Every single person who’s read your posts knows for a 100% certainty that is a pure lie.

You only see black and white or Blue and Red. Always. You see nothing BUT color.

In your mind everything is “us vs them”, never “WE”. You think Black and White are the same thing as Wrong and Right. If a white woman in a red hat was leaving the hospital in this video and nothing else changed you would be outraged at the “abusive liberal police attacking innocent people”, you know it’s true as much as we do. Ashley Babbitt is proof of your undeniable racism, that’s why you absolutely refuse to discuss your blatantly racist and hypocritical stance on her vs black men peacefully walking (which is she’s an innocent victim of police brutality despite being the tip of a violent destructive murderous mob trying to overthrow the elected government by force, but unarmed unthreatening black men peacefully and legally walking should immediately submit/comply and let their rights be violated daily and violence is justified if they don’t).

Maybe you can twist your own mind enough to convince yourself you aren’t racist, but that just goes perfectly with all the other reality denying theories you believe like….
The 2020 election was stolen
Covid isn’t dangerous
There’s no racism in America
Banning travel by Chinese, but not banning travel from China isn’t a racist policy and will stop Covid
Trump is fighting election fraud
Lockdowns don’t work
Russia didn’t help Trump get elected
The Trump economy was great
H Clinton is going to prison
Police aren’t racist
Forest fires are getting worse because the forests aren’t raked, not because of climate change
Climate change isn’t real
Jan 6 was BLM
Pelosi wasn’t attacked by a MAGgot terrorist, but had a lovers spat
Dominion stole the election
Soros stole the election
Cesar Chaves stole the election
Smartmatic stole the election
Italian space lasers stole the election
Hunter Biden stole the election
It’s not a crime to steal top secret classified documents, keep them unsecured, refuse to return them, lie about returning them, copy them, try to trade them, and to lie about it all to the FBI on sworn documents
Jewish space lasers are responsible for forest fires
Pizza gate is real, democrats are really pedophilic cannibalistic Illuminati lizard people that gain magic power from murdering children
Joe Biden raped a woman in the open halls of congress
Trump never raped a woman
Hunter Biden has well over $3 BILLION dollars from China
Jared personally EARNED $3 billion from the Saudi prince by selling them a classified enemies list our national intelligence community developed, nothing wrong with that
Trump didn’t abuse the office for personal/familial gains in excess of $3 billion
BLM murdered police, not the Boogaloo boys who were caught in the act


You never say the “should have complied with police, totally justified” bullshit when the victim is white (a rarity but it happens) and you nearly always excuse abusive police when they attack black people for “not complying”. You never care that “complying” means waiving their constitutional rights…unless it’s a MAGgot that’s “not complying”, which you always see as heroic patriotic bravery even when it’s paired with anti government terrorism and violence.

Trump is the only one with verified fraudulent votes. You know this. He ran the attempted steal, and failed to steal the presidency. Republicans are the only ones caught fraudulently voting. Sorry, Charlie, your guy cheated….and still lost bigly.

Biden is requiring vaccination and testing to let Americans back in from those African countries, Trump didn’t require a thing, actually discouraged testing of people from China, and only banned Chinese people, allowing over 40000 untested people in from infected areas in China…which started the American epidemic. Biden did not ban just black Africans, despite what you imply….that kind of racist move had already proven to be a failure during the previous administration.

Biden’s poll numbers are better than Trump’s despite the disaster he inherited from Trump. Duh.

A success at defrauding morons like you, and the American people. Are you trying to say the nation was in a better place Jan 20, 2021 than it was 2017? By what measure? I can’t think of a single way things improved…yet you stand up for this failed administration, guess you(re) part of the fooled 36% (now down to 26% btw) who thinks he did a good job. Derp.

A full year of being a whiny little bitch, bob. When are you going to get tired of throwing infantile tantrums out of sour grapes because you’re too immature to accept that the least popular president ever, presiding over an avoidable pandemic and recession, could lose an election (even though Trump has never gotten more votes than his opponent in ANY election EVER!). Remember you said Clinton should be disqualified because she was under investigation (even though she wasn’t, they reopened a long closed case to pretend she was still being investigated in the final week)….so I must assume Trump is disqualified because he’s under indictment and investigation dozens of times over…or do you admit you’re a hypocritical whining little bitch?

Really? You have a complete inventory of his arsenal, because I haven't seen one. He had many bump stocks.
Full auto what is 20 Hz? Different guns have different rates of fire, and he had many. Different bump stocks also deliver different rates, as do different fingers on different triggers.

When your target is a 15 degree arc, it's fine. For aiming, I agree.

Not in my experience at gun shows is all I'll say about that.

My point, these are legal. The traceability comes in if he had escaped.

You don't have to be squeaky clean, just not banned if you buy legally. There's no check at all for the bump stock or other rapid fire mechanism (there are many).

Ban of the rapid fire mechanisms would have at least forced him to buy them on the black market for far more money...if he could find them at all. That's a step, not a solution.

comes from youtube channel Ahmed Raza

username here ahmedrza1212

coincidence? I think not.

*ban

Haha, OK. It's funny, but I'm unclear as to whether or not you guys are making fun of me or not.
At this point I'm still recovering from the effects of dealing with the storm of memories that flooded my brain after maniacally confirming that the sift indeed did "break up" with me.
I love this website because everyone posts such amazing stuff and in truth I have felt guilty for not contributing to the community more, but I'm not that good at that, so I'll try and do better. Wasn't there a dude on here called chaosengine from NZ who used to comment a lot what happened to that guy?
Anyway, thanks for not banning me because I really love this place.
I never created an account before because I'm a bit wary of speaking up because people here be cray cray [sarcasm] and public vilification is terrifying, despite the anonymity (so, yes I'm a real person).

As I said, I did not mean the only argument. I should have been more clear. At least I can admit it.

Ha!!! Muphry was spot on. Mea culpa.
"Donald J Trump is calling for a complete and total shutdown of Muslims coming to the United States....."
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=viDffWUjcBA

Close enough, or do I need to find a video of him saying the words "Muslim ban"? From what I'm reading, any videos or statements he made with those words have been removed from his websites, so may be hard to find.

As I've said before, not banning ALL Muslims (yet) does not hide the clear intent any better than the targeted banning of Israelis hid the Jewish ban for some other countries.
Trump publicly stated that Christians from the "banned" countries, including Syria, would essentially be exempt and given preferential treatment, another legal indicator the ban is targeted at Muslims, not nationalities. I'll look to see if I can find a link to that.
http://time.com/4652367/donald-trump-refugee-policy-christians/

Obama never halted immigration from them, he implemented stringent vetting, but didn't revoke any visas like Trump, and extreme vetting has been the norm for years, it's not some new Trump idea requiring a travel ban until he figures out what's happening.

Saying he (Jim) didn't make an argument, when his argument is actually one of those offered in court against the ban, defends Trump's position, therefore him, intentionally or not.

Ban Arab Muslims, except from places that have attacked us, and tell all other Muslim countries that more is coming, they may be next.
Terror linked is a different category from terrorist sponsoring, and those nations are not banned. That's absolutely retarded.

I guess he's ignorant of the fact that the right was frothing at the mouth because Obama refused to just arm anyone fighting against Assad and insisted on VETTING them before he armed them. Had Trump and the Republicans been in control, Daesh may have been given battlefield nukes.

The "exemption" to the un-American refugee ban doesn't start for 120 days, and is then ONLY if Trump's people think it's in the national interest to let them in on a case by case basis (based on what, determined by whom?)....which is not likely for those worth less than $5000000. I guess he didn't read the text before calling others delusional or he would have read that.

Oops, the 2014 attack was also preformed by an American, as others have been....I guess we have to ban Americans too.

Yes, because America VETTS those we invite in...contrary to what most right wing idiots believe. They use Europe as an example of what will happen if we don't stop the scary Muslims, conveniently ignoring the vetting process that's completely non existent in Europe.

He's saying that people treated as the enemy often become the enemy, you feculent douche. Learn to read...and think.

Trump is just the bigot. Period. It's absolutely correct that if Muslims were as dangerous as portrayed and treated by Trump and the right, he would have been assassinated. That's a good indicator that Trump is wrong, not that all Muslims are easily radicalized or a call for assassination like the right spent 8 years doing directly and personally towards Obama.

Not a single Syrian that supports Daesh has made it through the vetting process to America.

They don't ban Israelis because of religion, they are banned because they are all in the military and that military is an expansionist fascist oppressor of and provocateur to Palestinians and most other Arab nations. I'm fairly certain Jews from America can go there.

What a fucking brain dead, dishonest idiot.
Mostly good tags though, this is certainly chock full of fail and lies, fearmongering, and has mostly been debunked....but it's absolutely not news in any way. I'll let someone else fix that though.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Gee, that's a bit harsh. Look, I completely disagree with what this guy is saying too. But you have to admit he represents the views of a sizeable portion of the American public.

Is it really better to chuck him out and risk becoming a groupthink choir? I know we've done it before, and there is definitely a line that can be crossed - but I'd rather not ban someone out just because he's saying what 60% of the US South thinks too.

Yes, they are in a unique situation.

I agree that availability in the USA is a major factor but I think it is the availability to people who intend to use them criminally that is the problem (as I believe you alluded to near the end).

The police force is an interesting suggestion. But remember the USA is so very unalike Australia. Historically, you take care of yourself - that's the price of liberty. That's how many Americans want it kept. I don't blame them, every inch you give in to restrictions is almost never given back. Australia is the perfect example of that. In Australia one doesn't ask themselves "is this illegal", you take the default position of everything being illegal and ask "is this legal" - because it's probably not.

Banning particular types of firearms really doesn't work. As above, NZ is a really good example of how Australia's laws aren't making the difference that some politicians suggest they are (which is backed up by the majority of studies that have examined the situation).

I don't think they're a rarity with the ownership rates we have in Australia. It's a very popular hobby.

Tobacco: 229875
Alcohol: 65678
Drunk Driving: 22204
Drug Abuse: 16423
Prescription Drug Overdose: 9852
..........
Gun related: 8,561


Dishonest use of numbers. the "gun related" tallys the number of people killed by gun violence ie people shot and killed intentionally by other people, it does not include suicide (about 20k dead a year) or accidental shootings (about 700 dead a year)

Secondly, lets look at these other causes of death: Lets see, all of these, except drunk driving, is people KILLING THEMSELVES, unintentionally. Theres a pretty big difference. Drunk driving is ILLEGAL, and nobody is arguing that it would be a good idea to have more of it. And you know, its not like we're trying to get more people killed by tobacco, for instance, in fact, lots of people are working on trying to lower the number of deaths from all these other things, but just because more people die from alcohol or tobacco use, ten to fifteen thousand murder by guns a year doesnt really count??

Secondly, people are on the whole not actually working to get guns BANNED, but to implement restrictions, perhaps in the same way owning and driving a car has its restrictions. Cars, you see, are not banned. But there are RESTRICTIONS. Does anyone feel there arent enough cars around?. No. But there are restrictions. You need a drivers license. you need to follow some traffic rules. Similar things could be implemented for guns. It would be a start.
Another place to start is gun CULTURE, which is probably the intent of this video, changing people minds about guns.

Heres a challenge to your statistics: The number of people SAVED by guns. We always hear of the elusive situation of a bad criminal breaking in to kill your family, but luckily dads an NRA member and chases the bad guy away with a trusty old gun. How often does shit like that ever actually happen?

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Everybody chill out. First off - please avoid name calling even if the comment is hateful. That means you @ChaosEngine.

I'm not banning anybody at this point but I'm warning that hateful speech is against the guidelines of VideoSift. Please observe the Golden Rule.

there may be some mistake in other information,but the video is tried to keep more and more informative as my first trial. A start should always be appreciated not banned

This TEDx talk was not "banned" . It was simply removed from TEDx's Youtube channel because TEDx found the content to be pseudoscientific and making unfounded claims. (After people had complained that they were) The TED brand prides itself on delivering inspiring talks by scientist and others, and the TEDx business is threatening to undermine that standard, as TEDx are events organized locally , so the quality assurance can be iffy.

TED/TEDx is in full right to decide whether it wants to be a platform for pseudoscientific gobbledygook or not. IMO, this was the right thing to do, and it should serve as a warning to TED against the woo-people who wants to spread their nonsense through TED. TED/TEDx should be stricter on who they let up on their stages next time around.

I do agree that banning online gambling while allowing for local gambling (in some states) is stupid, as well as banning drugs but not cigarettes or alcohol. As for public nudity, I personally wouldn't want to see most people nude as most people don't have attractive bodies. There's also the hygienic issue of naked people preparing and serving food, sitting on public benches and seats, etc. While there certainly is a naturist movement, it's comprised of a tiny portion of the population and is in no way indicative of the general views towards public nudity. Public nudity is banned because the vast majority of the population finds it offensive. Private nudity, however, is not banned, unlike Falun Gong which is banned outright and cannot legally be practiced anywhere in China, in private or public.

That's all besides the point, however. There is still no case where the U.S. government will imprison people (without even a trial) simply for practicing a spiritual belief. That's exactly what China is doing to Falun Gong practitioners. Despite what you said earlier, it really does seem like you're trying to condemn the U.S. above all else. I'm not patriotic by any means but we're talking about blatant religious persecution here and it simply isn't comparable to bans on drugs, gambling or public nudity.

@SDGundamX
This video is intended to sway people's opinions through faulty empirical results. Thankfully, intellectuals in this thread are noting those flaws.

We know concealed carry weapons sometimes save lives, as discussed above. "The rampage was ended because one person could defend himself from the cowardly nutjob. You will not see the real story in the mainstream media."


Legislation limiting firepower? Probably a fair idea. Trying to ban self-defense by responsible people, but not ban weapons used by violent criminals? Harder to make that case.