Donald Trump Jr compares Syrian refugees to a poisoned bowl of Skittles - Polidicks

[QUOTE=karlosfandango;51079976] *irrelevant attempt at humor* Might be NSFW *irrelevant video* [/QUOTE] Would it kill you to post something on topic? I don't see how that does anything other than attempt to derail the conversation and grandstand for attention. Go make a thread in the 'Video & Flash Movies' section if you want to share.

[QUOTE=FreakyMe;51078677][IMG]http://s16.postimg.org/np5rp2qc5/91310041_dd42910b_b182_47a0_a41a_08a6099b68e1.jpg[/IMG] Source: [url]http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37416457?[/url][/QUOTE] I'd gladly eat a handful if the skittles were vetted for 18 months

[QUOTE=FreakyMe;51080059]Would it kill you to post something on topic? I don't see how that does anything other than attempt to derail the conversation and grandstand for attention. Go make a thread in the 'Video & Flash Movies' section if you want to share.[/QUOTE] Lighten up, Trump started the stupidity.

Apparently the man who took the photos of the skittles is a refugee, and didn't give permission for the photo to be used: [url]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37421886[/url] grandest of ironies

[QUOTE=MissZoey;51079234][IMG]https://i.gyazo.com/ddfcc91a5bf50404086f116a810f3e66.png[/IMG] from the BBC[/QUOTE] And where the fuck was the BBC when feminists compared men to poisoned M&Ms? Oh right, they were attacking GamerGate with outright lies about harassing women and being made up entirely of PUAs and Trump voters. [QUOTE=Wii60;51078704]sounds familar to this that popped up a year ago or so [t]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/05/c3/b2/05c3b21fcdd075d709f23f3c292b3d09.jpg[/t] same logic here. horseshoe theroy keeps the world goin round[/QUOTE] And then there's the fact that a feminist analogy attacking men is being used by the US alt-right to attack immigrants... authoritarianism can eat shit.

[QUOTE=FlakAttack;51080242]And where the fuck was the BBC when feminists compared men to poisoned M&Ms? Oh right, they were attacking GamerGate with outright lies about harassing women and being made up entirely of PUAs and Trump voters.[/QUOTE] The BBC don't report on every fucking nobody who makes a picture for the Internet. They're reporting on this one because [I]it was being pushed by the son of a presidential candidate[/I]. This is a completely pointless comparison.

[QUOTE=karlosfandango;51080110]Lighten up, Trump started the stupidity.[/QUOTE] Sorry, but this is the news section. If you'd made a joke even slightly relevant to the article rather than just using the last four words of the title as a prompt to practice your text-based stand-up routine, I might have been a bit more generous in my initial reply: what you posted however had absolutely nothing to do with the article itself. The whole post just smacks of not giving a shit about the subject, which is the potential POTUS's son not being able to comprehend the basic value of human life to such an extent that he compares people fleeing a war-zone to poisoned, cheaply manufactured candy of no nutritional value. It's textbook affluenza, a condition his father has been somehow surviving a terminal case of his entire life. ( See? A relevant, if deadpan funny. ↑ ) If Trump had anything to do with the upbringing of his son, that says a lot about him as well.

Instead of worrying about which skittle was poisoned, I would be worrying about who the fuck poisoned my skittles.

[QUOTE=hexpunK;51080266]The BBC don't report on every fucking nobody who makes a picture for the Internet. They're reporting on this one because [I]it was being pushed by the son of a presidential candidate[/I]. This is a completely pointless comparison.[/QUOTE] Arguably the son of a candidate shouldn't exactly be news either. Exactly how personal are we going to be getting? If I remember right, you were against talking about Clinton's medical history publically, but completely different human beings should be newsworthy simply due to a family relationship?

[QUOTE=MissZoey;51079234][IMG]https://i.gyazo.com/ddfcc91a5bf50404086f116a810f3e66.png[/IMG] from the BBC[/QUOTE] It's funny people talk about dehumanizing the refugees when this is just as dehumanizing to citizens of the US. It turns the argument into a game of well the 1 in 3,640,000,000 person who dies from a terrorist attack is less important than letting in refugees. Moreover, perhaps the reason it's so unlikely to die from a terrorist attack in the US is because the process is so strict in the first place and so few are accepted, relative to the size of the US population. A country's duty is to its citizens first. If you can't protect and provide for your own citizens, you very well shouldn't be trying to help others. Throwing aside your citizens for the benefit of foreigners will end just as well as prioritizing an adopted child over your own; it will, by in large, create resentment. In the short term it may make whomever made the decision feel better, but in the long term it will only create deep issues that cannot easily be resolved.

[QUOTE=FlakAttack;51080358]Arguably the son of a candidate shouldn't exactly be news either. Exactly how personal are we going to be getting? If I remember right, you were against talking about Clinton's medical history publically, but completely different human beings should be newsworthy simply due to a family relationship?[/QUOTE] Hillary developing a medical condition (Pneumonia) that is very treatable in the modern world has less to say about her ability to be a good president than Trump's son's actions and stated beliefs have to say about his. [QUOTE] If Trump had anything to do with the upbringing of his son, this says a lot about him as well.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;51078865] a 10 cent package of candy[/QUOTE] Brb, moving to America.

[QUOTE=FlakAttack;51080358]Arguably the son of a candidate shouldn't exactly be news either. Exactly how personal are we going to be getting? If I remember right, you were against talking about Clinton's medical history publically, but completely different human beings should be newsworthy simply due to a family relationship?[/QUOTE] trump jr is involved with trump's campaign, he's spoken at the rnc and done interviews about his father he's not just some nobody who happens to be trump's kid

[QUOTE=FlakAttack;51080358]Arguably the son of a candidate shouldn't exactly be news either. Exactly how personal are we going to be getting? If I remember right, you were against talking about Clinton's medical history publically, but completely different human beings should be newsworthy simply due to a family relationship?[/QUOTE] Jr runs alongside daddy in the campaign trail, promotes him and is as far as I can find, officially a representative of the campaign. That's not personal, that's a professional tie that means shit he says can easily impact how people perceive the Trump campaign. [editline]20th September 2016[/editline] Shit beaten to it

[QUOTE=FlakAttack;51080358]Arguably the son of a candidate shouldn't exactly be news either. Exactly how personal are we going to be getting? If I remember right, you were against talking about Clinton's medical history publically, but completely different human beings should be newsworthy simply due to a family relationship?[/QUOTE] Trump jr had a major speech at the RNC, he isn't exactly irrelevant to the campaign. And now you're moving the goalposts - first BBC shouldn't comment, since they didn't comment on random nobodies on the internet, but now only Hexpunk's opinion matters. Nice.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51080465]Trump jr had a major speech at the RNC, he isn't exactly irrelevant to the campaign. And now you're moving the goalposts - first BBC shouldn't comment, since they didn't comment on random nobodies on the internet, but now only Hexpunk's opinion matters. Nice.[/QUOTE] Gotta work GG in there as the victims too somehow. Don't forget that. Despite it not being relevant to this discussion at all.

For one thing, the analogy's retarded. You could bring a lot of refugees in - all refugees entering the country are screened. So that eliminates some of your poisoned 'skittles' right there. Secondly, nobody's inviting these refugees into their own homes - the government is responsible for housing them until the war's over. Third, the tiny fraction of screened refugees who end up becoming criminals won't "kill" America. As far as the US's 300 million plus population is concerned, they'll be a mild inconvenience at the very worst. But it's a great demonstration of the sensibilities and intelligence level of the Trump campaign.

If I had the time, I would edit the chocolate skittles commercial to reflect this [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yPaLq1EpQw[/media]

[QUOTE=Coyoteze;51080220]Apparently the man who took the photos of the skittles is a refugee, and didn't give permission for the photo to be used: [url]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37421886[/url] grandest of ironies[/QUOTE] Hah, if that is true that means they didn't even credit the photographer. Unfortunately it'll be difficult going up against a juggernaut with millions of dollars and probably hundreds of lawyers they can throw at you.

You could just as easily apply this to any argument about gun control. Most people who own guns don't shoot people with them, but a few do so we better get rid of all the guns.

[QUOTE=Turnips5;51078681]I have a bowl of skittles. there are two skittles left. you have to elect one of them as president[/QUOTE]so, an orange skittle and a green skittle?

[QUOTE=DaMastez;51080374]It's funny people talk about dehumanizing the refugees when this is just as dehumanizing to citizens of the US. It turns the argument into a game of well the 1 in 3,640,000,000 person who dies from a terrorist attack is less important than letting in refugees.[/QUOTE] Statistics are inherently dehumanizing but the nice thing about statistics is that they paint in accurate picture, unlike Trump Jr's absurd illustration where humans are skittles and the bad skittles are arbitrarily three out of an entirely random amount. It exists so people who already agree can say "really makes you think man wow" before you actually think and realize you are being played. [QUOTE=DaMastez;51080374] A country's duty is to its citizens first.[/QUOTE] No shit? Who disagrees with this?

[QUOTE=-Chief-;51080738]You could just as easily apply this to any argument about gun control. Most people who own guns don't shoot people with them, but a few do so we better get rid of all the guns.[/QUOTE] Conservatives are entirely about double standards though, it's OK for Trump to lie repeatedly but not Hillary etc etc.

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;51079030] quick note on "economic migrants" before this is was asylum seeker or migrant. When heart breaking pcitures emerged and people realised these migrants were actually people a new rhetoric was needed. Economic migrant serves to frame them as lazy, greedy parasites only coming for free stuff.[/QUOTE] Hey hold on there. Migrant and refugee are two different things. Refugees are people escaping the Syrian war, but economic migrants are people who are escaping stable countries, like sudan or nigeria, and coming to germany/sweeden/etc because word got around in north africa that germany was just letting everyone in after merkel made such a big deal out of her open boarders policy, and handing out shit to whoever "needs" it. One is a group of downtrodden people trying to escape war, the others are people who are sprinting towards greener pastures, and taking advantage of unpragmatic policy by Merkel. Some want a better standard of life and want to fight for it, others just want a free welfare ticket. I got a buddy from Nigera who told me about this. And i'm willing to say a ballpark 2/3rds are just after the handouts. This is a genuine problem and saying "it's a narritive by the racists that the syrian refugees are lazy freeloaders" is an outright lie, and doing exactly what you're accusing people of doing. Come on man, don't do that

Trick question. Everyone knows skittles are best eaten by the handful. Trump's just trying to kill everyone in the world.

[QUOTE=Trilby Harlow;51081212]And i'm willing to say a ballpark 2/3rds are just after the handouts. [/QUOTE] On what basis.

I've always liked John Oliver's response to this premise. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_OrYjKERxQ[/media] Starts at 2:15

Why are people confusing Syrian refugees with migrants that came from other countries? Most of the "refugees" right now in Europe aren't even Syrian. Most of them are from lower parts of Middle East or Africa or from Afghanistan/Pakistan.

Statistically speaking, you'd need 45,000 "skittles" in that bowl to have three "poison" ones. Pretty big bowl.

[QUOTE=vrej;51081384]Why are people confusing Syrian refugees with migrants that came from other countries? Most of the "refugees" right now in Europe aren't even Syrian. Most of them are from lower parts of Middle East or Africa or from Afghanistan/Pakistan.[/QUOTE][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/75C57ay.pngp[/IMG] [URL]http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Asylum_quarterly_report[/URL] that's still a lot of syrian refugees, which is what the tweet is specifically referring to