Something the Mainstream Media Won't Tell You

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

Putting good news about Trump on A2K brings out all the regular dregs of humanity. They could have read it and moved on, but instead took the time to repeatedly insult Brandon and downplay the news.

Do the replies on the thread actually shock anyone though? There are certainly no surprises... You get the typical "What about Palestine?" drivel. You get the usual pitter patter of "orange man bad" and TDS.

I've mostly given up on this place until something new happens. There is nothing to be gained by coming here except disappointment these days. I might come back when Trump wins though just to taste the tears.

Yeah, but you were all for A2K when bashing Obama was the rage with you all.

Try looking in the mirror.

1 Reply

@engineer,

engineer wrote:

...You might feel they deserve more attention but I doubt you could say they were treated unfairly by a biased press.

I don't agree at all. I was really thinking about the most well known newspapers and TV news shows. Let me give a specific example. I have not investigated the treatment of this one, particular story, but I strongly suspect that if I watched all of the major TV evening news coverage over the period when these three peace deals and the four Nobel nominations happened, they would report it very little, and make it sound praiseworthy or important very little. If you want to prove your point, show me TV nightly news coverage of these specific events from any of the following news organizations: CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, or MSNBC.

2 Replies

@Brandon9000,

You have yet to explain why you think having four people out of thousands nominate the American president for a Nobel Peace Prize is a big deal.

This is a participation trophy.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

You have yet to explain why you think having four people out of thousands nominate the American president for a Nobel Peace Prize is a big deal.

This is a participation trophy.

Arafat and Obama have one. It is the prize that is no big deal.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Quote:

izzythepush wrote:

He supports the NRA an armed group of paedophiles dedicated to killing children.

Nonsense. Which group are you talking about? Provide evidence that this statement is true at all.

Quote:

izzythepush wrote:

He boasted about sticking his fingers up the vagina of a fourteen year old girl.

He did not. What the hell are you talking about? Provide a link to him doing this.

Quote:

izzythepush wrote:

Trump supported the Nazi proud boys.

God, this is like talking to children. Provide evidence that he supports the Proud Boys and evidence that they're Nazis.

Notice how these mentally deranged leftists literally never, ever back up their nutjob claims with actual evidence.

And then when you call them out on it, and demand proof, they accuse you of being the screwed up one@!

Don't you get it? The left truly believes that they can say whatever the hell they want, and that just magically makes it true!

Sure! The NRA are pedos, sure. Why not?

Trump is a Nazi and he fingered a 14 year old, sure. Whatever, why not?

The sky is orange and orange man bad!

0 Replies

@coldjoint,

Winning the Nobel Prize is a big deal.
Receiving a nomination for a Nobel Prize... not so much. Thousands of people receive nominations (including probably Hillary Clinton).

I can't imagine that you are actually confused about this.

(For the record... I agree with you that Obama's Peace Prize was completely ridiculous.)

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

Winning the Nobel Prize is a big deal.

I gave my opinion and do not care what you think. It was cheapened for political reasons. It is a globalist dog biscuit.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Quote:

(For the record... I agree with you that Obama's Peace Prize was completely ridiculous.)

Can you admit that he got it simply for being a black president?

Why do you think that affirmative action exits?

Can you see max, how being black is actually easier than being white, because things are handed to you just because of that?

2 Replies

@FreedomEyeLove,

I agree with you that Obama's Nobel Peace Prize was ridiculous (and that he got it for being the first Black president in history).

I disagree with you that being Black is easier than being White. I look around and see White people in general are wealthier, more educated with more resources than Black people. Black people are more likely to be in prison.

Unless you believe that White people are superior to Black people, the only explanation is that things are easier for White people

(If you do believe that White people are superior to Black people... you should say so directly).

1 Reply

@coldjoint,

coldjoint wrote:

Quote:
Winning the Nobel Prize is a big deal.

I gave my opinion and do not care what you think. It was cheapened for political reasons. It is a globalist dog biscuit.

Brandon started this thread because he thinks Trump should get a "participation trophy" because 4 people nominated him for the Nobel Peace Prize.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

I agree with you that Obama's Nobel Peace Prize was ridiculous (and that he got it for being the first Black president in history).

So you admit that being born with a certain skin color isn't an accomplishment or a refinable skill. So why then should companies be forced to hire X amount of people of a certain skin color or gender at the exclusion of better qualified applicants? Why should colleges do the same?

Quote:

I look around and see White people in general are wealthier, more educated with more resources than Black people.

Why should white people be faulted for working harder and following the rules? Why should they be faulted for having a stronger moral compass?

Quote:

Black people are more likely to be in prison.

Black people also commit more crimes. One tends to go hand in hand with the other.

Quote:

Unless you believe that White people are superior to Black people

I do not. I believe that blacks have fallen prey to the social disease known as liberalism (aka Marxism). I believe that blacks are good people.

Quote:

the only explanation is that things are easier for White people

Whites have it much harder than blacks in America, because much more is expected of them, and whites are not allowed to play the victim.

Quote:

Unless you believe that White people are superior to Black people

I do not. I believe that people are individuals, and that identity politics is a bunch of garbage.

Quote:

the only explanation is that things are easier for White people

This is 100% false. Whites have it much harder than blacks in America.

Quote:

(If you do believe that White people are superior to Black people... you should say so directly).

I do not believe that. I believe that unfortunately most blacks have swallowed the communist lies of the left. That doesn't mean I believe that black people are inferior (I do not.)

1 Reply

@FreedomEyeLove,

Quote:

Can you admit that he got it simply for being a black president?

I don't believe that's why he received the prize. Nor do I believe he deserved the prize. But the Nobel Committee didn't care that he was the first black president, that's strictly a U.S. thing. No, he got the prize because he wasn't George W. Bush. Bush had invaded Iraq under false pretenses and much of the world was opposed to the U.S. effort in that country. When Obama got in and started talking about international cooperation again instead of unilateral militarism the Committee felt he deserved to be recognized.

Wikipedia wrote:

Jagland said "We have not given the prize for what may happen in the future. We are awarding Obama for what he has done in the past year. And we are hoping this may contribute a little bit for what he is trying to do," noting that he hoped the award would assist Obama's foreign policy efforts. Jagland said the committee was influenced by a speech Obama gave about Islam in Cairo in June 2009, the president's efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation and climate change, and Obama's support for using established international bodies such as the United Nations to pursue foreign policy goals. The New York Times reported that Jagland shrugged off the question of whether "the committee feared being labeled naïve for accepting a young politician's promises at face value", stating that "no one could deny that 'the international climate' had suddenly improved, and that Mr. Obama was the main reason... We want to embrace the message that he stands for."

1 Reply

@hightor,

The Norwegian (sic!) Nobel Committee selects the recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize each year.

The committee decides independently and by majority vote, its members are not subject to any external regulations, meetings are not recorded in minutes; even in the event of disputed decisions, the members are not subject to any obligation to justify themselves.
But I have more than only serious doubts that the members selected someone just because of being a black president in the USA.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

The Norwegian (sic!) Nobel Committee selects the recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize each year.

The committee decides independently and by majority vote, its members are not subject to any external regulations, meetings are not recorded in minutes; even in the event of disputed decisions, the members are not subject to any obligation to justify themselves.
But I have more than only serious doubts that the members selected someone just because of being a black president in the USA.

How can you reason with people who think black people are advantaged over whites in this country?

1 Reply

@snood,

Quote:

How can you reason with people who think black people are advantaged over whites in this country?

That's a great point.

So it puzzles me why so many of you continue to try.

1 Reply

@eurocelticyankee,

eurocelticyankee wrote:

Quote:
How can you reason with people who think black people are advantaged over whites in this country?

That's a great point.

So it puzzles me why so many of you continue to try.

What’s the alternative?

1 Reply

@FreedomEyeLove,

Quote:

Why should white people be faulted for working harder and following the rules? Why should they be faulted for having a stronger moral compass?

This is the basic problem FreedomeEyeLove. Your political ideology is based on the believe that White people have a "stronger moral compass".

This is the definition of White Supremacy... that White people have easier, wealthier lives because they are superior to Black people.

My belief is that our society is basically unfair, and that it favors White people. There are factual reasons for this belief.

1. In the United States, starting from the end of slavery, there were laws and practices specifically designed to keep Black people out of power. Legally enforced segregation was ended (not that long ago). You can trace the effect of these laws up until today.

2. We have a racially segregated society. Resources like jobs and education are based on where you live. And where you live is based on the color of your skin.

3. Americans still judge people based only on the color of their skin. There are scientific studies showing that even in the 21st century, the color of your skin can determine if you get a good loan, or an apartment or a job.

4. This is science... you can test for racism. You simply get a Black couple and a White couple and give them the exact same resume or credit history. Then you send them in for a mortgage, or a job etc. It is easy to show that direct racism (denying someone an apartment based only on the color of their skin) still happens.

The belief that White people have a superior "moral compass" is White Supremacy.... and it doesn't match with the actual facts.

2 Replies

@snood,

Ignore them.

Because all you're doing is feeding them the attention they're looking for.

Can you imagine what would happen if everybody ignored the fanatics for a week or so, let them rant and rave among themselves.

I'd say they'd soon get tired of it.

I'd just like to add I've no problems with moderate Republicans who don't go along with all the bat-**** crazy stuff that the fanatics come up with.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

I do watch a lot of news and have seen the coverage including in depth analysis, but honestly I'm not willing to search and link to all the reports because you are not willing to test your own hypothesis. Just Google it.

I think others have noted this but the bar for who can nominate someone for the Nobel Peace Prize is very low. The President could just have several of his folks in Congress do it if he wanted to. Actually winning is the accomplishment.

1 Reply

@engineer,

Quote:

Just Google it.

Google search is biased against Trump or any right leaning person or think tank. It would be easier for you to back up what you claim. It is pretty clear that you cannot.

1 Reply

Something the Mainstream Media Won't Tell You

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know