It's not cause you watch a little girls show, it's not cause you masturbate to horses and you (some) find them sexually attractive... it's shit like this that makes me unable to accept you people



More extreme version of weebs - is how I see it.

I hold the same view about bronies as I do about gays, religion and similar (personal) things. You are, in my eyes, completely fine no matter how weird it is, but that's only as long as you don't take it out in the public and wave with it as if it was your dick.

You can fuck horses, dead mice, sleep with your mother or father, believe in an alien superbeing that created us by jamming feces into a pouch and squeezing it, you can do whatever the fuck is in the boundaries of law no matter how twisted or weird it might be, but the moment you create a fucking parade about it, it's crossing the line.

Comfy Slippers wrote: 4v5r2f

More extreme version of weebs - is how I see it.

bronies are nicer than weebs though

Both weebs and bronies are at fault. Nobody is gonna judge you for liking something unorthodox. Bronies have built these negative stereotypes and it's nobody's fault but theirs.

Railey2 wrote: 6a2u27

This might be an often overlooked fact so im just gonna throw it in here: Every country has no-go zones once it reaches a certain size. Not saying that refugees dont make it worse, because they clearly do, but still. Something to be mindful of.

That goes without saying. But when you have riots, flash mobs, emergency service workers being attacked, that is not normal. Definitely not normal for a Western country. But hey, at least everyone who ignores the issue can pat themselves on the back for not being racists.

B1rd wrote: 4w393k

when you have riots, flash mobs, emergency service workers being attacked, that is not normal. Definitely not normal for a Western country

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_riots

Mr. Perspective over here sure knows what he's talking about

Well there were 2 riots in Sweden in the past 3 years, both caused by immigrants.
As far as I can see, most of the riots in the past 2-3 years have been either in response to or as a result of something relating to Islam.

Aurani wrote: k3n52

Well there were 2 riots in Sweden in the past 3 years, both caused by immigrants.
As far as I can see, most of the riots in the past 2-3 years have been either in response to or as a result of something relating to Islam.

2015: Anti-Muslim Corsican nationalists cause riot

2016: Riots after Somali refugee Omar Mohamed was shot by police as he attempted to assault somebody. Not related to Islam, but he IS a refugee.

2016: Riots in Melbourne due to many pro and anti-islam protesters clashing

2017: Riots in largely immigrant populated suburb of Rinkeby, which has happened twice before. Lots of immigrants of all kinds live in Rinkeby.


So... 2 out of 18 events listed are related to Islam. What are you talking about, Aurani?

Comfy Slippers wrote: 4v5r2f

Both weebs and bronies are at fault. Nobody is gonna judge you for liking something unorthodox. Bronies have built these negative stereotypes and it's nobody's fault but theirs.

I can actually agree with this statement better than what anyone else posts here. I stopped caring about the show after Season 3 was revealed, and was like "Yeah, no, this is getting too cringey." Over the past few years, I've stranded myself further and further away from the brony community, generally because it's too many dumb people who take things way too damn seriously. But you also have people who are bronies, but don't really contribute to anything, and are more into something else in their life, straying furter away from the cancer this community provides. I'm technically not a brony anymore even with the avatar because I haven't been caught up with the show, and I haven't really cared about looking up online on art.

Mahogany wrote: 4pak

Comfy Slippers wrote: 4v5r2f

More extreme version of weebs - is how I see it.

bronies are nicer than weebs though

False, a community has it's share of nice people, unless it's super cringy, like Undertale or FNaF. I've met nicer weebs before, who were much nicer than my brony friends. Go on and defend your silly culture.

I don't know about the dispute of Armenia-Azerbaijan borders. There is a landlocked region in it.
This dispute is still going on today. Yeah no, this is getting too cocky.
7 other districts have been found in the dispute.
I mean there are others including the Doi Lang and the Liancourt Rocks,
but the Kashmir one takes the cake.

DaddyCoolVipper wrote: 4p47

Aurani wrote: k3n52

Well there were 2 riots in Sweden in the past 3 years, both caused by immigrants.
As far as I can see, most of the riots in the past 2-3 years have been either in response to or as a result of something relating to Islam.

2015: Anti-Muslim Corsican nationalists cause riot

2016: Riots after Somali refugee Omar Mohamed was shot by police as he attempted to assault somebody. Not related to Islam, but he IS a refugee.

2016: Riots in Melbourne due to many pro and anti-islam protesters clashing

2017: Riots in largely immigrant populated suburb of Rinkeby, which has happened twice before. Lots of immigrants of all kinds live in Rinkeby.


So... 2 out of 18 events listed are related to Islam. What are you talking about, Aurani?

Let's see:
2013 – Riots in Stockholm, Sweden - Immigrant riot
2013 – Riots in Bangladesh - Islamic-led anti-Hindu riot
2013 – Riots in Turkey (Istanbul) - Anti-authoritarian riot led by those who believe Turkey is becoming increasingly imperialistic
2013 – Riots in Shanshan County - Muslim riot (Uyghurs) against "oppressive" government methods
2013 – Riots in Trappes, - Muslim riot based on an incident

That's 2013 alone (5 out of 11 riots in total that year), and I'm sure if I were to go any further it'd be MUCH more than what you claimed (2)...

I don't mean to interrupt, but you said the past 2-3 years, not 4.

I never said "2-3". I said 3, but fine, if you want I'll make it 2 protests in the last 4 years.
Oh, you were referring to me saying riots in total. Yeah, I'm making that 4 years then, to save confusion.

Yeah I was going by your "2-3 years" claim since it was only 2 out of 18. |:

Even in 2013 alone, that's still a minority that are related to Islam, though. Your original statement was clearly very flawed, and I'm not sure why you said it in the first place, unless you wanted to be dishonest.

I'm sure it's not just 2 out of 18. You're forcing me to actually look up every riot separately, since I know for a fact that it's more.

Please do if you want to, I did that already though and most of the recent rioting has been related to other events, like police shootings and the Trump inaugeration etc


Maybe you're just ing protests and conflating them with riots?

If it's on the list you've linked, it's classified as a riot and not a protest. I'm taking these only off the list you linked here.

3 years would make it 2014, so let's start from there.

2014 – Riots in Mombasa, Kenya after a raid on a mosque by police.
2014 – 2014 unrest in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Bosnian Spring) - Ultra-nationalist riot aimed at overthrowing the government and installing an Islamic-led one

2015 - December: 2015 Corsican protests - Nationalistic anti-muslim protests

February 2016: Riots after the shooting of Abdi Mohamed in Salt Lake City
May–June 2016: A series of violent riots Melbourne, Australia between pro and anti-Islam protesters

February 2017: Rinkeby riots in Sweden - Immigrant riot
2017 French riots: Started with alleged police brutality over an immigrant, later escalated over the rape of a black man and then again over some Chinese guy

So, that's more than 2 riots in the last 3 years. Mind you, if we go just one more year back, that's another 5 riots added.
Overall, I'd say about a third of riots are over something relating to Islam.

Aurani wrote: k3n52

ebruary 2016: Riots after the shooting of Abdi Mohamed in Salt Lake City
February 2017: Rinkeby riots in Sweden - Immigrant riot
2017 French riots: Started with alleged police brutality over an immigrant, later escalated over the rape of a black man and then again over some Chinese guy

None of these are related to Islam, though. Abdi Mohamed was a "minority gets shot" riot, like lots of the ones in America (that's where Black Lives Matter came from, )

The Rinkeby riots certainly aren't Islamic in nature, rather they reflect tensions involving immigrants/refugees in general with the police. Just because many immigrants happen to be Islamic, it doesn't mean the riots are- that'd be like calling a bunch of the American riots "Christian in nature", which is obviously BS

The French riots were about police brutality, not Islam.

I was counting from 2015 since "2015, 2016, 2017" is 3 years, m'dude. Still nowhere near a majority Islamic-related, I think you just made a foolish statement.

2017 is not nearly over for you to claim it should start from 2015. Also, I'm not going to participate in this discussion if you're suddenly going to claim that a riot that clearly relates to some Muslim dude having been molested or that an IMMIGRANT-lead riot (immigrant referring to a muslim-lead one) is not at all relating to Islam.

I get where you're coming from, but these are all definitely Islamic in nature. Even the one where a muslim gets molested is still started because he's muslim, not because he's just a human.

I never said I experienced it through tough thoroughs.
There is a city named after Focko, and it has only a pop. of 104.
The city had to renamed multiple times, here's the list
Vucchingen
Fukching
Fugkhing
and I'll let you guess for the current one.

There have been so many riots because of police brutality (even if that reasoning is or isn't accurate some of the time) that it's very hard to say "This riot only happened because the victim is Muslim", though. Seems like a baseless assumption to me

Also again, immigrants that are Muslim who are rioting =/= "Islamic riot". Most middle-easterners are Muslim in the same way that most Westerners are Christian, but if the riot isn't strictly religious in nature, then it's a mischaracterisation to call it as such.

UltraHenzie wrote: 411z4m

I never said I experienced it through tough thoroughs.
There is a city named after Focko, and it has only a pop. of 104.
The city had to renamed multiple times, here's the list
Vucchingen
Fukching
Fugkhing
and I'll let you guess for the current one.

???

DaddyCoolVipper wrote: 4p47

There have been so many riots because of police brutality (even if that reasoning is or isn't accurate some of the time) that it's very hard to say "This riot only happened because the victim is Muslim", though. Seems like a baseless assumption to me

Also again, immigrants that are Muslim who are rioting =/= "Islamic riot". Most middle-easterners are Muslim in the same way that most Westerners are Christian, but if the riot isn't strictly religious in nature, then it's a mischaracterisation to call it as such.

A nigger gets shot - riots ensue.
Muslim gets shot - riots ensue.
White Christian gets shot by police - completely fine.

That's not a random riot over someone getting shot. It's a riot over a guy of specific colour/religion getting shot. A muslim guy riot is most definitely based on his religion, thus it most definitely links it to Islam.

As for immigrants rioting... what do you think they were rioting about? Not having enough fucking soap? Do you think there were Orthodox people, Catholics, Coptic people, or any immigrants of other religion rioting together with those ones? No? Yeah, it's because they rioted over the police arresting Muslim criminals, making it very much a riot with Islamic ties.

Eh, I see these things as "Minority gets shot" vs "Non-minority gets shot". It's outrage, partially fabricated by the media, and partially rooted in real discrimination against minorities. I wouldn't say it's an issue specific to black people much the same way as I wouldn't say it's an issue specific to Muslims.

When was the last time large-scale riots happened because of a, let's say, Hindu guy getting shot in America? It's very much based on black people being too attached to their slave problems from the past, but Muslims are a different case altogether.
Muslim guy getting shot is not based on some problem in the past; it's them being what they are - animals. No other religion in the world is quite as combustible as Islam is.

It's Fucking.
It's actually the city name.
It's located in Austria.

- in response to johnmedina999's post

Feels awfully short-sighted to label Islam as being the most "combustible" religion. I'm sure that label will move somewhere else with time.

I mean, the middle east in general has had a lot of massive political issues that are completely unrelated in nature to the religion of those living there. I bet if most middle-easterners were Christian, then Christianity would suddenly be "the world's most combustible religion", y'know?

DaddyCoolVipper wrote: 4p47

Feels awfully short-sighted to label Islam as being the most "combustible" religion.

The pot calling the kettle black.
Orthodox Christianity has had massive issues for centuries in the Eastern Europe, yet you don't see an Orthodox dude running into a mall in yelling "CHRIST EMBRACE YOUR BELOVED LAMB" and blowing up the whole place.
Buddhist, Taoist, Confucian, Shinto, Jewish, etc. have ALL been molested and affected by the West for CENTURIES, yet apart from local unrest, there have NEVER been major world-changing terrorism events caused by the people of those religions.

If you believe that Islam is only like this because of what's happening in the Middle East, clearly you've not been awake in your history classes.

Radical Islamic terrorism is only an extremely recent phenomenon in the grand scheme of things, though- happening since the 80's, with a much higher rate after 2001.

Why do you think that is, Aurani? Yes, I genuinely do believe that Islam is only like this because of what's happening in the middle east. Radical Islamic groups have an incredibly powerfully motivating "enemy" to fight against right now (Western imperialism), and the technology now exists to make that "fight" a global one. This wasn't available in the past.

Then you gotta read a thing or two about the things that have happened in India, China, Oceania, Arabia etc before America even existed and the crusades were even launched.

Why weren't there Islamic terror attacks in the 20th century pre-1979?

It sounds like you're referring to wars fought with Islam as the primary motivator, which really isn't that special, let's be real. Holy wars of all kind have been fought and it's generally understood that practising a religion and fighting a war under its banner are not necessarily the same- rather, they provide a motivation for "soldiers" a lot of the time, whereas the real intentions are politically-based rather than religious.

It's because the definition of "terrorism" didn't exist until recently.

Stabbing 5 people to death because they're Hindu and they oppose your Islamic practices is very much terrorism in today's world, but not in the 16th century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_o ... _terrorism

Definitely existed in the 20th century. Modern terrorism has been around for quite a while now (I suspect since communication tech got better, terrorism comes with it), notably from all kinds of sources. Islam doesn't exactly dominate until very recently, like I said.

I'm still standing by the argument that it's short-sighted to label Islam as being anything special when it comes to terrorism- seems like an easy scapegoat for deeper, more complicated explanations.

I said before the 20th century. Name me one reference to terrorism existing in the 10th century or even 12th.*

I still stand by my statement that Islam is the most combustible religion today. No other religion does what they're doing.

*By terrorism I mean something that's not disputed. We can argue that the revolt in Judea against Romans is an act of terrorism, but where does a riot end and terror begins?

DaddyCoolVipper wrote: 4p47

Why weren't there Islamic terror attacks in the 20th century pre-1979?

"Most combustible religion today"? I mean, if you're saying that because so much terrorism is Islamic in nature, then sure. The "today" is very important though- it gives context of time, rather than suggesting that the religion is inherently, always and forever, the most prone to terror attacks.

I'd also argue that it's fairly useless to state such a thing since I consider other factors to be a lot more important than the religion itself, but yeah. I mean, there's a reason why Islamic terrorism is happening a lot specifically nowadays, specifically post-1980 rather than at other times.

Well I mean, if you want clear evidence that Islam is doing SOMETHING wrong:
You claim modern terrorism originated because of the attacks on the Middle East, right?

How does your claim hold up against any other war waged on the soil of different religions, with no visible traces of extreme terror attacks?

There is no wiggling out of that one. You're trapped no matter how you answer, as we both know that they have to be doing something different.

Unfortunately, I'm not very well-read on national politics of various countries, so this isn't exactly my area to talk about.

Religious conflict has been incredibly common in world history, though, be they full-scale wars or massacres, genocides, etc. Terrorism is a pretty recent tactic, and like I said earlier, I assume that's because of how powerful communication has become- it uses the fact that information will spread as a weapon in itself.

What kind of examples are you looking to hear here, though? I know of many religiously-motivated massacres, both of whatever religion as well as between Muslims (a large amount of modern religious conflict is between different Muslims after all). Buddhists have committed massacres and fought in resistance movements, as an example.

I kind of wish I knew more African history just so I could give some good examples here, since that continent has been rife with all kinds of war and such over the last century or so, and unsurprisingly a large factor in that would be things like imperialism.

EYYY CALM DOWN

stfu

3300

Tbh, we can't even argue that most shit stemming from Africa is due to imperialism. When I see what kind of disgusting shit has been going on there, it makes me understand why the black people in murrica are so pissed.
Hika should be murdering people now.

Still not going to.

Had a racist experience a few days ago but I'm still not gonna do it.

You're not the same person I knew 20 years ago. Time to find a new subject.

ColdTooth wrote: 1g2nr

False, a community has it's share of nice people, unless it's super cringy, like Undertale or FNaF. I've met nicer weebs before, who were much nicer than my brony friends. Go on and defend your silly culture.

see you stopped being part of the community and now you're not nice anymore

DaddyCoolVipper wrote: 4p47

3300

Optically discern, now you're just verbalizing. I do not optate you to unearth information regarding the riot but cremate about it.

Seems Cato's Speech finally got shoa'd

I do not understand what do you betoken by "Cato."
But still, I can't regard the GDI for having the Central African Republic being 188th.

DaddyCoolVipper wrote: 4p47

3300

Wow

Another great youtube comment

Yeah lately there have been quite a few copies of that comment on various YT vids.

Nice breakdown/response video about the whole Bill Nye stuff

To weebs

Thank me later

You know you're preaching to the choir when your audience calls Sargon of Akkad and Armored Skeptic conservatives.

What is that shoddily done nail polish?

Meah wrote: f4f5b

To weebs

youre the one with a loli obsession tho ??

B1rd wrote: 4w393k

You know you're preaching to the choir when your audience calls Sargon of Akkad and Armored Skeptic conservatives.

What???

Sargon absolutely is a conservative. He voted for them, for Christ's sake. He's been riding the popularity association of "trying to reform the Left" for a while now, when in reality all that means is that his politics have shifted further right along with global events in general.

As for Armoured Skeptic, he seems a little more progressive than many of the "Skeptic Community". Him and Shoe seem to have been making some nice changes, honestly, they're moving away from the usual hate-based content that the rightwing skeptics got famous from. They build up a MASSIVE conservative viewerbase, you can't deny that. Does that mean they themselves are conservatives? Not necessarily. Does it even matter..?

Counting the days until the YOI movie trailer

RoseusJaeger wrote: x175n

Counting the days until the YOI movie trailer

i wish the movie and S2 would come out tomorrow

DaddyCoolVipper wrote: 4p47

RoseusJaeger wrote: x175n

Counting the days until the YOI movie trailer

i wish the movie and S2 would come out tomorrow

I've never agreed to a statement more in this godforsaken forum more

I wish it never comes out

b1rd irl

B1rd doesn't live in Nashville; at least I don't think he does.

vv

johnmedina999 wrote: 3r3a6s

B1rd doesn't live in Nashville; at least I don't think he does.

Nashville, Australia

Meah wrote: f4f5b

To weebs

Thank me later

Things that Meah says when looking at the mirror.

Aomi wrote: 2q6w66

Meah wrote: f4f5b

To weebs

youre the one with a loli Zain Sugieres (Klocuch12) obsession tho ??

fixed I am not actually limited to lolis, I am open for all kinds of girls

Allmynamestaken wrote: 255g6g

Meah wrote: f4f5b

To weebs

Thank me later

Things that Meah says when looking at the mirror.

yes! specially when I imagine myself as you

BrokenArrow wrote: 6i5o49

stfu

I forgot to quote and say fuck you

In mathematics, an arithmetic progression (AP) or arithmetic sequence is a sequence of numbers such that the difference between the consecutive is constant. For instance, the sequence 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, . . . is an arithmetic progression with common difference of 2.

Hika wrote: 2p2929

I forgot to quote and say fuck you

it's ok I still love you

Meah wrote: f4f5b

I am not actually limited to lolis, I am open for all kinds of girls

>being openly obsessed of a fictional 13-year old girl

Sagiri is trash

Foxtrot wrote: 2l233p

Meah wrote: f4f5b

I am not actually limited to lolis, I am open for all kinds of girls

>being openly obsessed of a fictional 13-year old girl

teehee

Klocuch12 wrote: 6h432u

Sagiri is trash

Zain > Sagiri

i like girls

Madvillain wrote: 2v6e3b

i like girls

Same

RoseusJaeger wrote: x175n

Madvillain wrote: 2v6e3b

i like girls

Same

Madvillain wrote: 2v6e3b

i like girls

haha fucking loser

sara, you're included

Madvillain wrote: 2v6e3b

i like girls

abraker wrote: 6cx2d

i like apache helicopters

I like crushed avocados with milk and sugar

I really enjoy a dish of spaghetti with Bolognese sauce. It is definitely one of my favourite meals.

In fact, I had that for dinner yesterday.

I can't wait for page 3333.

I like chocolates

Foxtrot wrote: 2l233p

>being openly obsessed of a fictional 13-year old girl

Don't post her. You're not worthy of her.

Madvillain wrote: 2v6e3b

sara, you're included

I don't think Sara makes a good girl, genuine opinion

Tbh there was one good girl on this forum and she left it some time ago.

DaddyCoolVipper wrote: 4p47

B1rd wrote: 4w393k

You know you're preaching to the choir when your audience calls Sargon of Akkad and Armored Skeptic conservatives.

What???

Sargon absolutely is a conservative. He voted for them, for Christ's sake. He's been riding the popularity association of "trying to reform the Left" for a while now, when in reality all that means is that his politics have shifted further right along with global events in general.

As for Armoured Skeptic, he seems a little more progressive than many of the "Skeptic Community". Him and Shoe seem to have been making some nice changes, honestly, they're moving away from the usual hate-based content that the rightwing skeptics got famous from. They build up a MASSIVE conservative viewerbase, you can't deny that. Does that mean they themselves are conservatives? Not necessarily. Does it even matter..?

Sargon is definitely not conservative. Just because he doesn't buy into the identity politics, gender nonsense and destructive immigration of the new progressives, doesn't mean he is conservative. He is what a liberal was a decade ago, back when the Left had some semblance of respectability. "Skeptics" like him will go after the lowest hanging fruit of irrationality available, now you progressives kick up a fuss because he's going after your own ideology. It's funny because it's the exact type of people who'd be going after religious conservatives a number of years ago, but as Sargon has pointed out, now it's the Left that is the most destructive fountain of irrationality.

I think I need to go into the [lucky:1337]judicial branch[/lucky:1337],
not blister.
It doesn't impact your life,
nor it doesn't need to be this way.
Anyway to not cheer you up,
do something worthy.

- [lucky:1337]Quartz[/lucky:1337]

Blitzfrog wrote: 2a3s

abraker wrote: 6cx2d

i like apache helicopters

Madvillain wrote: 2v6e3b

i like girls

but do you like like girls?

Aurani wrote: k3n52

Tbh there was one good girl on this forum and she left it some time ago.

UnderminE..?

Wojjan..?

B1rd wrote: 4w393k

Sargon is definitely not conservative. Just because he doesn't buy into the identity politics, gender nonsense and destructive immigration of the new progressives, doesn't mean he is conservative. He is what a liberal was a decade ago, back when the Left had some semblance of respectability. "Skeptics" like him will go after the lowest hanging fruit of irrationality available, now you progressives kick up a fuss because he's going after your own ideology. It's funny because it's the exact type of people who'd be going after religious conservatives a number of years ago, but as Sargon has pointed out, now it's the Left that is the most destructive fountain of irrationality.

You're accurate with some of this, to be fair. The modern "skeptic community" are the ones who generally got popular criticising crazy religious fundamentalists (usually Christians) a few years back, and since then, they have generally transitioned into becoming rightwing or otherwise conservative politics-based channels. One of the funnier transitions would be Stefan Molyneux, who went from "all politics is bad and I refuse to play that game" to becoming a full-fledged Trump Train er who spouts almost nothing but pro-Trump propaganda and batshit insane relationship theory.

I feel like the Internet has changed in really interesting ways over the years.

Also, I don't feel like the Left had more respectability years ago. Back when SJWs were all across the internet, I can absolutely understand people turning away from the political left in general, seeing the kind of slippery slope BS they seemed to be heading down. That was a few years back, though; it's almost as if people simply haven't caught up to reality yet, still fighting the insane feminists and identity-politics madpeople that no longer exist outside of their own heads, and have ended up siding with the kinds of awful people who have actually gotten real political power and influence (i.e. the Presidency) instead of having their influence rather thankfully contained to places like college campuses.

DaddyCoolVipper wrote: 4p47

Aurani wrote: k3n52

Tbh there was one good girl on this forum and she left it some time ago.

UnderminE..?

Wojjan..?

Jazz?

Madvillain wrote: 2v6e3b

sara, you're included

GO AWAY

DaddyCoolVipper wrote: 4p47

Aurani wrote: k3n52

Tbh there was one good girl on this forum and she left it some time ago.

UnderminE..?

Wojjan..?

You'd like to know, wouldn't you. :^)