search results matching tag: not qualified

» channel: nordic

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.009 seconds

    Videos (7)     Sift Talk (6)     Blogs (0)     Comments (140)   

Trump Wanted Armed Groups At His Jan 6 Rally

newtboy says...

Unsurprising, you cherry pick the one non crime mentioned then say something amounting to “look, that’s not a crime, it just indicates Trump is an infant that throws physical tantrums….that’s my man.”
And actually it is a crime, destruction of public property and vandalism of the White House….not that you care.
Also, it shows how outraged Trump was that there was no massive fraud. He wanted there to be fraud, he needed there to be fraud, or at least a lie that there was fraud, and was OUTRAGED there was no fraud and more so that Barr had admitted the truth. It shows how he is 100% not qualified emotionally to hold ANY office, much less the highest on earth.

Nice ignoring the physical attacks against secret service members while trying to personally lead the violent attack against America and the lynching of his own VP.
Good job ignoring him trying to let heavily armed crowds join his rally meant to march to the capitol building….armed to the teeth with everything from bear mace and spears to groups carrying assault weapons wearing tactical body armor.
Nice ignoring that he knew his crowd was heavily armed when he told them to fight hard at the capitol building and don’t let them certify the election (he may have said “don’t let them steal your country” , a distinction without a difference).
Be proud of ignoring all the Republicans who admitted knowing they committed crimes in an attempt to overthrow what they knew undeniably was a certified, fair, secure election by asking for pardons for their crimes they committed for Trump, including Trump’s chief of staff. Put your head in a little farther and you might be able to see out of your own throat.

Covfefe
Oranges of the investigation
Trump is no mental genius….and Biden handed him his ass without even holding rallies.
So….Sleepy Joe doesn’t need to be awake or conscious at all to be a much better president. Is that a compliment to Joe, a swipe at Trump, or both?

PS- kudos for admitting Biden actually is the current POTUS. I know that’s hard for you.

PPS- add to that news of Melania’s absolute refusal (by text, so recorded) to put out a statement calling for a halt to violence…..because they needed that violence and she expected her husband to be leading it.

bobknight33 said:

Riveting

Ketchup on the wall, broken plate WOW CNN front page news !!!

POTUS getting mad and making a mess. This is impeachable. This is a serious crime. Brian Stelter is jizzing in his shorts over this wonderful news

Unlike current POTUS Sleepy Joe can't get mad because he can't remember anything.

Honest Government Ad | Climate Change Policy

newtboy says...

I am. You are becoming too funny. What happened to Dimitri? He was never that clever to just say 'black is white' and sit back. What's your handle, comrade?

A chronically ill informed fear mongering right winger claiming the left is the fear mongering and hoaxing party is just so over the top hilariously ludicrous...the left's leaders aren't convicted criminal frauds who's entire platform is "they're coming to get you and only I can save you by protecting unregulated gun sales, banning im'grants, saving Christmas, and fixing some fence....i mean getting Mecxico to build that wall.", it just wouldn't work on the left, only the right celebrates known lies.
Before Obama, I might have agreed about the left being the snowflakes, but absolutely not now. You babies are so thin skinned, snowflake seems too adult, you melt over nothings daily.

If I thought for a pico second you honestly meant it and weren't just angrily projecting and trolling I would suggest an immediate brain scan, because that's so incredibly irrational that non professionals are simply not qualified to deal with that level of clinical dementia.

Funny you didn't contradict the neo-nazi right wing terrorism issue....I guess you must agree the right is now, by their own standards, a violent terrorist organization, and a more pressing issue for the U.S. than other terrorist organizations as the most active by far, outpacing to the point of replacing Islamic terrorism.

bobknight33 said:

You are losing your shit there Newt.

So sad. I’ll come visit you you in the psych ward.

I’ll come cheer you up and bring you a TRUMP button.

BSR (Member Profile)

16 seconds: The Killing of Anita Kurmann

Buttle says...

I reviewed the policy before posting, and concluded that this video does not qualify as snuff. Death is not presented as entertainment. Although the entire video is essentially about a single death and its causes and effects, the actual moment of Dr. Kurmann's demise is just one short but disturbing part.

newtboy said:

True, but that's not all it says....
The presence of human fatality is acceptable and not considered "snuff" if presented as a limited, incidental portion of a lengthy educational, informative news report or documentary that encompasses a much broader narrative. Our definition of "snuff" does include but is not exclusive to any short clip in which a human fatality occurs whether or not any victims are actually visible on camera.

As the fatal accident was the central point of the video and not incidental, and the video may or may not be considered lengthy and or news, I thought it a reasonable question to pose to the community.
To clarify, it was intended as a question not an accusation.

Chris Hedges On F On Fascism In The Age Of Trump (Nov. 2017)

newtboy says...

Yes...you did...and still do.
Yes, you did say we're in dire straits."A constant slide toward globalism all the while a less better way of life.
Constant strife, sliding towards a ever more debasement humanity and of values clearly promoted in Hollywood, and media. Who is really pushing this agenda".
Yes, you did admit he's unqualified...."This current state of being is a long time in coming not a POTUS Trump fault.. One can argue Trump is not qualified but this was laid at his feet when he took office" if you don't mean that as an admission, you need to study American phrases, perhaps that means something different in Russian.

Most Americans believe in diversity as a positive trait. Most Americans believe in individual freedom and liberty. Most Americans believe corporate personhood is a horrendous idea that destroyed our political system. If most of America didn't enjoy what Hollywood produces, why are they still buying it?
Granted, adult programs exist. As a parent, it's your responsibility to monitor what your kids watch, not mine. I don't have to go without adult programming because you suck as a parent. Ratings and child locks make it easy as hell for you, but still you whine. (What's your cure? Regulating entertainment to allow pg-13 at most?)
Hyper violence is as American as Apple pie, has been since the great war (ww1) if not our inception.

Is he the only one, far from it. Is he the worst offender, lying about everything, incapable of honesty on any topic, with multiple admitted felons committing treasonous crimes as part of his administration? Clearly. Is he even trying to be honest and give Americans real information, or is he outright boldly lying about tripling the deficit for personal gain. Hint...it's the latter.

Edit: Politicians and police are allowed to lie? Talk about debasement of humanity and values....geez. Only allowed to lie by people like you, not me. Liars are liars, not to be trusted again, not to be handed more power, and are undeserving of respect or acceptance. There's a big difference between lying and mistakes. People who unintentionally make misstatements, then correct them may not be liars. Trump is a proud, intentional, pathological liar, and not even a good one, so intelligent people stopped listening to him long ago, it's just a waste of time. Sadly, that includes our recent allies, who are turning their backs on us in droves. Even you cannot be so delusional or dishonest as to make a case that this is good for America or the globe, or something any rational parent would teach their children is proper behavior....but you are. I hope your kids learn the lesson you're teaching, that it's fine to lie if it helps you get what you want, and the next 7+ years are full of bold lies, unfulfilled promises, and excuses for why your kids are now teenage junkie parents with disdain for civility.

bobknight33 said:

I did not "blindly support the bankrupting idiot baby"
I supported the best candidate. Did Hillary really bring to the table a clear agenda superior to Trumps? She really did not have a platform. So was there really a choice?


I do not say nor believe we are in dire straits as yo say. Slipping morality for sure .

I never admitted that he is unqualified. He is doing a good job considering such division of both parties and animosity for Republican since he is not a party insider.

Hollywood agenda-- most Americans don't really want nor desire the stuff that is being pushed out.
Americans want quality story lines not slutting whoring worshiping shows just to fill time slots.


Do you have kids?
I do, 11 and 13 I can not watch some 60% of shows because they are inappropriate -- I'm not saying go back to Leave it to Beaver shit but do we really need sexualized content of some form on darn near every show?

Most shows incorporate some kind of violence, sexual innuendo, murder etc. Do we as a society need this day in day out?



You argue that Trump lies... and your upset? Is he is the only politician to lie. When hasn't a POTUS lied? There are 2 profession that are allow to lie. Politicians and cops.

As for the rest of biased commentary I just leave it for what is
and are entitled to.

Chris Hedges On F On Fascism In The Age Of Trump (Nov. 2017)

newtboy says...

Bob, I wholeheartedly disagree with your assessments, but it begs the question....if you thought the nation was in such dire straits, why did you so blindly support the bankrupting idiot baby that's made it exponentially worse while creating and reinforcing so many divisions, making it nearly impossible for Americans to work together while also obliterating our international leadership positions?

You now admit he's not qualified to lead (never was), but you put him in the most important position of responsibility and leadership possible....now you want to blame his utter failings on previous administrations, not his constant lies and total ineptitude that you zealously defended and excused!? No sir, blame yourself.

As to the "agenda", those Hollywood values (you know, honesty, inclusion, diversity, freedom to be who you are, personal liberties, anti corporate personhood,...) are shared by a VAST majority of Americans....they are American values.
Why am I not surprised you don't get that?

As to their debasement, that starts with lies...lies like the ones you defend and applaud, like Trump lying about the tax plan because, as you privately said, if he told the truth he couldn't have passed a tax plan that benefits the wealthy like himself immensely and hurts the people who can least afford it while bankrupting the treasury as a set up to kill programs for the poor. You defended that lie privately....are you too ashamed to do so publicly?

bobknight33 said:

...values clearly promoted in Hollywood, and media. Who is really pushing this agenda?


This current state of being is a long time in coming not a POTUS Trump fault.. One can argue Trump is not qualified but this was laid at his feet when he took office.

Chris Hedges On F On Fascism In The Age Of Trump (Nov. 2017)

bobknight33 says...

The only way to change all the bad around us to take down who? To rise up against what?

Deep state control Democrats/ Republicans/ POTUS subservient to a higher power(global elites)?

Obama, Bush, Clinton All the same, sold out / bought or black mailed to do the deep state / global elite bidding? Same for Dems/ Reps? Is this why nothing really changes for the good?

A constant slide toward globalism all the while a less better way of life.

Constant strife, sliding towards a ever more debasement humanity and of values clearly promoted in Hollywood, and media. Who is really pushing this agenda?


This current state of being is a long time in coming not a POTUS Trump fault.. One can argue Trump is not qualified but this was laid at his feet when he took office.

trump judicial nominee can’t answer any basic questions

nanrod says...

two minutes into this this guy should have stood up and said "I'm sorry, I'm obviously not qualified and I'm wasting your time and I withdraw". Apparently there is some other motive involved that doesn't require integrity.

Betsy Devos Embarrassed by Sen. Al Franken

poolcleaner says...

Politics needs a gauntlet of Al Frankens, like fear and corruption sniffing sphinxes, eviscerating the minds of every single pathetic puppet that enters our political rat race. If you can't get blasted by a room of geniuses, FUCK YOU.

After you get out of the mental gauntlet you won't want to go back if you're not qualified! Maybe the senate sacrifices and feasts upon the bodies of the unworthy.

a celebration of stand-up comedies best offensive jokes

Lumm says...

A bit off topic, but what I don't get is how so many assholes think free speech is limited to their speech. Listen to the idiot at 8:25.
"I don't think people are entitled to complain..." then he launches into a holier-than-thou speech about "free speech." What the fuck? Does complaining somehow NOT qualify as free speech?
Like half* the clips are this shit. "People don't laugh," "They don't like my offensive joke." Free speech is that you get to say your stupid joke. Free speech is also that I get to say you're a simple-minded unfunny asshole and your mother is ashamed of you. Anything else isn't "free speech" dumbass. By definition you don't get to pick which speech is free and which isn't.

Nothing to do with the Mike Ward stuff, where the government steps in. That's a whole other kettle of fish.

*half. at least. Fuck you.

Ken Burns slams Trump in Stanford Commencement

harlequinn says...

If you're eligible then you're qualified.

Again, your vote determines who will be the winner.

If you like to think of it in regards to qualified or not, then the final popular vote determines "qualification".

There are thousands if not millions of Republicans who would say that Clinton is not qualified on account of x,y or z. And they're all wrong.

bareboards2 said:

@harlequinn

Thought experiment for you.

Thirty five year old American born citizen.

Had a car accident with major brain damage. Has trouble with memory. Has to have things explained to them over and over? Gets easily frustrated and enraged by lack of actual abilities? Physically, mentally and emotionally challenged?

Qualified to be president? With that set of circumstances?

There is a difference between "eligible" and "qualified."

This poor soul, and Donald, are "eligible."

Neither are qualified.

how social justice warriors are problematic

enoch says...

@Jinx

hey thanks for keeping this conversation going and not just making assumptions and allowing us both to come to a better understanding.

though i am not really surprised,i am gladdened.

in my opinion,i think this situation may be a problem with indentifying with labels and maybe putting too much weight on them to convey complicated and complex human interactions.

i would call myself a social justice warrior,but i would never identify as those who behave is the extremists do.but to imply that the responsibility is on ME,or any other critic,to redefine these radical social justice warriors as somehow not being representative of the majority,is a false dynamic,because that is how they define themselves.

basically the "No true scotsman" fallacy.which is employed ad-nauseum by these extremists.that somehow if you do not adhere to their radical agenda you are somehow not qualified to label yourself:feminist,anarchist (this has been directed at me),socialist, etc etc.

this is just a silly and binary way of breaking down peoples complex human perceptions and understandings to fit a narrow,and restrictive narrative,in order to achieve an agenda.

so while we all viewed GW bush's "if you're not with us,you're against us",as an inane and utterly stupid statement.how come there is little push back when the EXACT same tactic is used to silence someone who may not be 100% on board with a certain agenda?

does me posting this video automatically translate to me being "anti-social justice warrior"?

of course not! that is just silly,but in todays climate that is exactly how some people view complex situations,and it HAS to stop!

you brought up police.
good.
lets use that as an example.
the fact the americas militarized and dysfunctional police force has accounted for more police shootings than soldiers have died in iraq.do we REALLY need to be told that it is not ALL cops.

of course not.again,that is silly but it DOES mean that maybe there is a problem within the institution that needs to be addressed.

here is a perfect case for social justice warriors to bring this corruption and rot to the surface,and here we have black lives matter.which is receiving mixed coverage in the media,but they have gotten people talking and even some incremental reforms in the woks AND,just recently..6 cops fired from a cleveland precinct for shooting civilians.this is where social justice warriors are not only necessary but vital!

but what if.....

those cops who were feeling threatened,or intimidated by the criticism and examination of their institution coming from black lives matters decided to use a tactic right out of these extremists playbook?

maybe some doxxing?
exposing personal information about the protesters?
how about a few false accusations of rape?
maybe personal harassing calls to friends and family members of the black lives matter movement?
how about some false charges of harassment and sexual discrimination?

that would effectively shut down the black lives matter movement within weeks,and how would we respond to that kind of underhanded tactics?

we would be outraged.
we would be furious at the absolute abuse of power.a power bestowed by the state.

and our outrage would be justified.

do you see where i am coming from here?

in the example i have given,which may or not be the best analogy.we can easily see the abuse of power as a form of bullying to get a group that is a dissenting ideology..to shut..the fuck..up.

freedom of speech is NOT just speech you or i agree with,or happen to support,but it also speech that we may dislike,disagree and even find offensive.

but by allowing those we dislike or disagree to say their piece,allows us and everybody else to examine,discern and ultimately discard as ridiculous.or,converesly,find some merit that was previously hidden from us,due to our lack of knowledge or understanding.

i realize i am reiterating my previous point,but i think it is so very important.

free speech allows the free flow of ideas and dialogue and allows good ideas to be absorbed into the body politic and the bad ones discarded into the trash bin.

but there MUST be the allowance of the free flow of thought!

so when i post a video such as this i am not ridiculing actual socially conscious people.i am exposing bad ideas,supported by narrow minded people who wish to impose THEIR sense of how a society should be and attempt to circumvent the very slow process of discussion,argument and debate by hijacking the conversation and shutting down all dissent and disagreement with the most fascist tactics possible.

up until a month ago i was fairly ignorant to things like gamergate and whatnot.i thought i had a pretty fair understanding of what a social justice warrior was,and even included myself as one.

but then,quite by accident,i fell upon a few stories that highly disturbed me.one ,in particular was the case of greg allen elliot who was being criminally prosecuted for harassment on twitter.

now the case was finally resolved,and elliot was found not guilty.
so hooray for justice right?
free speech won in the end right?
or did it...did elliot actually win?
i am not so sure.

you see.
he was a web designer.
and once he was charged 3 years ago,he was banned from any internet use.so effectively he was jobless.
on top of that his defense cost 100k.
sounds like a loss to me.

now let us examine stephanie guthrie.a prominent toronto feminist and tedtalk speaker:
1.she made the accusation of harassment and brought the charges.
2.even though this all started with a man who created a game where anita sarkesians faced was punched,and was the supposed imetus for all this fuss,guthrie never laid charges against the creator of the game.though she did,along with her followers harassed and bullied this man until he closed down his account.so chock one up for feminism? i guess?
4.what guthrie found so reprehensible about elliot was that he had the audacity to question guthries rage and called for a calm interaction.(mainly because there are literally 100's of face-punching games).
5.guthrie and her followers found this call for calm offensive and doxxed elliot and proceeded to harass his employer,his family and ffirends.
6.elliot lost his job.his employer could not handle the harassment.so feminist win again? i guess?
7.when guthrie blocked elliot on twitter she continued to publicly accuse him of misogyny,bigot and even a pedophile.
8.she then brought accusations against elliot for criminal harassment,and that she "felt" harassed.
9.guthrie has paid ZERO for her accusations.she has suffered no accountability nor responsibility.

now the court case is over,and elliot has been vindicated and free speech is still in place for today.

but lets look at the bigger picture.
and let us imagine how easily this situation could be abused.
can we really look at guthrie vs elliot as ANY form of justice? or is it MORE liekly that guthrie was abusing a court system to punish a man she happened to disagree with?with ZERO consequences.

now maybe you agree with guthrie.
maybe you are one of those people that believe in your heart that words are weapons and people should be held accountable for those words.they should be stripped of wealth,work and home..they should be punished.

ok.
thats fine.
maybe you agree because it is a matter you support?
a racist pig loses a job for saying racists things.
or a bigot gets kicked out of his apartment for being a bigoted asshole.

but how about this..
hypothetically:
a devout chritian woman is protesting an abortion clinic with her children in tow.

and lets say a pro-choice atheist comes over to her and starts to berate her i front of her children.ridiculing her for her beliefs and saying jesus was a zombie.that she is a horrible person for believing in such a tyrannical deity,that this so-called all-loving entity punishes all no-believers in a lake of fire for all eternity.that as a mother,teaching her children to worship such a god is tantamount to child abuse.berating her so badly that her children begin to cry?

now what if that interaction was filmed?
then posted to youtube?
what if a "social justice warrior" of the religious flavor decided that berating person needed to pay for his words?
what if that person got doxxed?
and the end result was he loses his job (because corporations are notoriously controversy allergic),and maybe his landlord is notified and he is kicked out of his apartment?

would you be ok with all that?
because that is the EXACT same metric that radical social justice warriors use!

and what about false accusations?
you dont even have to be actually offended and /or harassed,you just have to accuse and the rest takes care of itself.

are you ok with that kind of creative abuse?

so when i bring things like this to the forefront and attempt to expose the underlying idiocy.what i just wrote is where i am coming from.

and yes.these radicals and their underhanded tactics need to be exposed and all the attention brought to them the better.

why? because what and how they are behaving is anti-democracy anti-freedom and anti-liberty.

and i am all for debating specific issues,and will gladly do so..with glee,but i will not and cannot respect what the radical elements are doing to an otherwise worthy cause.

and YOU should be calling them out as well.

i know this is long and i probably lost the plot somewhere,but this is very important,becuase it threatens all of us and if we simply ignore these nimrods they will just become even more entrenched,self-righteous and arrogant in their own little bubble worlds.

that bubble needs to be popped,and soon.

anyways.thanks for hanging (if you made it this far)
there will be danishes and punch in the lobby!

Homeless Hero Sacrifies

lucky760 says...

Yep, all snuff.

All discarded.

Thanks!

(For the record, just because I'm an admin doesn't mean it's impossible for it to never come to mind that something might not qualify as not being snuff.)

Lawdeedaw said:

Then follow me my friend.

http://videosift.com/video/Seattle-cop-kills-nonthreatining-pedestrian

That video has no informative content. It's not a documentary or in any way shape or form follows your guidelines. It just gives an account of an officer killing a man. You hear the brutal gunshots, and see the man's lifeless corpse rotting on the sidewalk. His murder complete, the horror no less worse than my video any day of the week. Showing the shooting is no requirement for snuff... "Whether or not any victims are actually visible on camera."

Oh, and you UPVOTED the snuff... At the time I was personally mortified with that video, but then I kept my mouth shut because I don't ruin strong emotional videos for other people.

Discard that video. It is clearly snuff by our results today. No amount of "other reasons," such as the offender being an officer changes that.

http://videosift.com/video/10-Tragedies-Caught-on-Film

That video is hardly a documentary. It is snuff bullshit. Just a collage of death. I let it go because again it is not my place to attack its artistic conceptualization. Of course my own comments were put in, but I let the issue drop.

Now discard it.

http://videosift.com/video/Craziest-and-most-awesome-animal-compilations-of-the-web

This is my OWN video. This was a wildlife post that was deemed fine by the community after a bit of discussion. Although people didn't die on the video itself, some were killed. But again, it was not a documentary or anything other than the powerful, awe-inspiring reflection of nature. Even though it is "dead" it still must be discarded because the underlying content is still snuff; therefore, it would still be dead snuff.

Discard it.

Again, take your time. We have all the time in the world. We have a long long week of video killing to do you and I

300 Foreign Military Bases? WTF America?!

Praetor says...

Its a matter of chicken vs egg. They don't need huge military expenditures because security is provided by the US. But if they and all their neighbors had to provide sufficient defense, mostly against the people who are most likely to invade them (i.e. their neighbors), you get an arms race like you have with India/Pakistan, North/South Korea, Iran/Saudi Arabia. The indirect savings and the refocusing of capital and human resources away from the military in all of these allies countries makes the world a much safer place, since war no longer becomes the go to solution for states to resolve differences.

US bases do fall into 2 categories. Allies who don't want to get invaded again, and enemies who lost and became allies. As for Kuwait, that didn't work out well for Iraq, and Kuwait is still independent and an ally. Ukraine has no US bases, Russia would go ballistic if there were (surprisingly appropriate use of the word). ISIS is the anomaly, but right now you can put that down to the fact that Obama really, really doesn't want to put US troops on the ground (think he would hesitate if ISIS invaded England or Australia for example?), and that Iraq's military is trying to handle this as much as possible on their own and clearly having trouble.

I don't know if we need all 800 bases currently or if some are just vestigial. I'm not qualified to give an opinion on the necessity of them, though

The Last Ever Top Gear

A10anis says...

You are mistaking stupidity for racism. If you have never used a derogatory epithet, even once in your life, then well done. But I am sure you have thought of one; we all have. Clarkson, on many occasions, does not temper his speech with forethought. However, his attempts at humour do not qualify him as a racist. True racists hide in the shadows or stick with like-minded people. Oh, and btw, his Jaguar-toilet comment was funny. I imagine that because I thought so I am, based on your criteria, also a racist.

ChaosEngine said:

Let's see: during the incident in question, he called the produced a "lazy irish cunt" (and as much as everyone thinks it's fucking hilarious, racism against the Irish is still racism)

Then there was the "slope on a bridge" incident.

Not to mention the "catch a nigger" quote, or the mexican incident or the Indian special, during which Clarkson built a toilet into the back of a Jaguar, claiming it would be "perfect" for tourists because "everyone" who visits the country suffers diarrhoea, sparked a complaint from the Indian High Commission.

Nah.. no evidence at all.



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