BruceVC

Please explain how her words apply to Snowden but not to herself. Did she break the law? Yes. She blatantly mishandled classified documents in a manner that should've been painfully obvious to her, and she did so with what appears to be the direct intent of circumventing laws regarding documentation and processing of such documents. Has information fallen into the wrong hands? Russia sure insists it did. But this hypocrite is apparently a super qualified person to lead this country because hot damn she has a vagina. Yeah ok. Snowden is a traitor and deserves to spend the rest of his life in jail but he can live out the rest of his days is his " Russian heaven" ..by now he would have realized the false image Putin has been projecting is nothing compared to the reality of actually living in Russia compared to the USA. So I say never let him be able to return home...having to live in countries like Russia is fitting punishment And the two examples are NOTHING alike, I am genuinely surprised you can find commonality between them, this just demonstrates your bias towards Hilary as you are using such a low bar Hilary had her own email domain for convenience reasons around using things like certain devices. It should have been addressed by White House security but it was allowed to continue She didnt do it to attack or undermine the entire USA Snowden worked at the NSA and deliberately stole confidential information and then shared it with foreign countries who have numerous reasons to undermine the USA . He knowingly did this and knew this had serious consequences in an attempt to undermine the entire security system of the USA. He is a traitor, this should be unequivocal. Hilary Clinton is nothing like Snowden, she is no traitor and is a patriot and cares for the well being of the USA

No, we vote for any candidate that can do the job..its just as additional bonus Hilary is a women And yes being a strong and independent person who is a president matters on certain levels

Yes, I have found your general disdain for both candidates to be consistent

we know why there is no water: they closed the valves. what we don't know and nobody bothered to inform anyone about is the reason they closed the valves In South Africa until about 6 months ago we use to have electricity outages that lasted 4 hours or so every 3 rd day, people assume not having electricity is the worst thing Its not, water outages or disruptions to water is worse. Everything starts smelling and becomes dirty when you have no water...so I truly empathize with you

The Signal and the Noise... Talking about creative interpretation of data. But hey, the Golden State Warriors broke the all time wins record at 73 this past season. But you know what, they won 22 games where they didn't blow out their opponent by 10 points. Let's move those victories into the tie column since they were so close. So in essence, the Warriors only won 51 games this year... Here are the facts and my noteworthy interpretation of the data. Hillary Clinton currently has 2,203 pledged delegates to Bernie Sanders's 1,828. It's worth noting that the margin of victory is almost 400. Clinton won 33 contests. Sanders won 23. It's worth noting that this is a double digit victory. Clinton received 16,015,681 votes. Sanders 12,287,030 votes. It's worth noting that the margin of victory is almost 4 million votes. Clinton won 55.6% of the vote. Sanders won 42.7%. It's worth noting that the margin of victory is almost 13%. Guys these are the facts, can we focus on the Clinton victory and at least try to recognize the historical victory? Very few people on this forum have celebrated the fact the Clinton nomination has set a historical precedent. This is the first time a women has been nominated for a major US political party, I may need to repeat this for maximum emphasis " This is the first time a women has been nominated for the US president " ..... This is a huge and visible step for gender equality amongst other things, I can't speak for other white males but I have to say when I look at who represents us in the current US system and I see Trump I get embarrassed that Trump somehow has become the person who is " going to make the US great again " .. Anyway I would be supporting Hilary anyway even if I was a US citizen and I look forward to her 4 years as president But guys back to the original point...can we show a little enthusiasm for the Clinton nomination and what its represents for the positive social changes we are seeing throughout the USA? Being female does not qualify her for President. I'm not going to vote for her because of her gender. I didn't vote against Barack Obama because of his skin color. I voted against him because he is an ideologue and he scared the bejesus out of me. No he has not turned out to the the tyrannical horror I was afraid of him being but he has definitely harmed the cause of federalism, individual liberty and personal freedom in the country. He has changed the relationship of the federal government and the citizens in a way that will last long after he has left office. That is not a good thing. Now a power hungry self confessed "government junkie" (her own words) is promising more of the same, more war, more government, less freedom and all you can think about is the fact it's a woman? No thank you. There are plenty of women how would make outstanding Presidents. Nikki Haley and Susanne Martinez would get my vote today over Trump. Joni Earnst & Mia Love would be excellent choices once they get a little more experience. Bruce you need to get past this whole "identity politics" b------t. O Of course no one is suggesting she should be president because she is a women, she should be president because she has the experience, she is qualified and she represents a better future for the US than Trump and she is nomination from the Democratic party You have some perfectly understandable criticism, even if I don't personally support it, towards Hilary. For example the significance of the email scandal which we have discussed. But IMO many people on this forum seem to spend a lot attacking Hilary and her policies yet Trumps constant divisive comments and overall destabilizing views on the how to " make the USA great " again get ignored or justified And to be honest I have waited for this nomination to become more vocal about my support for Hilary but it would be a refreshing change if we could refrain from comments like " Clinton will be never be the next president " or " she is a criminal , she cannot be the next president " Its just the unsubstantiated " anti-Clinton" rhetoric that gets tiresome and is surprising considering the actual reality of the voting results and what the majority of the citizens want

The Signal and the Noise... Talking about creative interpretation of data. But hey, the Golden State Warriors broke the all time wins record at 73 this past season. But you know what, they won 22 games where they didn't blow out their opponent by 10 points. Let's move those victories into the tie column since they were so close. So in essence, the Warriors only won 51 games this year... Here are the facts and my noteworthy interpretation of the data. Hillary Clinton currently has 2,203 pledged delegates to Bernie Sanders's 1,828. It's worth noting that the margin of victory is almost 400. Clinton won 33 contests. Sanders won 23. It's worth noting that this is a double digit victory. Clinton received 16,015,681 votes. Sanders 12,287,030 votes. It's worth noting that the margin of victory is almost 4 million votes. Clinton won 55.6% of the vote. Sanders won 42.7%. It's worth noting that the margin of victory is almost 13%. Guys these are the facts, can we focus on the Clinton victory and at least try to recognize the historical victory? Very few people on this forum have celebrated the fact the Clinton nomination has set a historical precedent. This is the first time a women has been nominated for a major US political party, I may need to repeat this for maximum emphasis " This is the first time a women has been nominated for the US president " ..... This is a huge and visible step for gender equality amongst other things, I can't speak for other white males but I have to say when I look at who represents us in the current US system and I see Trump I get embarrassed that Trump somehow has become the person who is " going to make the US great again " .. Anyway I would be supporting Hilary anyway even if I was a US citizen and I look forward to her 4 years as president But guys back to the original point...can we show a little enthusiasm for the Clinton nomination and what its represents for the positive social changes we are seeing throughout the USA?

Apparently, these boards are not quite a representation of the general and diverse American voting public. It appears that way, when do you think Sanders will throw in the towel? I hear he will be meeting Obama this week

You still think Trump can beat Hilary? There is no chance of that ...I thought we were all in agreement on that political reality ?

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/07/politics/primary-results-highlights/ Guys what an amazing night, it must be so exciting to be a US citizen and to be part of this historical moment The first female presidential nominee, well done Hilary !!!

Generally you can tell if I'm joking as I was with the military post But I didn't say people should be prosecuted for " thinking wrong " but yes they should be prosecuted in places like South Africa for severe racist comments in public arenas and social media. We dont want people being part of SA society if they still make comments like this....and I'm not joking about that http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/07/south-africa-penny-sparrow-apartheid-nostalgia-racist

Yeah I see your point and I agree with you, I can also see you finding permanent employment at a McDonalds

Yes I'm joking ....but was Gfted1 ?

As I keep saying W3 is an example of modern RPG superlativeness I'm 180 hours in and I'm leaving the Skellige Isles ...its so exciting, its epic

Well I am surprised 2133....pleasantly surprised. You somehow found a way to not attack and undermine the EU..even if its a small positive step forward And you right its not a authoritarian regime EU is collective democratic regime (meaning collection of independent democratic countries that have decided by themselves and freely to participate in bigger democratic institution to achieve common goals) where lots of decision making process is obscured by bureaucracy and complex power structure. And things are made worse by countries government using confusion caused by EU's complexity and distance from general public as scapegoat for unpopular decision that they themselves haven been part of making. Of course collective democratic regime can be seen that individual country is losing its power to decide about things by themselves because there are things where they need to come in agreement with wider community. But in other hand leaving such collective regime don't mean that you don't need to come in agreements with other countries anymore. But of course if country and its population has fundamental disagreement about where things should go than rest of the countries in said collective regime then leaving that regime is probably best for their own interests. You know a lot about the EU, I always find these types of posts interesting

Gfted1 this MUST be the most relevant post you have ever made....people must join the military if they are unemployed In fact I would support new legislation that if anyone was unemployed for 6 months or longer they are immediately conscripted into the marines or similar unit. Two years in the Middle East will work wonders for patriotism

If I may opine on this point. Barack Obama has called people very much like me bitter, small minded, he says I cling to guns and religion because I'm afraid of people who don't look like me. He has insulted my religion when he spoke at Georgetown last year. He has insulted an organization I belong to, the VFW. He said people like me were incapable of thinking for ourselves. He has openly insulted my patriotisim and believes I am a likely terrorist because of my military service. GD I also find many of these accusations against Obama hard to believe, can you produce any links? I just prefer to read these types of charges in my own time? Have you read nothing I've linked here the last seven years? Well I have only been active since 2012...Im surprised you forgot this, wasn't 2012 the beginning of the greatest era you have ever experienced on these forums

Guys I will share a secret about how to play W3 and not get overwhelmed by all the quests ....as it can be overwhelming You need to take 1-2 day breaks before playing sessions, I always find then the number of quests seem manageable

Well I am surprised 2133....pleasantly surprised. You somehow found a way to not attack and undermine the EU..even if its a small positive step forward And you right its not a authoritarian regime

If I may opine on this point. Barack Obama has called people very much like me bitter, small minded, he says I cling to guns and religion because I'm afraid of people who don't look like me. He has insulted my religion when he spoke at Georgetown last year. He has insulted an organization I belong to, the VFW. He said people like me were incapable of thinking for ourselves. He has openly insulted my patriotisim and believes I am a likely terrorist because of my military service. GD I also find many of these accusations against Obama hard to believe, can you produce any links? I just prefer to read these types of charges in my own time?

Guys I dont think you trying to understand my point, please try to not look at this from your own view which is biased as you guys are convinced free speech means in a civil society that anything should be allowed to be said ...as long as its just words its okay @ Meshugger Please clarify your post as I have never suggested anything like that Freedom is impossible with forced diversity? No I live in a free country where we dont force diversity ....we acknowledge our diversity but we all are part of rebuilding the new SA misery is propegated by an elite class :Not really, I dont have issues with people who are wealthy. As long as they are ostentatious and think they better than everyone else....so what elite class do you mean? keeps the groups by your own design from hating and killing each other through superior acts of violence: No thats not the SA reality...black people dont want to kill white people at all? In fact we have been treated very well considering the attrocities of Apartheid. The racism I am talking about is from a small, 7 %, of the white people ....and nothing actually happens to them except for most black people getting upset @ Ganrich Yes I understand the argument about creep and suddenly there is real censorship ....but that doesnt have to happen. We only attempt to ban racist comments....thats all Let me ask you something and be honest. Trump has ignited in some parts of the USA real anger and violence through his words ...in fact even if you not angry with him this has got to be the most unexpected and interesting but also divisive election the USA has ever seen Do you really think this was necessary? Do you really think the USA needed this type of negative political outcomes? And if you do please tell me what the benefit it from Trump and his words ?

I have started watching this season and its good but the creation of the Others seemed like an anti-climax? So it was the children who created them to defeat humans? But why did they go against the children and who is the leader of Others?

So because they are angry with Trump it's perfectly understandable that they should trash the property of and beat the hell out of people who are not Donald Trump? Way to go, become the monsters Trump accuses them of being. They are doing more to help him than hurt him. Funny enough I can provide an answer to this point, I have seen this through the years in SA ( not white getting beaten up ). You are right though, destroying property and beating up some Trump supporters is wrong But this type of violence is more of an emotional human reaction to people feeling marginalized by a system or laws, the people who feel they are being hard treated cannot necessarily change the system so they burn or destroy property as a form of protest You think you have unreasonable protesters, we deal with this every few months in SA but it is getting less https://crusaderjournal.com/2016/05/06/19-schools-burnt-to-the-ground-in-south-africa/ Freedom of expression for some, jails for others. Hear me out for a second on this one, why are racist comments considered free speech? So what I mean is why do we classify hurtful and offensive comments as acceptable, this should be changed as it abuses what free speech is suppose to be

Do you have any sources that countries have done such thing as official declaration, and not just some politician speaking poppy****. Like for example there are Russian politician that tell every year how Russia will reclaim Finland, but that is quite far from Russia itself threatening to reclaim Finland. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0W50PN The Gibraltar one seems to be a few speculatory statement by the Spanish foreign minister taken as fact by several publications Good link but its just rhetoric, why would the UK allow that? If they do leave the EU the UK in fact would be more forceful and committed to stopping illegal immigrants. The UK is a small country and it could manage entry points effectively It isn't rhetorical threat, but quite real thing that France can do if they want. It is what Russia did for Finland from December to February, they just let immigrant pass their border control and then these immigrant seek asylum from UK and because of what was agreed on 1951 Refugee Convention UK has to take them in and process their petition for asylum. Of course UK can denounce it but such action probably would cause them quite lot problems in UN. You right about how I used the word rhetoric, I should have said " its rhetorical in the sense it wont impact the UK like France is suggesting " Not that France would do this but lets say France carried through with that threat and disbanded all the refugee camps near the English Channel and stopped policing there side and said to all the immigrants " there is UK we wont stop you " all that will mean is the UK will be finally able to implement proper border control.....there will be less refugees in the UK as the UK allows a certain percentage of refugees into the UK only because they have to due to there EU responsibility Currently UK can't say no for refugees that cross their border and seek asylum. It is what UK has agreed on when they signed UN's articles about refugee rights. Meaning that if France don't stop people that seek to go in UK to get asylum then UK don't actually can do anything else than take them process if they actually fulfill requirements to be refugee and if not sent them back to their home country if some other country don't take them. This scenario of course assumes that UK don't break their international agreements. You make some good points, all I'm saying is just because France fails to maintain its borders that will not suddenly mean thousands of refugees will overwhelm the UK and expect to be integrated

Yes he does and he did in the beginning The rise of Trump is actually a fascinating window into the depths of populism and how you can achieve a real political movement in a place like the US by following a certain strategy Personally I could never do or be part of that approach to politics but it worked for Trump but at the expense of alienating or offending most demographics except for who it was aimed at... disenfranchised white males But the decisions and comments he made I found almost incomprehensible, for example In the beginning he refused to apologize or admit he was wrong about anything....so its like " admitting a person is wrong makes you weak " Suddenly " being PC " is a big no no. Now I understand on the Internet and forums like this some people dont like this concept of being PC all the time. But in RL being PC is normal and expected and achieves the best results when debating or making certain points. Its not hard to be PC and is just really a form of diplomacy. But for some of Trumps supporters they loved the way Trump " refused to be PC and spoke the truth " ....except there is no logical corollary between not being PC and the truth being spoken. So for example I can insult people and not be PC but its still hyperbole or I'm biased

Do you have any sources that countries have done such thing as official declaration, and not just some politician speaking poppy****. Like for example there are Russian politician that tell every year how Russia will reclaim Finland, but that is quite far from Russia itself threatening to reclaim Finland. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0W50PN The Gibraltar one seems to be a few speculatory statement by the Spanish foreign minister taken as fact by several publications Good link but its just rhetoric, why would the UK allow that? If they do leave the EU the UK in fact would be more forceful and committed to stopping illegal immigrants. The UK is a small country and it could manage entry points effectively It isn't rhetorical threat, but quite real thing that France can do if they want. It is what Russia did for Finland from December to February, they just let immigrant pass their border control and then these immigrant seek asylum from UK and because of what was agreed on 1951 Refugee Convention UK has to take them in and process their petition for asylum. Of course UK can denounce it but such action probably would cause them quite lot problems in UN. You right about how I used the word rhetoric, I should have said " its rhetorical in the sense it wont impact the UK like France is suggesting " Not that France would do this but lets say France carried through with that threat and disbanded all the refugee camps near the English Channel and stopped policing there side and said to all the immigrants " there is UK we wont stop you " all that will mean is the UK will be finally able to implement proper border control.....there will be less refugees in the UK as the UK allows a certain percentage of refugees into the UK only because they have to due to there EU responsibility