Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY
Nolder

New Zealand Mosque Shooting

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Lenlo said:

Oh look, at least you're aware of it.

So if you have nothing to add to the conversation aside from insults and snark... why are you here?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

Just to be clear, I'm not the one that started this all of with the "The left want to ban guns, and any that say otherwise are all liars" argument.

Does that offend you or something?

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

I didn't actually say, that you called me a libtard. I was responding flippantly to your comment about it what I said being gibberish when it was anything but. 

It was gibberish. You were trying to discredit what I was saying On the basis that i , in your mind, should be for smaller government etc and I didn't make that claim nor was any of it part of what I was saying.

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

 

Anecdotal, irrelevant.

Quote

 I thought it was pretty funny but that's besides the point. If you want to make the argument that he's in the minority and that is a one off thing fine, I don't believe it but that's fine, but you can't tell me there aren't people out there who want to ban all guns.

Duh.

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

I didn't say that there isn't anyone who wants to ban all guns.

I'm dismissing your opinion from earlier that anyone who talks gun control secretly wants to ban all guns is bs.

I didn't say anyone/everyone.

Anyway at this point we're just arguing degrees you don't actually disagree with the basis of my belief.

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

 

Seriously dude? 

No.

You get kids from Intercourse. Colloquially known as Sex, and in the case of medical intervention, from In vitro Fertilization which.

Marriage doesn't magically produce children.

It produces the type of children who grow up to be healthy functional adults.

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

 

It's a two way street. 

Religion doesn't interfere with government, and Government doesn't interfere with Religion. It's pretty much that simple. Government doesn't recognize any one religion, so everyone is rightfully able to practice any religion they want. Having things like 10 commandments at Court houses, breaches that trust of not recognizing any one religion. The example of gay marriage is the easiest/best argument when it comes to obvious religious laws becoming government laws.

No, not religion, Christianity.

Its not a matter of government not picking sides.

That's where so many people go wrong.

 

When this nation was formed it was primarily protestant and with the exception of a few founding fathers with weird atheistic tendencies they were Christian as well. So this wasn't a bunch of Christians going hey you know what would be cool? If our new nation just totally had nothing to do with god. No what they wanted more than anything was legal protection for them to practice their beliefs safely but they didn't want to just recreate a Vatican state. Theocracy wasn't their game. They felt that state should be small and carry out certain functions like...have you ever been in an IRC with a chatbot? That's how they wanted government to be. Like an automated function almost that did the bare minimum to keep things running. I don't agree with this philosophy but I see the appeal in comparison to other choices. Anyway point is there was never intended to be an absence of religion it was just never meant to influence the workings of the government's functions.

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

Divorce isn't nearly as new of a concept as you make it out to be.

Did you know, that Fargo, ND used to be the divorce capital of the USA, because it was one of the easiest places to get one?

Why on earth would you believe Divorce is a bad thing? There's entirely valid reasons to get them. Getting them, can even help prevent domestic violence.
 

No fault divorce. Also I'm not worried about DV.

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

Also, Divorce Rates are going down.

Less people are getting married in the first place.

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

 


Cause Millennial's are more likely live with their future spouse before marrying, have premarital sex, and less likely to get married just so they can have sex, which doesn't lead to effectively hating each other over the next 30 years.

Which leads to children out of wedlock, often with separated parents.

I don't need to trot out the statistics on children without fathers in their lives do i?

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

https://divorce.lovetoknow.com/Historical_Divorce_Rate_Statistics

 

Yea, that answer isn't going to satisfy pretty much anyone.

What you're preaching, leads to Alcoholism. Adultry, Depression, Physical and Mental abuse.

Ever stop and think that maybe people are getting divorced, For there children?

That's bullshit. Marriage does not lead to any of that.

 

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

That defines pretty much 95% of all relationships out there.

You don't think that young catholic couple, waiting to have sex until they are married, aren't constantly thinking about sex? Jesus man, I dunno where you got these beliefs from, but the 1920s called...

I would say you're wrong, but looking at society today I'll just say it doesn't have to be that way and the alternative is better for everyone.

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

Stable family environment, married parents.

Kid literally can't tell right from wrong because of afluenza.

Single stories like that, completely ruin this imaginary magical realm of marriage bringing the ultimate stability to children.

Lol are you serious right now? The one was out of a million does not negate what I'm saying.

 

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

Let's say you're right. Let's say the statistics back up your point. (Which they barely do, because reasons I'm not going to go into here)

Why would you deny the billions of statistics that support climate change, or support gun control? Or Abortion, or, or, or.

Cherry Picking.

You're talking gibberish again. If you have something to say then say it.

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

Statistics do not tell the whole story. They tell a story based upon those polled, and it's extrapolated.

It's pretty reliable especially when there's been mmultiple studies.

 

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:


Statistics say I should be an Alcoholic drug addicted Smoker high school drop out.. I graduated college, I neither do drugs, smoke, and I have a drink once or twice a year. Statistically, I shouldn't exist.

... 

That's not how statistics work.

 

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

Shit happens.

I'll watch it later. But I'm guessing based on the picture, it's aged like milk.

No it's just bad quality because no one cares about a debate for Illinois senator.

 

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

Image result for not sure meme

What the hell are ya then? lol
Cause between Conservative and Liberal, you're not a Liberal, and probably not even close to a Libertarian.

I would describe myself as a right wing American Nationalist.

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

If you mean to say her cutting it was, then yea, pretty much.  
If you mean to say the whole thing was, and people getting mad at it.. Then.. yea. no.

I think it was dumb of people to get mad and I think it was even dumber to backtrack and give the money back.

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

How to do school, is different than setting up a minimum level of knowledge/standards.

Changing the DOE, Making better policies, bettering education is all possible.

I don't want federal policies.

 

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

Here's an honest question for you.

How many standardized tests did you have to take every semester?

Idk

I would guess 1.

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

 

image.png.b4254336a85357c78bf5a9896fb8aa31.png

Basically dismantling programs creates obstruction. It doesn't necessarily reduce red-tape, and bureaucratic obstruction.
This all goes back to the Tea-Party methodology of blocking everything in congress, and then getting positions within government agencies and slowly dismantling them from the inside out. This often has the unintended consequence of actually slowing government down... which in it's very nature is obstructionism.

WHO is being obstructed?

 

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

Again, you're not the only person in the USA. 

Expats aren't even in the USA...

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

Maybe Professors, but they aren't the only teachers.

Most studies don't include Tech/Trade Colleges, let alone k-12 Teachers.

And none of that takes into consideration the federal guidelines put in place that they have to abide by, whether they are Liberal or Conservative.

(as an Aside. I've never had a liberal professor or teacher. I'm almost 100% certain they were all Conservative and Republican. This is purely anecdotal. But if Professors are a clear majority... Then how did I get the conservative jackpot?)

You were probably wrong is the likeliest answer.

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

What do they do that you hate so much?

Image result for show me on the doll(he = DOE)

Cost money, employ useless bureaucrats.

 

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

 

Not really. Because we still have to deal with Christian Sharia Law.

No such thing.

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

Okay. That's your opinion. And pretty much 99% of America disagrees with that.

Maybe 80%. Lol

 

On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

Sounds good. 
Getting late here anyways.

edited my other post in addition to replying to this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2019 at 4:59 PM, Nolder said:

I don't agree with this philosophy but I see the appeal in comparison to other choices. Anyway point is there was never intended to be an absence of religion it was just never meant to influence the workings of the government's functions.

You can't prevent Religion/Christianity from influencing the Government, if the government isn't absent of it. 

If it's there, it's going to influence.

 

Quote

No fault divorce. Also I'm not worried about DV.

Less people are getting married in the first place.

Which leads to children out of wedlock, often with separated parents.

I don't need to trot out the statistics on children without fathers in their lives do i?

Go for it,  'cause you're dead wrong. 

 

Quote

That's bullshit. Marriage does not lead to any of that.

Actually, it does. People in an unhappy marriage that you refuse to allow get divorced, make situations worse.

You never stopped and thought, maybe that person getting beaten by their husband SHOULD get divorced.

 

Quote

Lol are you serious right now? The one was out of a million does not negate what I'm saying.

It's pretty reliable especially when there's been mmultiple studies.

.. 

That's not how statistics work.

Sure I am serious.

If we go by statistics, that guy should never have done it.

If we go by statistics, All crime should be done by those wicked poor kids from broken homes.

All drugs should be done by poor black kids. These outliers shouldn't exist. The probabilities of them existing are infinitesimal.

Other statistics show, and prove that the crime rate between races is the same (Different types of crime, with white collar financial crimes being more popular among white criminals)

Drug use per capita is the same among races and upbringing/financial station often has no bearing on drug use/addiction.

 

Polls don't poll every person, nor do all statistics capture every person.

They poll people who respond to polls.

They poll certain areas of certain cities. Certain rural areas.

They ask leading questions to manipulate poll statistics towards however people that are paying the pollsters want the data to swing.

 

This is why we have polls that show that the majority of Americans want to repeal Obama Care, contradictory the  majority of Americans oppose repealing the ACA (Affordable Care Act). 

They are the same thing.

 

So what I'm saying is, that your statistics about how well kids do based on upbringing are innately flawed and biased. 

They come from right-wing think tanks aimed at dissolving gay marriage, or gays from adopting, and they look for data to support their thesis, often excluding people from there polls for being outliers, or they gather there statistics from areas that prove there point, and avoid others that would counter it.

 

Quote

I don't want federal policies.

No federal policies = no Federal government.

No federal government = the USA is now a group of greek city states.

That's how you get Anarchy.

 

Quote

  On 4/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, SinisterDeath said:

Here's an honest question for you.

How many standardized tests did you have to take every semester?

Quote

 

Idk

I would guess 1.

 

 

See, I heard after Bush No Child Left Behind, those went from 1 or 2 every year, to 2 to 4 every semester, and every semester was about teaching those standardized tests.

 

I honestly don't recall having to take any standardized tests after 7th or 8th grade. No-Child Left behind didn't actually take affect until well after I graduated...

 

Quote

WHO is being obstructed?

Federal Government, any subsidiary programs. 

Businesses that have to work with those federal agencies to get work done for their clients/townships/cities/counties/states, can't get work done because those federal agencies aren't doing their jobs, because they're routinely being furloughed, told to work at a slower pace. Stop all active works, thus the american people, are being obstructed out of a misguided purpose of dismantling the Federal government from the inside out much like Termites.

 

Quote

Expats aren't even in the USA...

Doesn't matter. They are US citizens.

You realize these people come back right?

Like.. people go on vacation?

That we.. you know, send kids to college overseas? And then they come back here for jobs?

 

Quote

You were probably wrong is the likeliest answer.

Actually I'm not. They are all conservative Republicans. I can actually prove it via social media facebook. :wink:

But if you want to believe that all educators are liberals, go ahead. Reality isn't that black-and-white.

 

Quote

Cost money, employ useless bureaucrats.

Don't get me wrong, I dislike bureaucrats as much as the next person. But if you really wanted to get rid of senseless and expensive bureaucracy, you'd wipe out half the military industrial complex first.

 

Quote

No such thing.

Sure there is. You just don't see that sharia law = Religious Law, and any religion can institute there own version of Sharia law, not just Muslims.
 

Homosexuality, Oral & Anal sex are still crimes in several states.

 

Quote

Maybe 80%. Lol

Maybe 90%.

 

Quote

I would say marriage and procreation are intertwined.

And procreation generally requires sex, and as mentioned, many people who can not have children (barren), are married. Via your logic, there marriage is no better than a gay couple getting married.

 

Quote

Well we're kind of rethinking the issue here so I would say yes you do. Marriage has traditionally been between a man and a woman so you need to justify why that shouldn't be the case.

Marriage is traditional in more than Christian Religion. And there are other religions/societies that have allowed gay marriage.

Atheists also get married, without religion. It's still Marriage. Atheists have no law against gays getting married.

 

Quote

It's not about impact it's about the definition. What is marriage?

allowing homosexuals to marry changes what it is and why it is.

It doesn't change any meaning or definition for you at all. Because you're allowed to have your own definition/value/reason for marriage, just like anyone else can have there own meaning.

 

Just like with the freedom of speech, it stops when it harms other people.
 

Gays' getting married, do no harm you. They do not effect you.

 

It may offend you. But the entire point of the 1st amendment, freedom of speech & religion, is that it is my right to offend you with my words/beliefs. 

 

When your religion or Freedom of speech seeks to restrict my Freedom of speech/religion, is going to far, and just as dangerous as yelling fire in a theater.

 

Quote

Like most on the Left you appear to be reacting to issues with emotion and assume others are as well. My feelings are not hurt. This is about the definition of marriage. If anything the idea that some victim group might be excluded from something seems to hurt your feelings.

IT certainly sounds like it's hurting your feelings. It's hurting your feelings on the concept of traditional marriage being broken. The idea offends you, and others who Agree with your line of argument.

 

Quote

So either share the ball or you want to pop it so no one can play. Childish.

Actually no. 

Because in either case, everyone can still get married.

 

If we remove Federal recognition of marriage.

You can still get married at your church!

It's just not legally binding with the Federal Government, and doesn't require local, state or federal recognition of it, or any of the legal documents/annulments involved in the whole process.

*Gasp*

 

Which means, omg.

Like you can get married at any church you want! Which means Atheists can still get married, and Wiccans, and Muslims by their peers... Just without all the paperwork/government in your business.

 

Quote

I am not a libertarian.

That's a shame.  You might find people who agree with you there.

 

Quote

Ok but  i still don't get why you asked me at all and then preemptively answered your own question. If you just wanna have a conversation with yourself that's fine by me.

It's a leading question that I think I knew the answer to, but you've routinely answer the opposite of how I expect, thus asking it.

 

 

 

Quote

It doesn't matter. A militia isn't possible without a civilians right to keep and bear arms.

the militia thing is a total distraction from the issue.

Nah, it's intertwined. It's all part of it. Else we can't have any literal interpretation without taking everything within the context of how it was written. This is why people far smarter than us, have been debating this issue for 243 years.

 

 

Quote

It's fine by me.

So you don't care if those gang-bangers form a Militia?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, SinisterDeath said:

You can't prevent Religion/Christianity from influencing the Government, if the government isn't absent of it. 

If it's there, it's going to influence.

They did the best they could but a government is made of people.

 

Quote

Go for it,  'cause you're dead wrong. 

Next time I'm at my PC. I'm visiting my mom.

 

Quote

Actually, it does. People in an unhappy marriage that you refuse to allow get divorced, make situations worse.

You never stopped and thought, maybe that person getting beaten by their husband SHOULD get divorced.

I think women (and men) should take all possible precautions before marrying someone. Yeah if you elope with the bad boy on a motorcycle you met in a bar you might be in for a worse marriage than it you married some dweeb who collects frogs or whatever. 

 

Just like in other aspects of life I believe there should be consequences for poor decision making.

 

Quote

Sure I am serious.

If we go by statistics, that guy should never have done it.

If we go by statistics, All crime should be done by those wicked poor kids from broken homes.

All drugs should be done by poor black kids. These outliers shouldn't exist. The probabilities of them existing are infinitesimal.

Other statistics show, and prove that the crime rate between races is the same (Different types of crime, with white collar financial crimes being more popular among white criminals)

Drug use per capita is the same among races and upbringing/financial station often has no bearing on drug use/addiction.

THAT'S NOT HOW STATISTICS WORK

 

 

Quote

Polls don't poll every person, nor do all statistics capture every person.

They poll people who respond to polls.

They poll certain areas of certain cities. Certain rural areas.

They ask leading questions to manipulate poll statistics towards however people that are paying the pollsters want the data to swing.

 

This is why we have polls that show that the majority of Americans want to repeal Obama Care, contradictory the  majority of Americans oppose repealing the ACA (Affordable Care Act). 

They are the same thing.

I

Not all statistics are polls.

 

 

Quote

So what I'm saying is, that your statistics about how well kids do based on upbringing are innately flawed and biased. 

They come from right-wing think tanks aimed at dissolving gay marriage, or gays from adopting, and they look for data to support their thesis, often excluding people from there polls for being outliers, or they gather there statistics from areas that prove there point, and avoid others that would counter it.

That's a mighty big assumption. I think you will be disappointed.

 

 

Quote

No federal policies = no Federal government.

I'm only talking about education.

 

Quote

No federal government = the USA is now a group of greek city states.

That's how you get Anarchy.

We have states...

 

Quote

See, I heard after Bush No Child Left Behind, those went from 1 or 2 every year, to 2 to 4 every semester, and every semester was about teaching those standardized tests.

It's hard to remember. I definitely took standardized testing (CAT6 and STAR) but I don't recall the frequency increasing. Also one thing I distinctly remember from that time, especially high school, is that I WASN'T taught what was On the test sometimes. I remember having to guess since they were always multiple choice. My guess is they hadn't really caught up to what the federal government wanted yet.

 

Quote

I honestly don't recall having to take any standardized tests after 7th or 8th grade. No-Child Left behind didn't actually take affect until well after I graduated...

What year? I graduated in 08.

 

Quote

Federal Government, any subsidiary programs. 

Businesses that have to work with those federal agencies to get work done for their clients/townships/cities/counties/states, can't get work done because those federal agencies aren't doing their jobs, because they're routinely being furloughed, told to work at a slower pace. Stop all active works, thus the american people, are being obstructed out of a misguided purpose of dismantling the Federal government from the inside out much like Termites.

By that measure you can never cut a program or even funding because you would be obstructing the federal government.

 

Quote

Doesn't matter. They are US citizens.

You realize these people come back right?

Do you know the frequency at which expats return to the US?

 

Quote

Like.. people go on vacation?

That we.. you know, send kids to college overseas? And then they come back here for jobs?

Those aren't expats.

 

Quote

Actually I'm not. They are all conservative Republicans. I can actually prove it via social media facebook. :wink:

But if you want to believe that all educators are liberals, go ahead. Reality isn't that black-and-white.

You wouldn't know like that. Only way to know is either to ask them directly or see their voting record somehow.

 

Quote

Don't get me wrong, I dislike bureaucrats as much as the next person. But if you really wanted to get rid of senseless and expensive bureaucracy, you'd wipe out half the military industrial complex first.

Yeaaahhh..........but if I was going to make cuts that's probably the last place i would do it.

cause ya know...If you get that wrong we could all die.

 

Like would you just but the CDC if I told you 90% of their funds get wasted somehow? You could. But if you get that 10% wrong it's smallpox time lol. So better to focus on other areas first and continue to dump money into the CDC (and military) until you've cut everywhere else it made sense to cut first.

 

 

Quote

Sure there is. You just don't see that sharia law = Religious Law, and any religion can institute there own version of Sharia law, not just Muslims.
 

Homosexuality, Oral & Anal sex are still crimes in several states.

Is it enforced?

 

Quote

And procreation generally requires sex, and as mentioned, many people who can not have children (barren), are married. Via your logic, there marriage is no better than a gay couple getting married.

 

Did you watch the video?

 

Quote

Marriage is traditional in more than Christian Religion.

Yes.

 

Quote

 

And there are other religions/societies that have allowed gay marriage.

Yes. We are living in one now.

 

Quote

Atheists also get married, without religion. It's still Marriage. Atheists have no law against gays getting married.

Ok.

 

Quote

It doesn't change any meaning or definition for you at all. Because you're allowed to have your own definition/value/reason for marriage, just like anyone else can have there own meaning.

That's not how it works. Definitions are not personal. I can't all of a sudden just decide you're a plant.

 

Quote

Just like with the freedom of speech, it stops when it harms other people.
 

No.

 

Quote

Gays' getting married, do no harm you. They do not effect you.

That's not technically true though. They get benefits such as on taxes without providing anything in return (children). Less taxes collected when they should be effects me.

 

Quote

It may offend you. But the entire point of the 1st amendment, freedom of speech & religion, is that it is my right to offend you with my words/beliefs. 

Get off this offended kick already. I'm not offended.

 

 

Quote

When your religion or Freedom of speech seeks to restrict my Freedom of speech/religion, is going to far, and just as dangerous as yelling fire in a theater.

This isn't about speech or religion.

 

 

Quote

IT certainly sounds like it's hurting your feelings. It's hurting your feelings on the concept of traditional marriage being broken. The idea offends you, and others who Agree with your line of argument.

What did I say that makes you think I'm offended? I'm really curious. I mean just because I say something you don't agree with I must therefore be offended by YOUR beliefs? I hope you have more than that.

 

Quote

Actually no. 

Because in either case, everyone can still get married.

 

If we remove Federal recognition of marriage.

You can still get married at your church!

It's just not legally binding with the Federal Government, and doesn't require local, state or federal recognition of it, or any of the legal documents/annulments involved in the whole process.

*Gasp*

 

Which means, omg.

Like you can get married at any church you want! Which means Atheists can still get married, and Wiccans, and Muslims by their peers... Just without all the paperwork/government in your business.

So, again, share or pop the ball so no one can play.

If gays can't have tax benefits for sodomizing each other than no one should get them.

 

Quote

That's a shame.  You might find people who agree with you there.

I agree with libertarians on a lot of things but I agree with ex libertarians more.

 

 

Quote

Nah, it's intertwined. It's all part of it. Else we can't have any literal interpretation without taking everything within the context of how it was written. This is why people far smarter than us, have been debating this issue for 243 years.

Disagreed.

 

Quote

 

So you don't care if those gang-bangers form a Militia?

 

 

I think they would be a gang not a militia...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Zealand was right to do this ban. We swore to accept any creed or race as long as they were peaceful. He is the latest to break that promise. 

 

All other similar situations were against Maori 100+ years ago, mostly due to people thinking the Treaty gave them the right to do whatever they wanted without repercussions or consequences. 

 

We are strongly tied to the UK, but make our own laws, due to the Treaty Of Waitangi and how it's enforcement imposes changes in how our nation is governed. We have many people here that have family lines going back 100 years. My Great Grandfather fought in WW1 and four Uncles from my Maori ancestry fought in WW2 with the Maori Battalion.

 

A vast population has similar family ties, stretching back as long. We have always said that what other nations call rights, in our borders are privileges, such as public speaking and firearms. We put limits, because it would destroy our society because too many would abuse it if it were a right. We remember Hitler and what he started and have always opposed people acting on that sentiment. This just makes it a lot harder to kill people. Banning semi automatic or full automatic weapons is great. We have elements of Far Madding and swords, just without the paranoia and suspicion that goes with that city. We want to make it harder to kill people, and easier to catch them when they attempt to.

 

As for HIM, he has appeared in court. Not much seen after that. He is charged with 50 counts of murder and 39 counts of attempted murder.

 

For us, we believe that laws must change to reflect the events we experience. This is one such time, particularly if someone chooses to attack a Marae. That ends the country instantly if that happens, which is partly why they acted so quickly. We do not want someone attacking one because of Hobson's Pledge. That organisation is the definition of New Zealand's far right extremism.

Edited by wotfan4472

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Krakalakachkn said:

Vote for  Nolder in 2020.

 

He promises a nuclear warhead in every home.

Well I mean...If you can afford it I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Posts

    • I am currently rereading WOT for the first time since first reading it. I was just reading the following quote from chapter 12.   “You must handle it,” Moiraine said in answer to something unheard from Lan. “He will remember too much as it is, and no help for it. If I stand out in his thoughts. . . .”   I am trying to figure out what this might be referring to and can't remember what it might be. If somebody could point out what this is meant to reference I would appreciate it. 
    • skin color is irrelevant in wot and I could care less how they cast it.  If they go by the books there will be many races and cultures and main characters like Tuon will be black.  All that is great, no problem.  Just hope they keep the modern political narratives out of this.  I want it to be more like game of thrones where they can do surprising things without offending someone.  If they have to be politically correct then it will ruin the tv show.  Many of the characters have do offensive things and have offensive thoughts so hopefully they can let that shine through.   One of the key traits of the wheel of time was all the different perspectives and all the communication barriers that would crop up between different groups of people.  hopefully they can let all that shine and they will need a very diverse cast to make it happen. 
    • In this thread: some people who are gonna lose their shit when non white actors get cast despite most characters not having an explicitly established skin colour and Randland being a far future setting where skin colour is entirely irrelevant.
×
×
  • Create New...