yagami

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pE5L_kFlt3k

Here is the link to an article about this but I'll summarize it for you below : http://www.chicagotribune.com/bluesky/originals/ct-matt-maloney-grubhub-email-resign-bsi-20161110-story.html So the CEO of grubhub made this statement to his employees: “While demeaning, insulting and ridiculing minorities, immigrants and the physically/mentally disabled worked for Mr. Trump, I want to be clear that his behavior - and these views, have no place at Grubhub,” Maloney wrote. “Had he worked here, many of his comments would have resulted in his immediate termination.” “If you do not agree with this statement then please reply to this email with your resignation because you have no place here,” he wrote. “We do not tolerate hateful attitudes on our team.” Of course he later back peddled on this statement claiming to be accepting of all political views. *Sigh* I ordered from them a lot but no more.

Im not sure how old this video is or if most people here have seen it but I thought it was worth posting. https://www.facebook.com/anonews.co/videos/1313784798633076/

Im not sure how old this video is or if most people here have seen it but I thought it was worth posting. https://www.facebook.com/anonews.co/videos/1313784798633076/

You absolutely need to do that because this will take the matter out of the realm of theory and into the realm of fact. It's easy for you to make assumptions from the outside and say oh well that's what it looks like but then be completely proven wrong by a double blind study. This is how misinformation get spread. There is a reason why the double blind study is called the gold standard. Find the double blind study that proves your case and then we can talk. But you are making a truth claim which means we need more than your conjecture to for proof.

Are you making the argument that your IQ comes from your culture or social surrounding? Where is the double blind study for that? If IQ is just a matter of culture then how come no one has been able to point to the what a particular culture is doing to raise IQ scientifically. If it's just a matter of identifying the right environment how come no one has proved this using the scientific method of trial and error? It would be easy to take a bunch of children from different parts of the world and have them all raise the kids in very similar way. If you find wild variations in the IQ then the theory that race is a social construct goes out the window.

Sounds like you feel that you need to be able to defend him on every front for some reason. You can stump your friends by saying if you need to be able to defend someone on all fronts what candidate are you supporting that can be defended on all fronts. I doubt they will bug you after that.

This made me sick to watch and it really pisses me off. Especially the sexual stuff. I will never have my children in public government run schools.

Due to the amount of bs I've been exposed to from the mainstream media I never know when something the media puts out is real or exaggerated. So the story goes this guy was found by two students raping a girl who was unconscious in an ally behind a dumpster. We was convicted of 3 counts of sexual assault and given 6 months in country jail. That just sounds so freakin unbelievable I dont know what to say. But it seems pretty straight forward. Im not going to draw any stupid conclusions as to why this happened like the left does like "If he were black he'd never see the light of day again". I dont believe that at all but I want to know how someone could essentially get away with something like this. Are the courts really that corrupt? Or have I been mislead again by the mainstream media. Please spaghetti monster save us.

Holy crap great job on the video Mike and Steph!

I gotta say I was surprised Trump would call out the judge on his heritage publicly given how people are just dying for material against him. My views on his comments are that he just said what anyone would think in that situation. I mean Im not saying he is accurate in his assessment but given the fact that Trump has upset so many Hispanics and the judge is giving his what he perceives to be very unfair ruling can anyone honestly say the thought would not cross their minds? So Trump just feels the same way anyone would but just said it out loud. It seems like a pretty politically stupid move but what do I know. If you are gonna call Trump a racist over this I'd say he is more the say it out loud racist while the rest of us are just closet racist. Maybe im wrong and in fact the thought would never actually cross the majority of people minds who were put in that situation. My first thoughts were "I wouldnt be surprised if he is right but he'll never prove it". Anyway would like to hear what you think about this.

When you say im gambling on nothing but but faith an hope that is completely wrong. Unless you are are referring to the ability to tell the future. I have already stated that based on my understanding of the situation I believe Trump's solution is best. What will actually happen I dont know but you can say that about anything. I guess I have hope and faith that Steph will continue to put out great content. I have hope and faith that my internet connection will be here tomorrow. Slapping this hope and faith onto your argument isnt adding anything here it's just a way to diminish what im saying. I claim I have very little knowledge because I know what it means to have great knowledge in a particular area. When you really learn something deeply you realize how little you know about everything else and I know most people know almost nothing about this subject in particular but always seem to think they know the answer. So when you say I should be more humble you again are adding nothing to the conversation. I already said I know very little but given what I know I think Trump is right. How much more humble can I get? I absolutely will not take responsibility for any negative outcome. Why should I? Im in prison. I can sit by and let the migrants come in I can choose to vote for more migrants to come in or I can vote for them to leave and keep them out. Keep in mind I have a gun to my head here. Two out of three of my options will destroy what progress we have made towards a free society. It's not even a question for me which answer is the best for our future. Steph often says when force is a factor morality goes out the window. Do you not believe that? It's like you dont see the danger that is coming to us all. This is a society destroying event. Sit there and theory craft about solutions that will never happen in your lifetime if you want. I will be out there doing what I can to ensure we have a free society in the future. Also sorry I took so long to reply. I wrote something before but I refreshed the page after writing something and got totally demoralized that my post got destroyed.

Yes I am arguing for Trumps position and yes it may expand government power but so what? I get that government programs fail I get that government programs get corrupted but SO WHAT? I dont think you understand how irrelevant that is. I am not advocating for a moral solution nor am I arguing for the best solution. Im arguing for the solution that looks best to me. As I stated in the beginning I am no expert and I only know so much. But to me the wall seems like a step in the right direction. Who cares if it fails I am in prison just like you and I just want things to get better. It's like you have a society that is getting sick from a disease and we need to do something about it. I dont know the right solution and maybe historically every government solution has failed in the past but so what? People are dying as we need to try something. Normally I wouldnt say that for every problem in society. I wouldnt say the government should really do something about pollution problem because things are getting bad. But this problem in particular is a society destroying problem that is not fixed will lead to neither of us having the luxury to type on these forums. I believe this is our best shot to make a positive change. It may fail but what choice do we have? If it fails for all those reasons you pointed out goodbye western values forever.

Alright lets go point by point. * Please point out where I claimed to have proof that Donald Trump's plan will work. How could any reasonable person make such a claim? The same goes for his promises. * Of course government programs historically fail on that we agree and I have never disagreed with that point if you believe I have please point out where I have said a past government program has not failed. * Again please point out my statement where I am arguing for more state power. You are just throwing these words at me with no proof. Show me the evidence not what you think you gathered from what I've said. * I believe the statement you cant prevent corruption is completely false and here is my argument. I will assume you are an anarchist so you should be familiar with the concept of getting money out of politics. You should also be aware that by reducing government power you also prevent corruption propositional to the amount of power reduced. Now if you are making the argument that you can not completely and totally prevent corruption you may have a point but im just responding to what you actually posted. But since most people dont use the term that way I would like to think my assessment is correct. If im wrong and you meant totally and complete prevention just correct me in your response. And if that is the case I'll just go ahead and respond and say that that is a near impossible standard to have and perfection in my opinion is not at this stage what we should be aiming for. Lets do as much good as we can right now and smooth out the edges later. * We both agree that power corrupts but that has nothing to do with my response to you. Pointing out something like that doesnt move the conversation forward at all. Im not going to challenge something I agree with. History does prove your case so there is no point in staying on this corruption bit of your argument. * I have never said building a wall is not an expansion of state power. * I do have reason to support trumps position. I believe Trump will build a wall and it will help to prevent illegal immigration. Of course I am no expert on building walls or preventing illegal immigration. I only know so much. But what I do know is that right now what we are doing is not preventing much of anything. We all have the metaphorical gun to our head and what im saying is if I had to choose i'd choose building a wall over what we currently have. I would love to have no government at all of course but we dont have that choice in prison. I am also not saying that everyone should go out and vote/advocate for Trump. We are just talking about that validity of the arguments here. If Trump builds a wall how effective would that be. Not whether it is right or wrong to build a wall. That's a totally different conversation. * I think this is where you believe I am advocating for state power. If someone ask me should the speed limit be 120mph or 30mph in a residential neighborhood I dont know much about speed limits and what would be optimal but given the choices I would choose 30pmh. Maybe even that isnt a good number but I am just leveraging my currently knowledge to decide what I think would be best. Picking a number has no baring on the morality of a state run speed limit system. * Now I believe I have sufficiently responded to your points. You have ignored many of my points from my last post and I hope you dont do that same here. Let's hear your argument.

I seriously doubt there is a scenario where Hilary will come out the winner in this. It's one thing that people dont like your stance on something it's another when you are not trustworthy. I am mind blown as it is to see Hilary doing even well as she is. But I talked to my Dad and he said he is voting for Hilary. Although that was right after Iowa. He told me he believes that she really believes what she says. Are there really that many delusional people in the US? God I hope they are just hacking the voting machines or something. Plus she carries the stench of establishment and I honestly am not sure the value of being moderate this election. I dont see Trump as extreme but as far as normal politics are concerned he is very extreme and Bernie is on the other extreme. I feel like that has to be worth something just to be outside of the norm.

Love that one.

This thought randomly popped into my head today while looking at my username for this board. The name Yagami is from my favorite anime of all time called Deathnote. It's a story about a senior in high school that is a genius and one day finds this notebook on the ground. He discovers that this book has the power to kill anyone who's name he writes in the book as long as he has seen that persons face. In the anime he goes around killing criminals trying to make perfect world in which he is the decider of who will live and who will die. My favorite shows tend to be along these lines where the main character has no problem killing people for what he believes and the main character is always significantly more intelligent than others in the story. Code Geass would be my number 2. I wonder why these type of shows appeal to me and what that means about me if anything. I'd never actually kill someone of course so let me just put that out there. I dont exactly expect an answer from anyone here. I mean how could you know without significantly more detail about me. It's just food for thought. Have you every noticed a trend in the characters you enjoy?

That's a good point if Trump can get Sanders to beat up on Hilary Trump is gonna win the general. If Trump can frame the debate to show how much they have in common he is gonna win a lot more than 40% of the Sanders supporters. Also another thing Trump said this will need to be in an large arena of some sort which will be a great change from the small venues they have been using that look like they hold 200 people. We can finally get a somewhat accurate reflection of how people feel about each candidate. Albeit just a glimpse.

You are jumping around in your argument. I am responding to what you said about the effectiveness of building a wall. You seem to know for sure it wont work and im saying what you know about preventing illegal immigration is limited to what you can know as a civilian. So I stand by my humility statement. Also I am not making an argument for state power at all so please dont mischaracterize my point. You did not respond to any points I made at all. How can we have a discussion on the ideas if we are not directly responding to the points each person is making? The funny thing is if you know about an infrastructure of tunnels dont you think the government knows about it? And if it's known do you then think these tunnels are indectecable by any means? Do you honestly believe that in the 21 century we could not figure out where the tunnels are and fill them or prevent them from popping up? Or is it your belief that no matter what we do like moles in the ground there is nothing we can do to prevent new tunnels from popping up? If you are that much of an expert on this issue please explain how illegal immigration would get around inferred detention underground. That's only my amateur solution im sure much smarter and more knowledgeable people can come up with better solution. Also what do you mean straw man? Where?

I think we need a little humility here. You say the Mexicans will just go over and under the wall but that's assuming we dont take that into account. You can build walls deep into the ground and you can have sensors that can tell if there are things that look like people moving underground. Im no expert on wall building or immigration but to assume that it cant be done is the same argument people make about anarchy. You not being capable of coming up with a plan doesnt mean it cant be done. And of course Donald Trump focuses on the wall aspect of stopping illegal immigration because it's an easy concept for people to understand. If he started getting technical everyone's eyes would glaze over. You also have to define the word fix. What does fix mean? Do you mean stopping illegal immigration? Do you mean vastly reducing the amount of illegal immigration? Do you mean stopping all immigration? I dont see it as necessarily true that if you abolish welfare and government benefits you will stop any form of immigration. The problem isnt immigration and welfare it's open borders and welfare. If anyone for any reason can come in the country and they get paid to do nothing that's a huge problem. But immigration by itself doesnt have anything to do with that.

Well I hope you're right. Me I am not so confident in Trump's appeal when put up against Bernie. Either way I dont think the winner of the debate matters much. It's more the message that is being sent to those that believe their vote is suppose to matter but really doesn't. Regardless of who wins the debate this is a win for Trump assuming Hilary wins the nomination. So I guess that means he really cant lose XD.

I disagree. I think the arguments you made are valid but will not sway people on the left. Those are the same arguments that have always been made against people on the left. People love Bernie because he promises free stuff and I dont think anyone cares that he has no way to pay for it. In the mind of a lefty it's the principle that counts not reality. Whether Donald wins or loses the debate though isn't what I love about his decision to debate Bernie. This is another nail in the coffin against Hilary.

Donald Trump has agreed to debate Bernie Sanders in a debate yesterday and I think this is a brilliant move by him. I dont think Donald Trump can win in an election vs Bernie Sanders and I think he knows this also. So what he is doing is promoting Bernie Sanders by accepting this debate. It is to your advantage if you are behind in the votes to get more TV time and Donald Trump is giving that to Bernie. I believe Donald Trump wants Bernie to get his ideas out to more people and convert as many Hilary supporters to his side as possible. This way when the convention happens and Hillary gets the nomination via super delegates it will really disenfranchise people against the system. I dont think Trump has any real intention of winning the debate(although im sure he will not intentionally make a fool out of himself). Donald Trump is essentially doubling down on the fact that Hilary will win the nomination knowing that if Bernie wins the nomination the fact that he had this debate will not matter. The other part to this is that it shows how arrogant Hilary is for being unwilling to debate Bernie. It also makes Hilary like the kid no one wants to play with as she sits on the side lines. I doubt Hilary will participate as she knows Donald Trump will absolutely destroy her during a live debate. This is just a theory of course but if this is what he is thinking it's brilliant. I cant wait for this to happen. What do you think?

I think you are kind of missing my point. I know very little about the proper way to extract minerals from plants that will bring you the most value. Maybe you know more about what is most optimal but that has nothing to do with what im saying. Im talking about absorption. If you do not use colloidal minerals the minerals will be difficult to absorb. Of course pesticides are harmful but they are not the big issue. In fact you can get the most organically grown vegetables on the planet harvested by Jesus christ under a full moon and that would not make a huge impact on your health. All organic means is without the bad but not having the bad stuff isn't even close to important when you compare it next to having the good stuff. Not sure if that makes sense. I guess im saying is if you have all your nutrients you will not even notice the effects of a non organic food on your body because your body is dealing with it as it is design to do when it's given all the proper tools. Not to say we should all just go out and eat non organic it's not just not where the majority of people should be looking at first. The other point you made about "nutrient-rich soil" brings us back to what I said before. Farmers grow their crops for the crops not the consumer. Plants have a curious property of being able to absorb minerals they dont need. When you say nutrient rich do you really know if the soil is nutrient rich for humans or for the plant? Humans require much more in concentration and variety. Plants only need a three at minimum we need many many more. This is the main reason we cant just eat plants and think we are getting what we need. We have no earthly idea what is in the food and the food for the most part is completely void of the nutrients we need. Buying organic wont do anything to help that problem. I also push back on your assumption since supplements must be treated with chemicals. Youngevity for instance has all organic supplements (at least the ones I buy). They are one of the only if not the only company that actually has every ingredient certified by the FDA. Not that that means much but there has got to be a reason the competition isnt doing so.