Valsuelm

One can hope that Merkel follows in his footsteps next year. Long live Assad!?

Nigel is the shiz. One of the only politicians anywhere on earth at a national level that is telling it at least somewhat like it is. Got a problem with him relative to other politicians, and I'd say you've probably got a problem with reality.

You know the irony of all that is there were deaths back in Arkansas that were a lot more suspicious than that one with much better evidence of foul play and cover up. But for some reason this is the one that gets remembered. That is not to suggest anyone named Clinton had anything to do with any of them but it does beg the question when the Arkansas State Police determine the AG (one William Jefferson Clinton) former mistress Suzanne Coleman committed suicide by shooting herself in the back of the head with a rifle. Vince Foster was never 'debunked'. There are some unanswerable questions. Suzanne Coleman is just one of many of who died in Arkansas who had their deaths covered up under Bill Clinton's watch, as AG and as governor. My personal opinion on all of these vary, though I'd say the teenagers killed who stumbled on a drug drop probably has the biggest red flags of all. It'll be interesting to see if the forthcoming Tom Cruise movie 'Mena' mentions Clinton's connections to 'Iran Contra'. Doubtful, as there are other bigger players to mention first (like Bush), and a 2-3 hour long movie is only going to be able to show the tip of the iceberg, but it's certainly possible.

Well, well, well. What do we have here in the donor list? (Those who in bold are those that got my attention at first glance) $25 million + Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation * Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership (Canada) * Fred Eychaner * Frank Giustra, The Radcliffe Foundation Nationale Postcode Loterij * The Children's Investment Fund Foundation $10-25 million AUSAID Stephen L. Bing COPRESIDA Tom Golisano Government of Norway The Hunter Foundation * Kingdom of Saudi Arabia * The Victor Pinchuk Foundation Cheryl and Haim Saban & The Saban Family Foundation * The ELMA Foundation Theodore W. Waitt $5-10 million S. Daniel Abraham Sheikh Mohammed H. Al-Amoudi Susie Tompkins Buell Fund of the Marin Community Foundation * C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, Inc. * Commonwealth of Australia, DIICC * Elton John AIDS Foundation Government of the Netherlands Irish Aid J.B. and M.K. Pritzker Family Foundation * John D. Mackay Denis J. O'Brien * Michael Schumacher State of Kuwait The Coca-Cola Company * The Rockefeller Foundation The Swedish Postcode Lottery * The Wasserman Foundation * $1-5 million 100 Women in Hedgefunds Absolute Return for Kids (ARK) Jay Alix Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa Nasser Al-Rashid American Federation of Teachers * Angelopoulos Foundation * Gianna Angelopoulos Anheuser-Busch Foundation Smith and Elizabeth Bagley * Barclays Capital Mary Bing and Doug Ellis Fidelity Charitable Gift Fund * Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina * Richard Blum and Blum Family Foundation * Booz Allen Hamilton * The Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation * The Sherwood Foundation * Richard and Jackie Caring * Gilbert R. Chagoury Christy and John Mack Foundation * Cisco * Citi Foundation The Clinton Family Foundation * Clinton-Bush Haiti Fund Stephen J. Cloobeck * Roy E. ****rum * Victor P. Dahdaleh & The Victor Phillip Dahdaleh Charitable Foundation The ERANDA Foundation * Robert Disbrow Dubai Foundation Duke Energy Corporation Entergy ExxonMobil * Issam M. Fares & The Wedge Foundation * Joseph T. Ford Wallace W. Fowler Friends of Saudi Arabia Fundacion Telmex Mala Gaonkar Haarman GEMS Education * Ariadne Getty * GIZ - Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale * The James R. Greenbaum, Jr. Family Foundation Vin Gupta * Worldwide Support for Development * Hewlett-Packard Company * Hult International Business School * Humana Inc. * ICAP Services North America * Inter-American Development Bank * Sanela D. Jenkins Robert L. Johnson * Walid Juffali Dave Katragadda Kessler Family Foundation Michael and Jena King Laureate International Universities Lukas Lundin MAC AIDS Fund The Marc Haas Foundation * Microsoft * Lakshmi N. Mittal James R. Murdoch Norad (Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation) * NRG Energy, Inc. * OAS S.A. OCP Corporation Open Society Institute Jonathan M. Orszag * Peter G. Peterson Foundation * Pfizer Inc * PGA Tour, Inc. * Presidential Inaugural Committee Princess Diana Memorial Fund Procter & Gamble * Stewart Rahr Paul D. Reynolds Robertson Foundation Newsmax Media Inc. * Salida Capital Foundation Donald L. Saunders * Joachim Schoss Bernard L. Schwartz Walter H. Shorenstein Arnold H. Simon Bren Simon * Amar Singh Carlos Slim Helú & Fundación Carlos Slim Michael Smurfit * Harold Snyder Sol Goldman Charitable Trust * Steven Spielberg Standard Chartered Bank * Starkey Hearing Foundation * Starkey Hearing Technologies, Inc. * State of Qatar Sterling Stamos Capital Management, LP The Streisand Foundation * Suzlon Energy Ltd. Swedish Postcode Foundation Swiss Reinsurance Company * Nima Taghavi * Tenet Healthcare Corporation * The Annenberg Foundation The Boeing Company The Dow Chemical Company * The ELMA Philanthropies Services (U.S.) Inc. The Ford Foundation * The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. * The Government of Brunei Darussalam The Howard Gilman Foundation The New York Community Trust * The Roy and Christine Sturgis Charitable & Educational Trust The Sidney E. Frank Foundation The Sultanate of Oman * The Walmart Foundation The Zayed Family Thomson Reuters Torres-Picón Foundation * Toyota Motor North America, Inc. * Tracfone Wireless, Inc. * T.G. Holdings U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) * UK Department for International Development ( DFID) United Arab Emirates * Verein Aids Life The Walton Family Foundation * Rilin Enterprises * Gerardo Werthein Frank White * The Wyss Foundation * YPY Holding Limited * This list. Where exactly did you get it? I'd like to send it on to some folks I know outside of Obsidian land.

Yup, seems like the pro-EU party consists of prime examples of good educated humans... EDIT: Having said that if there was a chance, I would vote pro-Nexit. And no, I don't vote PVV. What TN is referring to is indoctrination, not education.

Warning: NSFW lyrics

In the case of the former, I can actually see scenarios where the powers that shouldn't be would allow for the UK to 'Brexit', though I would agree those scenarios are less likely than the remain scenarios (we'll find out in some hours). In the case of the latter, Trump even running at all is going to accomplish some good, win or lose, and probably not in the way most would normally expect.

Gary, is not the answer. Nor is the Libertarian party, which was hijacked years ago by the same folks who own the Republican and Democratic parties. There's oodles of evidence of this if you've followed the party over the years, but most recently Weld as the VP pick (despite the outcry of a great many folks in the party itself) should tell you all you need to know. If you don't like Trump (who is more of an outsider than Gary, and possibly even more libertarian at the end of the day) or Clinton, I suggest voting for Mickey! Or.... don't vote at all. Or, go ahead and vote Gary, which will essentially yield the same results (if he won) as voting Rubio, Cruz, Clinton, or any of the other establishment stooges.

So you're on the fence about ceding your national sovereignty with it's usually corrupt parliamentary democracy to an always corrupt always bought and paid for bureaucratic corporate/banker dictatorship? Really? This is a no brainer vote methinks. Do you want a say or not? If yes, vote GTFO, if no, vote remain. The whole you've got corrupt politicians thing is certainly real, but you've got a chance to get rid of them in any given election. This is likely your last chance ever to get rid of the corrupt bureaucrats in Brussels that trump your locally and nationally elected folks . Relatively peacefully anyways... Put very simply: Yay serfdom forever! > Remain To hell with serfdom! > Leave and continue to fight the good political fight within your nation.

Greatness? Do you consider Trump a great man, what in your view makes him great? Trump is cool, sharp, brash, assertive and self-confident; he is successful in every of his lifes goals, he is successful in his business ventures and he swims in money; women want him, men want to be like him and he has beautiful wife with a beautiful family that loves him. He is tall, has a great set of hair, an imposing figure and finally: a proud american who loves his country country without any regret and with a clear conscience. Such sense of being is greatness and such greatness works like a magnet for those who are jealous of it. Michael Steven Stanford on the other hand, emotional, afraid, autistic and filled with self-hatred. He is poor, he lives in his car, he hasn't succeeded in anything. No women wants him and men make fun of him. He is short, sad, unkempt with a forgettable figure and finally: an illegal alien who hates america, filled with regrets and a buckling conscience. When witnessed with such greatness, he instinctively has to destroy it, as he cannot bear the knowledge of its mere existence. He tries to follow the path of Zé Pequeno in "City of God", but he fails even at that. A total failure. Superb movie!

LoL. No. Care to explain why? .... Nope! Sorry, not wasting my time on that one, especially in a thread not about it. You may as well be linking articles on Barbie and Ken's love life. But worry not, that's one scenario that will never play out in realityland. Or waste your time worrying if that floats your boat, but I suggest finding better things to do.

There are few, if any people on earth, who don't have some skin in the game of what happens in the EU. Some of course have more skin, but what happens there has great potential to reverberate everywhere. I'd say the 'Brexit' vote potentially matters more (especially if the leave vote wins) on an international scale than any U.S. Presidential election (the one many traditionally think matters a great deal internationally) has in at least 70 years.

The question of whether Brexit is/isn't pro-globalisation isn't an easy one to answer. On the surface it's anti-globalist. But the whole thing can be finagled to be fit the agenda when all is said and done. At the end of the day, if the Brits vote to leave the EU, it might be a might setback to the globalist agenda, or it might not. I can personally see a number of scenarios play out. If 'Brexit' happens, what happens next will matter a lot, and is currently largely unknown, at least publicly. Rest assured, bets are certainly hedged.

Terrific. If i was briton, i would be more than ever convinced to leave the EU. It's like a textbook example on reverse psychology. Your comment made me watch, despite me thinking beforehand 'Gee, I'll wager this occasionally mildly amusing useful idiot commie/globalist pawn assclown is going to be pro EU, and will attempt to comically poop all over the idea of leaving it.' Yup, sadly predictable. Sad, because so many unintelligents get their information from him. Predictable, because he's a commie/globalist mouthpiece, and pretty much always falls in line with those agendas.

It certainly isn't to welcome all of the above with open arms. If a man isn't tolerating the fact that your daughter is telling him no, your reaction should not be to tolerate him when he forces her legs open.

Perhaps said in jest? but there's certainly a good deal of ugly truth to this statement.

Such a society is doomed when it tolerates and embraces those that won't tolerate them. 'Tolerance' is not always a goody goody gumdrop thing. It's become a destructive Orwellian buzzword such as 'progress', 'new', 'change', etc. Some things should not be tolerated. Just as some progress is down a bad path, some change is for the worse, and 'new' isn't always better than what it replaced.

You're a relatively astute person, so this is probably somewhat rhetorical: Did it ever occur to you that overthrowing Saddam and Qaddafi were not terrible mistakes? That perhaps the folks who orchestrated these things knew exactly what they were doing? The outcomes were indeed predicted by many, even as early as the 90s. So at least in some quarters there was no surprise at what happened. If we are to take the position that these things were terrible mistakes, what are we doing allowing those who made them to continue holding the strings of power? And if we take the position that they were not mistakes.... Then /pol/ is right and we are in for terrible times ahead. I do not wish for that to happen. Reddit and 4chan are places I do not frequent (I'm not sure which one you're referring to). But I would agree that terrible times are ahead. I also do not wish for them to happen. However, us wishing thus is akin to us wishing the tides to not happen. Rubicons have been crossed. We are past points of no return at this point, and have been for quite some time methinks. The calm before the storm is passed, and the waves are beginning to get choppy these last few years. The worst part methinks is that the longer the flames take to ignite the worse the explosion is going to be. I'm curious if you have any particular essays/articles/authors you would reference/recommend on /pol/. If not, no worries.

The irony on display here is just as delicious as it is staggering. Alas. /shoo troll

Have you stopped beating your girlfriend? lol Stupid question but I dont get this joke? It's fun because it goes both ways. Numbersman illustrates that my pontification is an accusation where there is no possible answer to refute the question(s), while on the same hand it is very permissable to beat your wife in islamic countries. Okay that is quite funny But we cant say that is true for all Muslims so we just need to not say things that will offend them No. They have to change their ways in our countries in order to fit in. If not, then there's the door back. Oh dear, But what if they don't want to leave? Offer incentive for returning (financial, logistical) and working with current regimes in stabilizing the region (like accepting that the overthrowing of Saddam and Gadaffi were terrible mistakes and start supporting Assad as the least evil option). If they still don't want to leave then sadly there will be conflicts on some degree or the other. You're a relatively astute person, so this is probably somewhat rhetorical: Did it ever occur to you that overthrowing Saddam and Qaddafi were not terrible mistakes? That perhaps the folks who orchestrated these things knew exactly what they were doing? The outcomes were indeed predicted by many, even as early as the 90s. So at least in some quarters there was no surprise at what happened. If we are to take the position that these things were terrible mistakes, what are we doing allowing those who made them to continue holding the strings of power? And if we take the position that they were not mistakes....

Have you stopped beating your girlfriend? lol Stupid question but I dont get this joke? It's fun because it goes both ways. Numbersman illustrates that my pontification is an accusation where there is no possible answer to refute the question(s), while on the same hand it is very permissable to beat your wife in islamic countries. Okay that is quite funny But we cant say that is true for all Muslims so we just need to not say things that will offend them No. They have to change their ways in our countries in order to fit in. If not, then there's the door back. Oh dear, But what if they don't want to leave?

Your complete inability to identify sarcasm somehow fails to surprise me. So I can assume that every ridiculous ignorant post you make is sarcasm then here forward? As your posts generally are combative, vitriolic, ignorant of facts at hand, as well as fairly prolific, and even somewhat consistent in the former qualities if inconsistent in their ideological content. This would lead one to believe that you are sincere in your posts, especially given the vehemence you often display. So are you just a prolific troll then? For your sarcrasm wasn't obvious (those who know me in the face to face world would find it amusing that I'm accused of not recognizing sarcasm). Always remember tone, inflection, facial expression, etc are missing in the world of black and white text. An emoticon wink, or some other such hint is generally advised when one wishes to convey humor, tongue in cheek, sarcasm, etc when one is discussing serious issues. Else one runs high risk they will be misinterpreted. Also, trolls suck fermented dung beetle excrement, and that is the most wholesome of their activities. I have more respect for the truly ignorant zombie morons out there. I sincerely hope you are not a mere troll, for your sake more than anyone's. Such a life is hopelessly shallow and sad.

So, in the last 5 years, on average, there's been slightly less than 17 deaths per year attributed to Muslim extremism. The US sees 14-15k cases of murder and nonnegligent manslaughter a year. The terrible menace you speak of is responsible for a little more than 0,1% of the total murder rate in the country. I can't help but add that about 70% of Americans profess to be Christians. In the absence of other data, we should default to the base ratios, meaning that we can safely assume that Christians committed 70% of those 14k murders. Even if we assume that Christians are especially peaceful, and are only responsible for half the normal rate of murders, this still puts them at around 5k. There you have it, folks - even by exceedingly conservative estimates, you're almost 300 times as likely to be killed by a Christian than a radical Muslim! Tremble before the true scourge of America. Your response was predictable (hence me typing the bolded above, more than once, yet to no avail as ignorance reigns in your head) and is as relevant as if I quoted some crime statistics for predominantly Muslim nation X, and laid the blame upon Muslims. The fact that 70% of the U.S. population is definitely not made up of devout Christians aside. As well as the fact that the murder rate within the U.S. is not uniform across the ethnic group board or religious group board aside. You're attempting to obfuscate evil with other evil (and oft lesser at that). There is a world of difference between the general crime that any given nation on earth experiences and violent attacks perpetrated by people who are foreign to a given nation who fundamentally believe they are at war with said nation or it's people (via culture, ideology, religion, etc). If you cannot see that difference, your brain is broken.

Actually, collectivists built the second world hellholes. The third world hellholes were built/made by both the first world and the second world together. Nowadays there is little difference between the first and second worlds, and both are largely highwaying it to the third. The nice individualists have allowed the more oft not so nice collectivists the stage for a bit too long. Also, both individualists and collectivists have allowed themselves to be fooled by evil MFers who adhere to neither general philosophy, but only to a philosophy of power. It's the latter folks who are driving the train all over, while employing conductors to make sure the passengers are so at odds with one another they don't look out the window to see where they're going nor realize who is driving.