45th President of the United States, Donald Trump. Vol 2
Discussion
A good news story for Mr. Trump
Donald Trump's administration has secured the freedom of an Egyptian-US charity worker who was detained for nearly three years in Cairo.
Aya Hijazi, 30, was flown back to the US on Thursday night with her family on a US government jet.
Ms Hijazi, whose charity cared for street children, faced child abuse charges branded false by rights groups.
Disclaimer- could be fake
Donald Trump's administration has secured the freedom of an Egyptian-US charity worker who was detained for nearly three years in Cairo.
Aya Hijazi, 30, was flown back to the US on Thursday night with her family on a US government jet.
Ms Hijazi, whose charity cared for street children, faced child abuse charges branded false by rights groups.
Disclaimer- could be fake
Eric Mc said:
Scherzkeks is just a vacuous waffler.
He cannot form an original thought or form an original and sensible sentence.
On that basis he is not really worth debating with - unless one just likes keeping him busy flicking through his "Boys Book of Right Wing Clichés and Phrases".
Triggered yet again, Eric lashes out in impotence. He cannot form an original thought or form an original and sensible sentence.
On that basis he is not really worth debating with - unless one just likes keeping him busy flicking through his "Boys Book of Right Wing Clichés and Phrases".
Somewhere in China, a sack of rice tips over.
Eric Mc said:
You have a very odd view of what constitutes "lashing out".
And also of what being "triggered" means. It's quite amusing really, he has no idea what the words he uses even mean.I'm getting a bit bored of his snide little posts, using the same misunderstood words over and over again. It's basic trolling in the original sense of the word and I don't know why anyone puts up with it.
p1stonhead said:
Like Inforwars and Zerohedge AMIRITE!
You've got to laugh at people that treat those sources as valid, though.Alex Jones (Infowars) is currently fighting a custody battle for his children, clearly their mother doesn't want them anywhere near him because he is a lunatic.
Jones's response, via his lawyer, is that none of that is true and he's just playing a character.
That's right believers, he's "just playing a character". Straight from the horses mouth, Infowars is full of s
t.boxxob said:
this may be so but it is curious how there's very little reciprocated concern when scherzeks is on the receiving of a stream of snide and pointless attacks, usually from the same once-hatched, batch of frothing posters. Must be all the confirmation bias of the triggered, virtue signalling, killary lovers....
Why do you think he's on the receiving end? It's warranted, he's a conspiracy lunatic.rxtx said:
p1stonhead said:
Like Inforwars and Zerohedge AMIRITE!
You've got to laugh at people that treat those sources as valid, though.Alex Jones (Infowars) is currently fighting a custody battle for his children, clearly their mother doesn't want them anywhere near him because he is a lunatic.
Jones's response, via his lawyer, is that none of that is true and he's just playing a character.
That's right believers, he's "just playing a character". Straight from the horses mouth, Infowars is full of s
t.
My sources of choice are Consortium, McClatchy, Greenwald, and a few others. ZH is great for hard news and hit-or-miss with opinion pieces.
rxtx said:
Eric Mc said:
You have a very odd view of what constitutes "lashing out".
And also of what being "triggered" means. It's quite amusing really, he has no idea what the words he uses even mean.I'm getting a bit bored of his snide little posts, using the same misunderstood words over and over again. It's basic trolling in the original sense of the word and I don't know why anyone puts up with it.
Post a link to me espousing a specific conspiracy theory.
Post a link to me citing Infowars.
(Hint: we have been through this already)
scherzkeks said:
In other words, you are triggered.
Post a link to me espousing a specific conspiracy theory.
Post a link to me citing Infowars.
(Hint: we have been through this already)
^^^ Classic from the "On the spectrum guide to arguing on the internet". Post a link to me espousing a specific conspiracy theory.
Post a link to me citing Infowars.
(Hint: we have been through this already)
"Show me where I used those words. Because if you can't all of your opinions are wrong and I am right about everything".
You've "espoused" 911 truther theories and cited as reliable a nutter who claims that Sandy Hook was faked. And you've equated Infowars to being on a par with mainstream outlets such as CNN and MSNBC.
Run along little sockpuppet. No one's listening any more. You've used up all your credibility here.
Greg66 said:
^^^ Classic from the "On the spectrum guide to arguing on the internet".
"Show me where I used those words. Because if you can't all of your opinions are wrong and I am right about everything".
You've "espoused" 911 truther theories and cited as reliable a nutter who claims that Sandy Hook was faked. And you've equated Infowars to being on a par with mainstream outlets such as CNN and MSNBC.
Run along little sockpuppet. No one's listening any more. You've used up all your credibility here.
Post a link with me espousing a specific conspiracy theory. "Show me where I used those words. Because if you can't all of your opinions are wrong and I am right about everything".
You've "espoused" 911 truther theories and cited as reliable a nutter who claims that Sandy Hook was faked. And you've equated Infowars to being on a par with mainstream outlets such as CNN and MSNBC.
Run along little sockpuppet. No one's listening any more. You've used up all your credibility here.
Post a link with me supporting Infowars.
scherzkeks said:
Greg66 said:
^^^ Classic from the "On the spectrum guide to arguing on the internet".
"Show me where I used those words. Because if you can't all of your opinions are wrong and I am right about everything".
You've "espoused" 911 truther theories and cited as reliable a nutter who claims that Sandy Hook was faked. And you've equated Infowars to being on a par with mainstream outlets such as CNN and MSNBC.
Run along little sockpuppet. No one's listening any more. You've used up all your credibility here.
Post a link with me espousing a specific conspiracy theory. "Show me where I used those words. Because if you can't all of your opinions are wrong and I am right about everything".
You've "espoused" 911 truther theories and cited as reliable a nutter who claims that Sandy Hook was faked. And you've equated Infowars to being on a par with mainstream outlets such as CNN and MSNBC.
Run along little sockpuppet. No one's listening any more. You've used up all your credibility here.
Post a link with me supporting Infowars.
Thank you.
Your concession and gracious climbdown is noted.
Greg66 said:
scherzkeks said:
Greg66 said:
^^^ Classic from the "On the spectrum guide to arguing on the internet".
"Show me where I used those words. Because if you can't all of your opinions are wrong and I am right about everything".
You've "espoused" 911 truther theories and cited as reliable a nutter who claims that Sandy Hook was faked. And you've equated Infowars to being on a par with mainstream outlets such as CNN and MSNBC.
Run along little sockpuppet. No one's listening any more. You've used up all your credibility here.
Post a link with me espousing a specific conspiracy theory. "Show me where I used those words. Because if you can't all of your opinions are wrong and I am right about everything".
You've "espoused" 911 truther theories and cited as reliable a nutter who claims that Sandy Hook was faked. And you've equated Infowars to being on a par with mainstream outlets such as CNN and MSNBC.
Run along little sockpuppet. No one's listening any more. You've used up all your credibility here.
Post a link with me supporting Infowars.
Thank you.
Your concession and gracious climbdown is noted.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff