Slashdot Mirror


User: meta-monkey

meta-monkey's activity in the archive.

Stories
0
Comments
5,602
First seen
Last seen
Profile
(view on slashdot.org)

Comments · 5,602

  1. Okay that was funny.

  2. I'm saying Hitler's rants against Jews are legendary. He never had a nice thing to say about Jews. He was not trying to "trick" Jews into supporting him only so he could betray them later.

    Trump says nice things about blacks and hispanics. He kisses black babies and tweets out smiling pictures of him saying "I love hispanics!!" This is nothing like the behavior of a racist who hates blacks and hispanics.

    Your argument is that Trump is like Hitler because Hitler didn't write down he wanted to gas Jews, and Trump hasn't written down that he wants to gas Mexicans. Have you not written down your plan to gas Whites? Oh you haven't, have you? Therefore you're just like Hitler and Trump, never writing down your genocide plans. (I have written down my plan to gas Eskimos, so therefore I'm not like Hitler and Trump and you).

  3. Re:And yet on Ecuador Acknowledges Limiting Julian Assange's Web Access (reuters.com) · · Score: 1

    And he's always released information on his schedule, when it suited his purposes. He has never rushed to dump everything ASAP. Assange is a political actor, just like every other political actor, and just like Snowden and Greenwald released his stuff in different timed waves for political purposes.

    If he were dumping stuff strategically to hurt Trump you'd still be gargling his cock about how "Assange is your friend he fights for freedumb!" But right now his political purpose is taking down the corrupt DNC and media establishment, the rancid Clinton Foundation and the psychopathic Clinton crime family. Because you support these things for some bizarre reason you're all pissy at Assange now. Yawn.

  4. That's not a complete sentence. I'm assuming your IQ is in the 85 range?

  5. Education and training is the only answer.

    Can you turn a man with a 100 IQ into an electrical engineer?

  6. I totally value the political opinions of educated people with a Ph.D. in Gender Studies working at Starbucks over those uneducated rube plumbers with 12 employees.

    Liberals: "We're the champions of the working class."

    Working class: "We'd really like it if the government would stop flooding the country with cheap labor, criminals, drugs, and people who hate us while also shitting on our history, culture and religion. We're fucking dying here."

    Liberals: "EVIL RACIST SEXIST XENOPHOBIC ISLAMOPHOBIC BIGOT LITERALLY DOUBLE MEGA HITLER VOTE FOR US WE KNOW WHAT'S BEST FOR YOU!!!!!"

  7. Who gives a fuck about any of this shit? Trump's insensitive. Hillary's never met a war she doesn't LOVE. Not just like. LOVE. I don't think there has ever been a more bloodthirsty politician than Hillary Clinton. In Syria alone she's got 400k dead. Migrant crisis that's destabilizing all of Europe. Make her president and we'll get a few million more slaughtered in pursuit of some geopolitical scheme for cash or another, but hey, at least she won't have said mean things (in public).

  8. Is he wrong?

  9. I think Hitler made it pretty damn clear how he felt about the Jews. I don't recall him ever hugging Jews on stage, kissing Jew babies, or having pictures of him disseminated eating matzo balls with the caption "I love Jews!" and telling everyone how he just had a problem with illegal Jews but loved legal Jews and the Jewish people.

  10. Re:Minefield on Mark Zuckerberg Defends Peter Thiel's Trump Ties In Internal Memo (theverge.com) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you're a Trump supporter and drop him over a single issue you happen to disagree with or a single scandal, what then?

    Move over to Hillary? Why? Because her political plank issues don't match you in any way, BUT AT LEAST SHE SUPPOSEDLY HASN'T EVER TOLD A SEX JOKE!

    The thing I find really amusing about the PussyLeaks issue is that the left demands I drop Trump because of pussy grabbing, when they're not dropping Hillary because of the rape victim intimidation. But lefties, this is YOUR ISSUE. As a right winger, I'm already an evil sexist. So how is this argument possibly persuasive? Trump is SO EVIL because he admits that women will let stars grab their pussies that I must abandon my policy goals (the wall, law & order, deporting illegals, killing the TPP, etc)...and then vote for Hillary? Who threatens her husband's rape victims? How is that better?

    I don't care about wymynz rights crap. They do! If Hillary threatening rape victims isn't bad enough to get them to drop their politics, why on earth should Trump being a pussy hound be bad enough for me to drop mine?

  11. Re: And yet on Ecuador Acknowledges Limiting Julian Assange's Web Access (reuters.com) · · Score: 1

    The fact she gets full questions from CNN and topics from Fox? Yes, burn the witch.

  12. Re:Weiner Pics on Ecuador Acknowledges Limiting Julian Assange's Web Access (reuters.com) · · Score: 1

    Data's all sourced, friend. It actually all links right back to the same PAC as in O'Keffe's videos, so it's corroborating those, too. It's a twofer.

    The only question people then need to ask is, when you're shilling this stuff around, is it because:

    1) You know it's false, but it accomplishes your political goal, meaning you're evil.

    2) You're literally too fucking stupid to understand the fraud.

    I think it's #1. Little of #2. You are pretty damn dumb. But I don't think you're so dumb you don't know what you're doing.

  13. Re: And yet on Ecuador Acknowledges Limiting Julian Assange's Web Access (reuters.com) · · Score: 1

    1. Where there's one there's more.

    2. Why does it matter? Even one is damning.

    3. CNN is lying to you.

  14. Re:And yet on Ecuador Acknowledges Limiting Julian Assange's Web Access (reuters.com) · · Score: 1

    Trump releases his tax returns. It turns out he's lost billions, gives nothing to charity, and has heavy investments from V. PUTIN INC. What happens to his poll numbers?

    Trump releases his tax returns. It turns out he's rich as fuck, gives mountains of cash to wynynz and kids and shit, and has not the slightest hint of foreign entanglement. What happens to his poll numbers?

    Anyway, keep screaming "MUH TAXES MUH TAXES!!!!" Working great for ya.

  15. So let's say President Trump's in office, and documents get leaked that are embarrassing or damaging for the Republican party. And Trump said "it was Iranians! They hacked our shit and we gotta bomb the hajis!" And Trump's CIA says "yes, we believe it was the Iranians." Would you be okay with bombing Iran based on that declaration from the government?

  16. Re:Interesting, Dave Chappelle. on More Performers Are Demanding Audiences Lock Up Their Phones (nytimes.com) · · Score: 1

    Have you ever been with a woman? How did you know when it was the right time to grab her pussy?

  17. Re:She did nothing wrong on Journalists Face Jail Time After Reporting on North Dakota Pipeline Protest (techcrunch.com) · · Score: 1

    I mean have you actually looked at photographs of Castille, and compared them to the photographs from the security camera?

    If you were a cop, and having seen the photograph of the robber at the morning briefing and been told "be on the lookout for a subject matching this photo," and then you saw Castille driving by, would you stop him?

  18. Re:Weiner Pics on Ecuador Acknowledges Limiting Julian Assange's Web Access (reuters.com) · · Score: 2

    The whole thing has already been debunked. Part 1 and Park 2. It's the sloppiest smear job I've ever seen. You should spread it around like crazy because when someone easily debunks it it helps play into our narrative that the DNC is crooked beyond measure and their supporters like you are either disgusting liars or mad fools. Even the wicked are made to serve God's plan.

  19. Re:Anti-Secrecy Organization?! on WikiLeaks: Ecuador Cut Off Assange's Internet Access (bbc.com) · · Score: 1

    Is the audience informed that any of the participants receive the questions in advance? And is not the de facto standard in a debate competition that no one gets the questions in advance?

  20. Re:Too many paid shills vs organic posters on Ecuador Acknowledges Limiting Julian Assange's Web Access (reuters.com) · · Score: 1

    Why would something you pulled out of your ass show up in FEC filings?

  21. Re:And yet on Ecuador Acknowledges Limiting Julian Assange's Web Access (reuters.com) · · Score: 1

    There is a difference between releasing information when available, and strategically releasing at specific times to maximize the political impact. One is in a spirit of freedom of information and transparency where truth speaks for itself, and the other is a deliberate attempt to wield power for personal reasons.

    No, he was always doing that. Remember the flak he got for the editing of the "collateral murder" video? Assange has always had an agenda. That agenda is...mainly Assange. Julian wants to save the world, but mainly because Julian wants to be famous and beloved for saving the world.

    What is your agenda in trying to defend this guy?

    I'm laughing at the hypocrisy of...well most everyone, but definitely the left. Lefties on /. were all up Julian's ass when his leaks helped their political causes. Now that they're in complete denial about the thorough corruption of their party that Assange is revealing he's evil and they want him droned. Similarly there's lots of conservatives who are suddenly Assange cheerleaders who probably agreed with that drone strike idea back during the Manning dumps.

  22. Re:And yet on Ecuador Acknowledges Limiting Julian Assange's Web Access (reuters.com) · · Score: 1

    No, I don't give a shit about his tax returns. My point is no one actually gives a shit about his tax returns. There isn't a single person saying "Gee I'm fine with building a wall and deporting millions of people and banning muslims, but what if there's something shady in his tax returns?!? Nope nope nope #ImWithHer!"

    Since it makes no difference one way or the other, I hope he never releases them because it makes lefties so buttmad and the media wastes tons of time harping about something completely worthless instead of picking a more effective attack.

  23. Re: And yet on Ecuador Acknowledges Limiting Julian Assange's Web Access (reuters.com) · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It has the verbatim question. Word for word. Same punctuation and everything.

    No one is buying the lies anymore. Well actually that's not true. Tons of people are still buying the lies because they're brainwashed retards.

  24. Re:Too many paid shills vs organic posters on Ecuador Acknowledges Limiting Julian Assange's Web Access (reuters.com) · · Score: 1

    no one wants WW3.

    [Citation Needed]. After everything I've seen this election, cleansing nuclear fire sounds downright peachy.

  25. Re:Too many paid shills vs organic posters on Ecuador Acknowledges Limiting Julian Assange's Web Access (reuters.com) · · Score: 1

    I agree with that. I haven't seen anything that looks like CTR on /.

    Reddit and 4chan, absolutely, but nobody's bothering with fucking slashdot. Especially when you can easily see anybody's UID, and date it.