just stay angry about that forever!
51215 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M
Offline
Posted 1/6/16

eclair-lumiere wrote:

I AM NOT SAYING MASS SURVEILLANCE STOPS TERRORIST ATTACKS!


So if you don't believe that, what's your reason for bringing that up in all of your posts? You keep saying mass surveillance failed to stop terrorists from killing people because of Snowden. Why do you keep saying you'd rather be spied on than blown up if you acknowledge that getting spied on doesn't prevent you from getting blown up?


Maybe he didn't pull the trigger but he might as well have done. Anyone who helps ISIS may as well be a terrorist.

The UK doesn't enjoy being spied on. And we definitely don't get spied on to the extent that the USA does. But even if we did, I would rather have that than be attacked by terrorists.

Mass surveilance isn't the answer and I never said it was. But if I had to pick one of the two, I'd pick being spied on over being blown up.

I never said Edward Snowden has killed anyone but he has helped people who aim to kill.

I said if I had to pick one of the two, I would pick being spied on. Surely even you would rather be spied on then be blown up?


These are all your words, not mine. There's no point in denying that you've said this.
10228 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / United Kingdom
Offline
Posted 1/7/16


PhantomGundam wrote:


eclair-lumiere wrote:

I AM NOT SAYING MASS SURVEILLANCE STOPS TERRORIST ATTACKS!


So if you don't believe that, what's your reason for bringing that up in all of your posts? You keep saying mass surveillance failed to stop terrorists from killing people because of Snowden. Why do you keep saying you'd rather be spied on than blown up if you acknowledge that getting spied on doesn't prevent you from getting blown up?


Maybe he didn't pull the trigger but he might as well have done. Anyone who helps ISIS may as well be a terrorist.

The UK doesn't enjoy being spied on. And we definitely don't get spied on to the extent that the USA does. But even if we did, I would rather have that than be attacked by terrorists.

Mass surveilance isn't the answer and I never said it was. But if I had to pick one of the two, I'd pick being spied on over being blown up.

I never said Edward Snowden has killed anyone but he has helped people who aim to kill.

I said if I had to pick one of the two, I would pick being spied on. Surely even you would rather be spied on then be blown up?


These are all your words, not mine. There's no point in denying that you've said this.


WOW, are you really that bad at reading?! Is the american education system that terrible?! I'll try and explain it one more time, but if you still don't understand then I am just going to assume you are trolling... I'd rather believe that no one can be THAT stupid.

I never said that mass surveillance stops terrorist attacks. But the reason I bring it up is because of Edward Snowden.

He uncovered illegal mass surveillance which is of course bad. It was wrong what the CIA was doing. People had a right to know about it. BUT since uncovering the corruption he has left the USA and ended up helping terrorists who go around killing people. Maybe Edward Snowden would have left the USA and gone to help them anyway. It's hard to understand why anyone would want to do such terrible things. BUT maybe he wouldn't have if he hadn't had to leave the USA. Maybe the reason he is helping them now is because the hardships he experienced abroad left him vulnerable to being radicalised.

If that is the case then it probably would have been better if he had never uncovered the illegal activities of the CIA and been forced to leave the US, where he could then be radicalised.

Mass surveillance isn't a good thing. BUT wouldn't it be ebtter for Edward Snowden to never have uncovered it and for the CIA to be spying on people, rather than him leaving the US and helping the terrorists who with his information could carry out their attacks more successfully and kill more people? THAT IS WHY I KEEP ASKING WOULDN'T IT BE BETTER TO BE SPIED ON THEN BLOWN UP?

If you STILL don't understand my meaning after that then you're either so stupid no one could ever explain it to you, or you're just trolling me.
51215 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M
Offline
Posted 1/7/16

eclair-lumiere wrote:

WOW, are you really that bad at reading?! Is the american education system that terrible?! I'll try and explain it one more time, but if you still don't understand then I am just going to assume you are trolling... I'd rather believe that no one can be THAT stupid.


I could say the same thing about you. I feel like I'd have an easier time teaching Donald Trump how to perform brain surgery than getting you to read my posts. You just repeated the same nonsense from before even though I've already told you that it's not true countless times. It wouldn't kill you to try to read for once. If getting spied on really does save you from getting blown up, that'd be another story. But the fact is that these spying programs don't catch terrorists. You're giving up your privacy for nothing. And for the last time, Snowden has never helped terrorists, whether directly or indirectly. If you're going go make such insane claims, you would look better if you had any sort proof. Otherwise you just sound the same as the people who say Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya.

I've already countered your argument in every single one of posts and you keep repeating the same false narrative over and over again. All you have to do is go back and actually read my posts. If you still want to ignore facts, that's your problem and I won't try to babysit you anymore.
Humms 
10537 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / CAN, ON
Offline
Posted 1/7/16
And you are surprised? Do you really think that rebels, or terrorists actually have power? America can destroy half the world if they wanted to, what can I.S.I.S do? They are puppets on strings pulled by our very own. They want to put fear into our nation so we can focus on them. When the time comes, America will pull the trigger and eliminate that fear, so the people may believe in America once again, so we may be blind to the intentions of the government, and the presidency.

Simple tactics for simplistic minds. Always using fear as their Trump card. People need to wake up.
Posted 1/7/16

Humms wrote:

America can destroy half the world if they wanted to

Posted 1/7/16 , edited 1/7/16
fal·la·cious/fəˈlāSHəs/
adjective

based on a mistaken belief.

OP argument is fallacious, b/c due to militant islamists taking whatever aid they had from the US in the past, e.g. Cold War vs. the soviets etc. and then backstabbing us with that aid. Furthermore, we've been messing around in Kuwait some during George H.W. Bush's presidency, so there's some hatred sown in the minds against Western interests in the ME for some time before. ITE its conspiracy theories that are the most intriguing , so we can tie everything to the illuminati.(The Democratic Party ofc;))
Humms 
10537 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / CAN, ON
Offline
Posted 1/7/16

Hrafna wrote:


Humms wrote:

America can destroy half the world if they wanted to



Lol that's not fair when you use that picture but come on you know they could destroy a good chunk if they really wanted to, all I'm saying, just like other countries as well.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.