search results matching tag: engagement

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (450)     Sift Talk (47)     Blogs (29)     Comments (1000)   

Don Lemon is not having it

newtboy says...

Lol. Nice try. If I were a Russian troll pretending to be left leaning, I would be doing it on a right wing site, wouldn't I?

Deliberate, he admitted as much. At the direction of Trump or Jared, or both, according to him. They're the only leaders of the transition team he reported to.

What he admitted he lied about was colluding with Russians to subvert American foreign policy, which is treason, he's been caught on tape and now admitted doing it at the transition teams direction.

It's about his team being liars and criminal traitors. If it's not at his direction, he's incompetent as a leader. If it's not with his knowledge, he's senile. Consider his best attribute was supposed to be his ability to get only the best people, so.....

Everyone who's not a Russian puppet or Trumpeter believes it, and you do too, you simply can't admit it or your world crashes down.

I'm here because I'm retired (low income doesn't necessarily mean low net worth), it's a fun site to watch more interesting videos and talk about them, and with few exceptions have adult conversations and maybe learn something I didn't know from interesting diverse people.
Even you've taught me something....that Putin's troll farms are so advanced they turned out right wing characters to "live" on left leaning sites in order to give the impression that right wingers are ridiculous know nothings that can only parrot the great leader's ramblings as if they weren't racist insanity and troll like 12 year olds with no information to add to a discussion but lots of "I no you are but wat am I" arguments, this to give the impression that those with opposing views aren't worth engaging elsewhere. That helps divide us farther, Dimitri. You know this, it's why you exist here. ;-)

bobknight33 said:

Flynn lied to the FBI. A mistake or deliberate.. don't know. This would be a process crime not a Russian collision link.

Still this is a side story of little direct impact to POTUS.

Yet Brian Ross suspended 4 weeks for lying on air and misleading false hoods about this.





Still the witch hunt will continue ..
Keep spewing your Trolling POV -- No one believes this story and all know it is BS.

I believe if I recall correctly you implied an IQ of mid / high 130s.
I also believe you indicated that you are in one of the lower tax brackets.

Why would a poor man with such an IQ be here? Righting justice where ever wrong doing exist? Or are you 1 of those Russian trolls?????????????

"..I hope we can be one happy family"

00Scud00 says...

I'm not sure which is worse, that he actually paid seventy five hundred for a engagement ring, or that she probably only got a fraction of that when she pawned it.

How Millennials Are Killing the Diamond Industry

How Millennials Are Killing the Diamond Industry

ChaosEngine says...

*related=https://videosift.com/video/College-Humor-Engagement-Rings-Are-A-Bullshit-Scam

*related=https://videosift.com/video/A-More-Honest-Jewelry-Commercial

Fuck diamonds.

Tesla New Semi Truck. Also surprise Tesla roadster unveiled.

radx says...

After the recent production numbers of the Model 3 and the reports of horrible working conditions at the Fremont plant, Tesla lost a lot of its shine for me.

Elon Musk seems to be convinced that being a Silicon Valley bigshot of his calibre is enough to run this operation, or that industrialism of the sort that, say, Toyota is engaged in is outdated. Those pitiful production numbers and the issues with the workforce indicate to me that management at Tesla (read: Musk) is not capable of industrial manufacture of cars at scale. Not at this time, at least.

Why Should You Read James Joyce's "Ulysses"

dannym3141 says...

I recently re-read this as well as Robinson Crusoe. I find both to be very interesting in that you get an understanding of dominant philosophies of the time, the traditions of life, language and more subtly writing; how all of those developed together and reflected upon each other.

But they are also both incredibly dull. I sort of wish I could read it as someone from that era read it, because I imagine it might be a little like seeing a film with revolutionary use of new film tech like sound or colour for the first time. It might be another old western, but it's engaging with parts of your brain you're not used to using in that particular medium. Whereas we're used to advanced and refined versions of the same thing, because it influenced so many.

Subliminal Messages in 60's TV National Anthem

ChaosEngine says...

"What I always find astounding is the amount of people who don't think in the last 50 years they haven't been perfecting this. "

What I always find astounding is the number of people who unquestioningly accept that something posted on a youtube channel is real.

I'm not saying this is definitely fake. Fuck knows, the US government has engaged in some pretty shady shit over the years, but it's ALMOST definitely fake.

There is zero actual evidence here and tonnes of reasons to be INSANELY skeptical about this.

Why on earth would they use the words "ultra" and "naomi"? Those codenames weren't even known publicly.

Grab her

Vox explains bump stocks

harlequinn says...

"You said almost 3 times that speed, continuously for over 10 minutes....and not with a lightweight speed shorting pistol."

You are not making any sense. I see what I wrote but it is unclear what you are referring to. You are welcome to quote the part you are referring to.

As I wrote above, you can choose the length of time you are aiming your firearm for. I even gave a comparative set of aiming scenarios.

I love how you take the top end of my approximation as your "laughable" scenario and don't mention the rest of the range (i.e. 50 rounds per minute with mag changes). Could you shoot at one round per second aimed? I think with a little training you could.

Doing 0.2 second splits (i.e. you shoot twice at each target) and taking about a second on every target, using 30 round mags, you can do 90 round per minute without much trouble. Going a little slower, say 0.3 second splits, and taking 1.5 seconds per target you can do about 60 round per minute. I could go on. The point is, these are aimed shots with a higher chance to hit the target, and with just as much chance to accidentally hit another target on a miss. This has the result of more hits on target.

"you get more hits on target in full auto".

No, you don't. On target means a hit near the point you intended on a target. He was getting random hits - as is evidenced by the low fatality rate versus high injury rate. The only way you would be correct was if you argued that he intended non-fatal injuries as much as he intended fatalities (and you're welcome to make that argument - it has some merits depending on what this lunatic was trying to achieve).

"If it's as common as you say, that should be easy to provide with a comparison video instead of a suggestion to buy and read a certain book. The videos I found are all short range small target, not at all the same as what we're debating. Show me a comparison of a field layered deep with 10000 balloons getting shot at from distance, that would be informative, short course accuracy target shooting isn't."

The book is good because it shows military statistics with full-auto versus other fire modes. Books are often better than videos. It also outlines military teaching methodology, include marksmanship and how it evolved over time. Full auto is still used in military engagements but you'll find it is used very sparsely (here is a good thread of military and ex-mil talking about it's uses: https://www.quora.com/Why-do-militaries-use-assault-rifles-when-the-full-auto-feature-is-rarely-ever-used )

Short range targets are easier to hit. Are you trying to prove my point? Long range targets are harder to hit. Your rate of randomly hitting targets does not get better at longer ranges. But aiming does increase your chance of hitting a target at any range.

If you really wanted to do a comparison at that range then the targets would be a lot larger than balloons.

You're arguing against established marksmanship knowledge that is readily available over the internet or in firearms courses.

I think you owe it to yourself to prove yourself right or wrong by doing some rifle marksmanship courses. Approach it as a sport and you'll have a lot fun doing it!!!

I can't chat much longer - thanks for the good discussion!

newtboy said:

You said almost 3 times that speed, continuously for over 10 minutes....and not with a lightweight speed shorting pistol.

If someone wanted to kill with each shot on moving targets at 3-400 yards in the dark, yeah, 5 seconds+- per shot still seem reasonable, maybe half that for someone who practices on living, moving targets often. Your claim some people can continuously do that 120 times a minute including mag changes is just laughable. They might shoot that fast, but not hit anything accurately at that distance.

You have to prove it to convince me...better? If it's as common as you say, that should be easy to provide with a comparison video instead of a suggestion to buy and read a certain book. The videos I found are all short range small target, not at all the same as what we're debating. Show me a comparison of a field layered deep with 10000 balloons getting shot at from distance, that would be informative, short course accuracy target shooting isn't.

My claim is you will have more control at full auto than absolute maximum possible finger speed.
My other claim is you will put more lead down range with most full autos. In a crowd situation where missing is basically impossible and aiming wasted effort, like this one, more bullets means more damage. Once the crowd dispersed, aiming a high powered rifle would probably be more effective, but not before. Were this not the case, why would any military allow them, ever?

In this Turkey shoot situation, you get more hits on target in full auto. In target shooting, you won't. This was not a series of targets at 20 yards, it was a target zone at 3-400 yards in the dark.

Ooops!

Asmo says...

Miraculous how the rockets just happened to go off perfectly aimed at a large military truck that, in all likelyhood, looks kinda like the rest of the trucks on the range?

Must have been eyeballing it, IR would have shown plenty of people around the vehicle (bit of a dead give away in a practice engagement that shooting is a bad idea...)

Victim Gets Revenge On Bully By Dating His Mom

newtboy says...

In my eyes, that's fraud at best, and since sex can't be sold, she would have no recoverable loss.
That goes for your examples until impairment comes in. I disagree, but I think the law says if you sleep with someone who's drunk or high, that's rape, even if they were ok with it at the time.

Mentioning she enjoyed it wasn't meant as a defense to rape, but an indication that he was not an asshole to her on the date.

No, if you intentionally murder me, your intent is to victimize me, your goal might not be.

Yes, schadenfreude is not becoming, but we all engage in it. I can't blame him for being gleeful his plan had so overachieved his goal, but the djs, yeah.

All that said, I'm pretty sure this is all scripted...it was just too perfect.

noims said:

I know what you mean, but I think there is a blurred line when it comes to rape. Does sex coerced under false pretenses count?

If you claim to be in love with someone but aren't, is it rape? Or if you claim to be a millionaire but aren't? If you claim to be of their religion? If you wear a mask and they think you're someone else? If they're drunk or high and they think you're their partner? Or so far gone they don't know or care? How about if you got them drunk/high for that specific reason?

In all these and many more scenarios between, they can enjoy the act, but there's a valid argument for rape. Laws and individual morals vary, but they're all on a spectrum.

If I murder you to hurt your brother, my intent isn't to victimise you, but it still has that effect.

Finally, yes, she brought the conversation public, but under very different (and I'd argue innocent or even noble) circumstances. Revealing the reality - and reveling in the revelation - is in my view rong [sic].

Inside the mind of white America

aaronfr says...

Actually, the whole point was to "go on a journey into the mind of white America". You can't just change his objective because you thought it was something different.

Furthermore, he didn't try to engage meaningfully in the society and the (racist) systems that it has set up. He wasn't looking for a job, he didn't try to purchase a house, he didn't have exposure to the judicial system.

You're (once again) saying there isn't systemic racism because a foreign journalist didn't run into overt racism. The cancer analogy holds just fine.

bobknight33 said:

How foolish.

He whole point was to see if there was racism. Or in you case systemic racism.

Being a black man walking and driving around, if there were systemic racism he would have bumped into it.

You cancer analogy is wrong, pick another.

Eddy does not know how to slide

Arnold Schwarzenegger Has A Blunt Message For Nazis

newtboy says...

*quality sentiments, *promote

We can't deport them. We can't jail them. We can't shun them. The only option I see is engage them and educate them. Their beliefs come from a miseducation, clearly, since they somehow see their failed causes as superior.
Remind them the Nazis lost...and are anti American.
Remind them the confederates lost...and are anti Americans.
Remind them the white power movements lost...and are anti American.
Remind them that, if they are working to eradicate all but a master race, they have proven repeatedly to not be that master race, so they should start by eradicating themselves.

This is what a coward looks like

bareboards2 says...

Why doesn't he just call a lawyer?

Over four minutes long, and the answer is easy peasy.

And I agree with Dag. He is a human being.

He is also a human being with zero self-reflection skills. He feels empowered and powerful when he can scare others, but is terrified when the guns might be trained on him.

Zero self reflection. Zero understanding of cause and effect.

And a textbook example of Toxic Masculinity.

There are other ways of engaging the world. Get some therapy, dude.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon