Salem Saberhagen

The emails are explicit proof of collusion - why are you posting Russia Today links about Hilary Clinton, out of interest? Also -it's not a 'story built out of nothing' Trump Jr. tweeted these emails himself as he became aware they would be released by someone else. He has literally tweeted his own email interactions where this exchange takes place + This is a verbatim, Trump Jr being told that Russian government wanted to aid his fathers campaign via the leaking of highly classified, sensitive information, and he agreed to it. This is illegal, it is also 100% proof of collusion. It is also proof that both Paul Manafort and Jared Kusher (who previously swore they did not know about the Russia situation) explicitly knew I don't know why you seem to have turned into a paid account for Trump disinformation, like those you see on Reddit and Facebook - trump is brought up, and they respond with comments about Hilary and the DNC. This email chain is literal and verbatim proof of collusion with Russian sources, posted by Don Jr himself. Agreeing to accept high level info from the Russian government...and then attending the meeting. If this was about meeting a kid online, Chris Hansen would step out and ask Don 'have a seat over there'.

You, and everyone else here should make a concerted effort not to browse daily mail - you know they get paid for it, right? Each click, each article is ad revenue If you would like to stop them being paid for shoddy 'journalism' (and thus making it a worthwhile and profitable enterprise) then don't go on the site, don't click their outrageous clickbait articles I know so many people who when bored, just visit DM.co.uk, and continually scroll as it seems to be neverending As long as people will click on articles that say KIM KARDASHIAN IN HAITCUT SHOCKER, or GRENFELL SURVIVORS TO BE PUT UP IN MANSION, there will be a reason to keep creating them Just don't do it, don't do the same with the sun or any other shitty clickbait publication Number 7 will shock you!

The stoppage was absolutely fine, most of the shots that Kovalev complained about were legal and on the belt, there was one right at the end that was low, when he had already doubled over. He was uncomfortable with the body work from early on, and the big right sent him spiralling, and he tried to claim a low blow in order to get a breather, no dice. Real good stoppage from ward, good fight

The amount of time spent on the training ground on things like positioning, manipulating space to show other players into, defending with 10 men etc etc, and the quality of whatever does go on, are both sub par, the quality of drills as you said focusing on the opponents weakness is also sub par, this is poor tactical work There is no good drilling for fantasy situations where that consist of the opposing team not wanting to attack, or not having a player in the number 10 position Arsenal concede all types of goals, players running past defenders, balls straight through the two centre backs, space in-between the fullback and centre back, getting dragged across to one side and having the ball switched, goals from crosses and set peices....theres not enough organisation defensively, people don't know their roles, and the attacking players don't seem to be given much defensive instruction either On a scale from 1 - Go out and play lads Redknapp style 10 - Mourinho style combing over each and every facet of the opposing team and attempting to tailor a style to beat them He isn't a 7, 8 or 9. The most you can hope for is Strong team - Giroud players Team with a high line - Welbeck plays

Pretty astounding thing he did, it was quite moving to see the guy gripsed up against the van and people asking in anguished voices WHY DID YOU DO IT. Not sure how he wasn't torn apart but it seems in large part due to this guy

Islam is a set of ideas, beliefs and statements about the world, Muslims are people who subscribe to it Same with Hindu's and Huduism, Christianity and Christians.. I don't necessarily think it is had to hold 'hatred' (lets just say a strong dislike) of a religion, in fact given the sorts of the things in most religious texts/traditions that are themselves thought to be reprehensible unless placed under the umbrella of 'a persons faith', it's probably advisable to some degree Conflating lets say Muslims with Islam does actual Muslims a disservice and makes it seem like they are a monolithic group of people with no separate identities or differences in belief of their own, and in terms of apologetics is a very convenient way to make criticism of the religious doctrine look like racism and shut down all conversation, it's very common throughout the past decade and a half for fairly prominent members of both the Muslim community and the left to use the word Islamaphobia as a means to shut down debate, in the same way 'racist!' was a term used very often to shut down anybody who wanted to have a conversation about immigration, and the term 'sexist' will be used to shut down criticisms of contemporary feminism Criticising Islam doesn't make you a bigot, or racist, or hateful, though it's possible to be all of those things and criticise it too, there would obviously be some overlap in the Venn diagram of 'People who dislike Islam as a set of religious beleifs' 'People who are xenaphobic' In terms of how you differentiate between criticising one and the other? By speaking honestly and clearly about that doctrines of the religion you wish to discuss I.e. 'Western interventionism and geopolitical events definitely play a role in the 'recent' Jihadist phenomenon, and we need to talk about that. But we also need to talk about underlying concepts within mainstream Islam, concepts such as martyrdom and jihad, that can make the idea of this sort of thing not only attractive, but theologically justifiable' Don't make blanket statements like muslims this or muslims that Disclaimer 1: Tommy Robinson obviously dislikes Muslims, regardless of his attempts to whitewash his image Disclaimer 2: Unfortunately now the Islam is not a race card is being used by anti-Muslim bigots Disclaimer 3: I am yet to watch the video, intact I probably won't bother unless someone recommends that I should, it's likely to be a re-run of previous interviews

*plays trife life*

Feminism, like most things that are seen as defecto property of 'the left', including political correctness are essentially very good ideas in their own right, in so far as by feminism we mean the empowerment of women as a means to achieve equality for them in situations where it does not exist A problem with the recent milieu is that the most vocal (and apparently influential) proponents of feminism are outrageously propagandistic in their characterisation gender inequality, and often border as much on man-hating as they do female empowerment, All of these issues that centre around identity politics like sex, race and religion all seem to be on a continuum with ethical concern about the well being of my group on one end And female/male/black/white/religious supremacism on the other Mainstream feminism seems to have shifted toward the second so much so that it's probably necessary to differentiate your thoughts and views from the status quo as soon as you mention it

Yooo fam, lets not put Sam Harris and Milo Yannopulous in the same sentence, Sam is an incredibly honest and articulate intellectual who seeks to try and get at ethical bedrock with a mix of a scientific and philosophical approach Milo is literally a real life troll, who says things with the purpose of getting a reaction, thus generating controversy, thus generating clicks, he's pretty much in character full time

I have to admit I find this a little odd, I myself enjoyed Trumps campaign purely for the comedy value, I would hardly call him a straight-talker. He's spoken out of both sides of his mouth on most issues he has touched on, he's been incredibly inconsistent, even for a politician, and I won't bore you with highlighting many of his obvious fabrications as I assume you will already know about them It's a little concerning you would want someone in charge of a country (or support them being in charge) when you acknowledge they 'constantly speak their mind before thinking it through' that does not bode well for major political decisions. How a person speaks is a major indicator of how they think, and if he does not think before merely speaking, what guarantee do we have that he will think before acting? His position of power and visibility is so great that he doesn't even need to act, his words can decide the fate of billions of people. I can't help but see this as a huge miscalculation on your part, you are conflating him being 'brash' ie. saying fuck immigration if that is what 'the common man' think, and him being honest. He certainly isn't honest, and nothing he did during his time in business, during his election, or in his subsequent presidency have made it seem like he has any desire, let alone plan, for achieving many of his stated goals. From his attempts to unilaterally curb press freedom, to his hiring of unqualified individuals (all surprise surprise, with some link to Russian ogliarchs) to his highest and most important positions, the man is genuinely and dangerously unqualified, and the only 'positives' about his potential presidency would be that he would 'shake things up' - I don't think people genuinely understand how dangerous this experiment is, nobody would elect an unqualified Doctor, or Bus Driver, or Pilot to do their jobs just because they didn't like the status quo, and something like this could have a much more serious affect on billions of people As for the corruption...he's hopelessly corrupt, from Trump University scams to not giving up his real estate dealings upon entering office to a web of Russian collusion to literally right this moment being under investigation for obstruction of justice for firing a person who was investigating him, and planning to fire another one - all after a couple of months in office If he was half as bad, he would seem worse I don't think the Nazi rhetoric is necessary and all it does is further alienate people, but Trump and what you've said about him is visceral reminder of how dangerous partizan politics can be

I think you have unintentionally moved the goalpostsposts, and you are being a little simplistic here. Policing and Grenfell both have a link, and the link is that the discontent felt by people over Grenfell and Policing both have their roots in (perceived or real) social inequality, People in the affected communities feel they are unfairly targeted by police, because they come from a lower income bracket, or because of their ethnicity or religion People affected by the fire feel that the victims basic needs were overlooked because they come from a lower income bracket, or because of their ethnicity or religion People who's children can only attend sub-standard schools because of catchment area feel they are in this position because they are in a lower income bracket, because of their ethnicity or religion Do you not see how the Grenfell situation occurred because of a type of classism and social inequality? Do you not see that classism and social inequality cause OTHER problems aswell? If you are from a community with more money, you will have less shitty interactions with the police, you can afford to get better schooling, and you can afford housing that won't kill the majority of people who live with you because it's been shoddily constructed I seriously am struggling to get my head around what you are saying, especially as Esquilax has pointed out - this is an entirely political incident; from the construction and safety regulations to the non-response after the incident, yet you would prefer all political talk be kept strictly about the one accident that has occurred, and ignore the many other similar symptoms? I find that odd.

Forgive me for saying but you seem to have changed from your original greivences, You say 'it is all over the place', yet you are summarising and paraphrasing the collective complains and outcries from a dozen or more people, what would you expect? I am not sure that to voice a legitimate grievance with the status quo, you have to have a well thought out and realistic plan of action to replace it. These people are common civilians, not politicians. People want equality from social change - that is a broad spectrum that covers housing, political voice, policing, jobs, education So when people feel like the above things are unfairly stacked against them, when ONE thing happens out of that group, it makes all of them relevant

As an almost complete segue here, much of what you consider to be your own drive and self determination are in reality just as influenced by your genetics and your upbringing as something like your height. Every decision you or I make has a host of chemical and neural reactions that precede it that we neither understand, nor control. A persons psychological make-up is largely outside of their immediate influence. As much as you may want to try, you cannot account for why the people you speak of are how they are, and why you are not like them. The fact of the matter is, if you had the same genetic makeup, the same parents, the same environment...you would be them. Literally. It's honestly probably more compassionate to realise you are one of the very few people that managed to escape a life of firstly poverty, and secondly mediocrity to do whatever you do, rather than just loathe the people who didn't, because if you didn't have the mental, emotional or environmental resources (all of which are not your choosing), then you wouldn't have done so. It's fair to call a spade a spade, and there are indeed a lot of wastemen and ne'er-do-wells about, but you are coming across as intensely self righteous.

It's odd that you would separate the treatment of poor people inso far as they are given sub-quality, possible illegally constructed housing in order to cut corners. But expect no overspill with regards to the emotions generated by such an incident. This has happened against the wider backdrop of a recent recession, increased minority scapegoating, riots, the rise of the far right, and more and more cuts to social housing, all of which would have been realities for the residents and demographics in question I suspect you will struggle to find a better example of what is wrong with society than corners being cut to provide poor people with substandard and unsafe housing which resulted in their deaths. I don't think there is a more obvious metaphor of class discrimination. So what is the issue with Grenfell becoming symbolic of one of the major issues of our age, and most ages that have preceded it? Again, I have not seen any agenda pushing outside of something like legal and fiscal equality, except the one moron who said it was some sort of false flag / intentional fire to gentrify the area. What agendas being pushed aren't important? Social equality? Financial Equality? Accountability for corporations and government? I sense you begin to get to the fringe when you move past those, so I am not sure who you are fighting against

This is a curiously worded post that seems oddly supportive of trump Saying losers and haters implies some sort of overriding jealousy driving criticism of him, rather than concern that the a boy king has the nuclear codes. From a quick browse of a few threads you seemed to be nagged a lot, but I hope you haven't just become a defacto apologist for the alt-right/nationalist narratives just because there are one or two conspiracy minded black supremacists here

Literally

It's difficult to see any reasons that the team doesn't need to start transitioning now. Either Wenger has too much control, or the staff aren't good enough. There have been numerous ex players (Wright, Adams) who have said theres little to no tactical work done, and it shows, players to go other teams and make huge improvements (i.e. Szezeny) The plan now has to be to stabilise, make plans to bring in a long term successor (i.e. someone with some pedigree that won't be gone after two seasons)

Giroud should really be staying. Offers something that no-one else in the squad does. Lots of rumours he will be a makeweight for Lacazette (MBappe obviously will not happen)

Jim?..

This is silly. Even with Floyds caution, McGregor shouldn't really see the final bell, unless Floyds endurance and punch resistance (he will not need too much) have dipped in the past couple years.

He's under official investigation for obstruction of justice.

Not even close, shocking album.

Meanwhile an orphanage burned to the ground.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO