dont ask dont tell is the most FAIR thing for both stand points.
people, you don't have RIGHTS when your in the military. its supposed to be hard for you.. the military doesnt need a bunch of yapping rainbows. it is not illegal to be gay in the military. wtf more do you want? you cant go to the military and then tell them whats right and whts wrong. thats why were the most disciplined military in the world. besides israel
Normal straight parents don't prefer their children to be or become a gay, even for liberal parents. On the other hand there are some parents would or could accept their children who are already gay more in peace than other parents; those are choices parents make. However, their (normal straight parents) preference on what their children to be (gay or straight) is fixed by the nature.
@nonaCbarC are you even american? You type like a foreigner. "fixed by the nature" what nature?"who are gay more in peace than other parents". MAKES NO SENSE.Your overuse of exclamation points and rofl's tell me that you are a very sad and crazy person. You need to calm yourself. Im done talking to you. Its like talking to a 5 year old. You make no sense and you refuse to state a thesis so im just done.
As Mike Gravel once before referred to I think on the 2008 campaign trail, Rome or Troy or one of those major militaries had PLENTY of gayness. In fact, it was ENCOURAGED among the male soldiers. Thebes had the Sacred Band, about 150 gay lovers. Thebes did become, if only for a short time, the most powerful (militarily, anyway) Greek city-state at one point.
@whoo689 And we're supposed to be scared of gays in the military WHY? There were gays before, and there are gays NOW. It hasn't harmed morale or hurt our readiness. There are no conclusive, credible studies that say it does. All these military and Republican anti-gay idiots can muster is bullshit about "let's not use the military for a social agenda" or "Most soldiers will have a hard time serving with gays cuz they're conservative." Oh, please. They're mature enough...hopefully.
the Bush Doctrine was not "pre-emptive" war, but "preventive", in that, he went to war to stop war, which is both insane and illegal. pre-emptive war is legal undert International law so long as you're in actual danger unlike Bush who lied.
It's not gay people the military is worried about per-se... You see you can be gay in the military, just don't talk about the dirty places u stick your tool. The military is just worried that the overt fabulous, limp-wrist types will dampen morale.
In the service you are not entitled to civilian rights and every now and then an instructor might call you a fag to break you down mentally. If you can't handle ridicule about physical/personal traits like everyone else; then stay home.
How could your sexualty matter in the military? Isn't that making the same, stupid argument that blacks can't serve because they're all stupid and Crow-like? We're still fighting for civil rights -.-
If the 'system' would just leave people alone then it dosen't matter where one puts the unit. Whether a person is homosexual is just not one of the important things harming our world. The people making the issue are the problem as they hide their criminal activity behind the "Gay" hobgobblin and scare the ignorant.
i) It's know that well brought up married women don't like to go to see a male Dr (medicine) for certain things, cause they don't feel comfortable other men touching certain parts of their body even for medical purpose. By the same token I can see straight men not feeling good getting examined by gay Dr. These feelings are natural, i.e. it's personal feeling, so straight pp (or ppl in general) ought to not be pressured to accept things.
It's known that well brought up married women don't like to go to see a male Dr (medicine) for certain things, cause they don't feel comfortable other men touching certain parts of their body even for medical purposes.
@nonaCbarC You have mistaken me for someone who cares if a man or women is homosexual or not,... let me ask you, are you a good christian? You present your points like a good christian.
:D I'm not a Church goer nor a Temple goer. I have some religious friends, though. So, perhaps, I can introduce you to them, so you can talk to them about stuff, if you want. :D
ii) A family is from where everybody & society come. Gay is in a lot of aspect anti-family; note that even if a Gay couple adopts a child to form a family, we can't still deny the fact the child came from straight parents, i.e. it's a simple Biology. The foundation of a family is Biology, not religion, school, institution, govt, media, nor propaganda.
We now have medical procedures that allow gay people to have children anyways you dumb fuck (welcome to the 21st century).You compare having to work with an openly gay person in the military to having to have a gay doctor fondle your balls. It just shows that you are so preoccupied with that actual sexual act that it becomes impossible for you to see the big picture.Do you have the right to not have to work with gay people at a publically funded library?NO, then why the military?
"We now have medical procedures that allow gay people to have children"
That is called "Artificiality", not "Biology", if that exists; I don't need that stuff, so never checked it out. LOL. Having a little trouble with Taxonomy, aren't you. LMAO.
"why the military?"
Read my comment first & write you reply. The term "military" can't be found on my comment. LOL. You just enjoy barking around, eh?!! "Bark, Bark,.... !!" Oopse, I ran out dog biscuits, sorry. LMAO. :D
@nonaCbarC yes, you forgot to quote the other half of the sentance where I said its hard to debate with a nonexistent viewpoint. You haven't made any clear thesis therefore it makes it impossible to debate.I would call this interaction more of a lecture bc you are lost.
My trade is Pure Mathematics, so I talk, work, breath, eat, shit, piss, fart, sleep, dream Logic. ROFL Thus, quoting the other part must have been false. ROFL.
@nonaCbarC lol if pure logic is your best asset than it would be easy to prove that only hetero people can have children. Ill be waiting for your proof lol.
There are two ways to define things. One is called 'Axiomatization' (particular to Math, some Phil). The other one is called 'Lexicography' (Natural Sci, everyday terms). The subject which we've been dealing is certainly in Lexicography, i.e. term which defined by preexisting conditions or predominating conditions. Hence, more precisely our subject has been the concepts originated from predominating conditions according to you. LOL.
@nonaCbarC lol are you high dude?Your last comment made no sense and was completely irrelevant. Have you figured out how to prove hetero people are the only ones who can have children?Or are you gunna just spout some more idiot babble to change the subject?
You started with saying, I was wrong. So I asked which part: IR (Individual Right) or BL (Biology); note that my initial comment has only two parts. You came back with 'adoption' argument against 'straight ppl being the foundation of family'. So I said kids are made by straight ppl. And then you came back with SGT (synthetic gay tech) argument along with the hypothesis; world can be composed of ... .
But all the terms we used are defined based on preexisting conditions or predominating conditions (lexicography), e.g. BL, procreation, etc, i.e. your SGT & hypothesis couldn't prove me wrong: IR or BL, since I only use axiomatization or lexicography which are only ways any human being on earth to define anything. So, you are checkmated, i.e. I proved that you couldn't prove me wrong: IR or BL.
@nonaCbarC Yeh I should have figured I was talking to an insane person. "which are only ways any human being on earth to define anything" PSYCHO BABBLE
@nonaCbarC you know you cant debate the issue so you try to distract. You seem very unstable. Anybody reading this conversation knows whats going on right now. Seriously seek mental help. Dude you live in your moms basement and it is incredibly obvious you arent a mathematician. Get a job,a clue, or a spine. When you debate the issues Ill be here.Funny you had to correct yourself.Had trouble copying the first time of wikipedia?lol pathetic.
!!! :D Note that if I copied & pasted, then why do I have to correct myself. LOL. Perhaps, you are suggesting that wiki on that thm is incorrect, since you can't understand it. LMAO.
Also, note that I type what I think or know directly on YT unlike you; your comment has a term, "cant", this suggest me that you write on Word (word processor) first, check syntax, & then copy/paste onto YT. LMAO.
@nonaCbarC btw yes it is true v would be homeomorphic to a 3d sphere. I learned that as a freshman in high school you idiot. Good job copying and pasting right from wikipediA. You have to understand you arent fooling anybody fat person.
So, either you are lying or you are only at most 21, since it was proven, what? 2006 or 2007, i.e. prior to 2006 or 2007 nobody knew it was true. LOL. So, If you are a liar, don't lie. If you are a child, learn more.
BTW, do you understand the propn?? LMAO.
OK, that one was easy, since it's famous so you could find it in stuff like wiki. So, I give you another one:
Propn. There exists a numerable set X such that the set of all condensation points E of X is not perfect.
It's a small result, so stuff like wiki might have it or not. But if it has it, then you are gonna look for it hard. Also, I give you one hint. Since, my comments are written such that one who's craft but not so well disciplined can guess certain answer. ROLF.
In addition, your Ch says that you are 37; I just checked. LMAO. Hence, you are lying. ROFL. Note that 20 yrs ago the proposition was only a conjecture, i.e. nobody knew it was whether it was true. LMAO.
There is another possibility which is that you finished your high when you were 33 or 34. ROFL.
@qualityrkc hahaha looked at your channel! you have the gayest video on earth right on ur channel and you have the nerve to rip on gay people???lol now i see the problem. Self hating homo needs to rip on gay people to feel better about himself. Keep telling yourself you arent gay and gays are evil you psycho religious freak.
Your Ch says 37, you are saying 24, i.e. at least one time you lied. And now I should believe you.
Assuming you are 24, you graduated you high school when you were 20 or 21, then, i.e. you are a Slow Learner. I graduated a high school when I was 14. LMAO.
Also, note that I didn't denied the existence of SGT; I said, I didn't know. So, you can't attack me as if I denied it. :D
I gotta hit the sack, dude. I've done enough explaining today. If ppl read stuff carefully & contemplate, then I don't have to explain fuck all. But, ..... .Well, shit happens.
@nonaCbarC you are a very strange person... I didn't take the time to read what you're actually talking about but what caught my eye is seeing someone saying "NEXT!!!" like 10 times. This is a royal rumble you freaking weirdo.
@nonaCbarC the foundation of a family is biology? im so confused by your logic. My friend is adapted,never met his biological parents, never wants to. Does this mean he does not have a family or that he is anti family bc his parents/siblings are not biological?
Procreation is an intrinsic property of human beings (Biology); of course there are ppl who have physical defects, so they can't make offspring, for this case the subject becomes Medicine. Adopting a child is a personal individual choice. So, you can form a family in this manner. However, adoption requires two parties: ppl who are pursuing an adoption & a child who exists & waits for an adoption, i.e. a child must be there, i.e. straight ppl are foundation of a family.
@nonaCbarC haha you made the same mistake. You still live in the 18th century.The world could be completely composed of gay people and yet we would still be able to have children as long as there were still lesbian women and gay men bc of synthetic biology. Egg and a sperm are the foundation for procreation. Love is the foundation for a family. And sexual preference has nothing to do with either.BOOM.Gotta go to work. How does it feel to be dominated with pure fact.
"The world could be completely composed of gay people and yet we would still be able to have children"
So, is the world composed of gays & children of gays, now?!! LOL How many ppl so far have born through this gay synthetic process of which you are talking?!!! LOL.
You are the one who's living in wrong time & wrong planet, simple man. LMAO.
@nonaCbarC your thesis is "straight people are the foundation of a family bc they are the only ones who can have children". I have already proven a gay woman and a gay man can have a child therefore this conversation is over. Just as I was hoping you stated you lackluster thesis making it incredibly easy to debate you with fact.Consider yourself neutralized. Stop worrying about gay people and worry bout yourself queer.
@DigitalAquarius GITMO - Still open, Torture and Assassination - Still official policy.
Wars - Expanded. Govt. spending - tripled. Bank Bailout - Started by Bush, finished by Obama. The so called "Patriont" Act and warentless wiretapping - Started by Bush, continued by Obama. Threatening new wars in Iran and N. Korea - Obama.
@DigitalAquarius Health Care reform when it started was supposed to have a Public Option, was supposed to regulate for preexisting conditions. We didn't get that because they couldnt get 60 votes. They water it down and still cant get 60 votes so they come up with a method to get the watered down version with less then 60 votes.
If they can pass with less then 60 why didnt they do that for the Public Option?
You did NOT get health care from Obama, you got government mandated
@HeinousOne101 private insurance and that is it. Your enamored Democrats sold out to Big Business Insurance. Instead of them having more competition we now HAVE to buy Big Business's product.
@DigitalAquarius dude the healthcare reform fucking sucks. Who profited most from the recent bill??HEALTHCARE COMPANIES. If you dont believe me then say so and I will prove it to you.
In the Bush Years the admin was about as diabolical for monied as can be. We might not believe it, but Cheney and his Ilk might have made this thing happen in the gulf of Mexico. They blamed some swarthy enemy types for 911, who could not have pulled that off.. If you are going for some kind of order, you don't just fuck stuff up and watch them scurry. This is messed up Repbublican politics and probably their national policy of taking over using this disaster. It's a perfect Cheney move.
@ReliableInsider Who cares for a few nutcakes less getting waterboarded when the whole war (in which people are actually being killed and not simulated) is just going on just like Bush intended?
@ReliableInsider not true. We still use extreme rendition. Wat is the difference between having the cia torture someone or having the cia send someone to saudi arabia to have the saudis torture someone with a cia agent present. Snap out of it, Obama has only continued what bush started. He even ramped up the war in afghanistan. Not what we voted for.
wrong again. I dont know how to send links on yt but just type in obama extreme rendition and read all the articles talking about how he continued this specific policy. On february 9,2009 .The Obama Administration today announced that it would keep the same position as the Bush Administration in the lawsuit Mohamed et al v Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc.
Continuing secrecy about actions taken by the Bush administration is not the same as engaging in extraordinary rendition.
The ACLU isn't accusing Obama of extraordinary rendition. They're accusing him of secrecy.
The Obama administration engages in RENDITION--transferring people from other countries to the U.S. to be interrogated or transferring them from one country to another.
But it does not engage in EXTRAORDINARY rendition, i.e. allowing torture.
The word 'rendition' means 'moving a guy from one country to another'.
The fear always is that turning someone over to the government of another country could lead to mistreatment since we might not be able to monitor effectively what the other government is doing. And yes we would be responsible for anything the other government does.
lol appreciate the article but it doesnt help your argument much when you link me to articles proving what I said was correct. Obama has continued bush's policy of rendition despite railing against it. Obama is a fraud and a liar but that is no surprise to me bc I am aware that the republican party and the democrats are the exact same.
Obama, GOP & DEMS are Fake Wrestling Actors & the CEO of this Stage Show are Banks, Health Insurance, Wall Street, Fed Reserve, War Industry, Israel, AIPAC, PNAC, JINSA, CFR, Rothschild, Rockefeller, Oil Industry & Corporate Lobbyists. WashingtonDC the City of Deception & USA Backstabbing which contains 2 Fascist Neocon Parties who are the Same- 2 Wings of the Corporations, Neocons, Zionists, Bankers, War & Federal Reserve Cabal who owns USA, all USA politics will ever do is Deceive & Betray YOU
obama doctrine = for any big decision: play golf, party with hollywood celebrities, wait 35 days, make 3 speeches, blame bush, make decision when polls look good
dont ask dont tell is the most FAIR thing for both stand points.
people, you don't have RIGHTS when your in the military. its supposed to be hard for you.. the military doesnt need a bunch of yapping rainbows. it is not illegal to be gay in the military. wtf more do you want? you cant go to the military and then tell them whats right and whts wrong. thats why were the most disciplined military in the world. besides israel
sedro32 1 year ago
Normal straight parents don't prefer their children to be or become a gay, even for liberal parents. On the other hand there are some parents would or could accept their children who are already gay more in peace than other parents; those are choices parents make. However, their (normal straight parents) preference on what their children to be (gay or straight) is fixed by the nature.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC are you even american? You type like a foreigner. "fixed by the nature" what nature?"who are gay more in peace than other parents". MAKES NO SENSE.Your overuse of exclamation points and rofl's tell me that you are a very sad and crazy person. You need to calm yourself. Im done talking to you. Its like talking to a 5 year old. You make no sense and you refuse to state a thesis so im just done.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
"are you even american? You type like a foreigner."
Are you a racist?? ROFL.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
war is peace
freedom is slavery...
itoldyounolies 1 year ago
Why not just have all-gay units and issue extra condoms for them?
Seriously, it's not like you have to fully integrate everyone. To be honest, I'm more against women in the military than gays.
LibertaerUeberAlles 1 year ago
As Mike Gravel once before referred to I think on the 2008 campaign trail, Rome or Troy or one of those major militaries had PLENTY of gayness. In fact, it was ENCOURAGED among the male soldiers. Thebes had the Sacred Band, about 150 gay lovers. Thebes did become, if only for a short time, the most powerful (militarily, anyway) Greek city-state at one point.
whoo689 1 year ago
@whoo689 And we're supposed to be scared of gays in the military WHY? There were gays before, and there are gays NOW. It hasn't harmed morale or hurt our readiness. There are no conclusive, credible studies that say it does. All these military and Republican anti-gay idiots can muster is bullshit about "let's not use the military for a social agenda" or "Most soldiers will have a hard time serving with gays cuz they're conservative." Oh, please. They're mature enough...hopefully.
whoo689 1 year ago
why no one even bother to ask for a poll among soldiers
hoangcs 1 year ago
the Bush Doctrine was not "pre-emptive" war, but "preventive", in that, he went to war to stop war, which is both insane and illegal. pre-emptive war is legal undert International law so long as you're in actual danger unlike Bush who lied.
deveousdevil 1 year ago
It's not gay people the military is worried about per-se... You see you can be gay in the military, just don't talk about the dirty places u stick your tool. The military is just worried that the overt fabulous, limp-wrist types will dampen morale.
In the service you are not entitled to civilian rights and every now and then an instructor might call you a fag to break you down mentally. If you can't handle ridicule about physical/personal traits like everyone else; then stay home.
TheHardMoneyMan 1 year ago
How could your sexualty matter in the military? Isn't that making the same, stupid argument that blacks can't serve because they're all stupid and Crow-like? We're still fighting for civil rights -.-
Freethinker94 1 year ago
@Freethinker94 I absolutely agree with you.
motorolarules 1 year ago
How about doing a study on straight people living proudly as straight people in the military... doesnt that sound just as ridiculous... lol
ezze902 1 year ago
He was one TYT!!!!
dude12nothin 1 year ago
newsflash, all of Europe and Israel allow openly gay service... very simple
Craigipedia 1 year ago 2
Fuck an Obama Doctrine, bring the troops home.
DefenceSpeech 1 year ago 2
BARRY SOETORO: enough said.
bigc028282 1 year ago
If the 'system' would just leave people alone then it dosen't matter where one puts the unit. Whether a person is homosexual is just not one of the important things harming our world. The people making the issue are the problem as they hide their criminal activity behind the "Gay" hobgobblin and scare the ignorant.
motorolarules 1 year ago
@motorolarules I
The gay thing isn't trivial.
This is how:
i) It's know that well brought up married women don't like to go to see a male Dr (medicine) for certain things, cause they don't feel comfortable other men touching certain parts of their body even for medical purpose. By the same token I can see straight men not feeling good getting examined by gay Dr. These feelings are natural, i.e. it's personal feeling, so straight pp (or ppl in general) ought to not be pressured to accept things.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC
(correction)
It's known that well brought up married women don't like to go to see a male Dr (medicine) for certain things, cause they don't feel comfortable other men touching certain parts of their body even for medical purposes.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC is a hetero couple that gets married and decide they dont wanna have children and instead they wanna adopt, are they anti family?
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC You have mistaken me for someone who cares if a man or women is homosexual or not,... let me ask you, are you a good christian? You present your points like a good christian.
Glad I'm not drunk typing right now...
motorolarules 1 year ago
@motorolarules
:D I'm not a Church goer nor a Temple goer. I have some religious friends, though. So, perhaps, I can introduce you to them, so you can talk to them about stuff, if you want. :D
Cheers.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@motorolarules II
ii) A family is from where everybody & society come. Gay is in a lot of aspect anti-family; note that even if a Gay couple adopts a child to form a family, we can't still deny the fact the child came from straight parents, i.e. it's a simple Biology. The foundation of a family is Biology, not religion, school, institution, govt, media, nor propaganda.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC lol you are so wrong. Stop trying to justify your bigotry bc u know that is what you are doing.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
!! :D Which part is the wrong part?? The individual right part or the Biology part?!!! LMAO.
"NEXT!!!!"
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
We now have medical procedures that allow gay people to have children anyways you dumb fuck (welcome to the 21st century).You compare having to work with an openly gay person in the military to having to have a gay doctor fondle your balls. It just shows that you are so preoccupied with that actual sexual act that it becomes impossible for you to see the big picture.Do you have the right to not have to work with gay people at a publically funded library?NO, then why the military?
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
LMAO.
"We now have medical procedures that allow gay people to have children"
That is called "Artificiality", not "Biology", if that exists; I don't need that stuff, so never checked it out. LOL. Having a little trouble with Taxonomy, aren't you. LMAO.
"why the military?"
Read my comment first & write you reply. The term "military" can't be found on my comment. LOL. You just enjoy barking around, eh?!! "Bark, Bark,.... !!" Oopse, I ran out dog biscuits, sorry. LMAO. :D
"NEXT!!!"
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC its hard to debate with you bc your views are illogical and very hard to understand,forgive me.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
!!! :D "its hard to debate with you"
i.e. You are a simple man (or a woman). ROFL.
"NEXT!!!"
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC yes, you forgot to quote the other half of the sentance where I said its hard to debate with a nonexistent viewpoint. You haven't made any clear thesis therefore it makes it impossible to debate.I would call this interaction more of a lecture bc you are lost.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
LMAO
My trade is Pure Mathematics, so I talk, work, breath, eat, shit, piss, fart, sleep, dream Logic. ROFL Thus, quoting the other part must have been false. ROFL.
"NEXT!!!!"
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC lol if pure logic is your best asset than it would be easy to prove that only hetero people can have children. Ill be waiting for your proof lol.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
There are two ways to define things. One is called 'Axiomatization' (particular to Math, some Phil). The other one is called 'Lexicography' (Natural Sci, everyday terms). The subject which we've been dealing is certainly in Lexicography, i.e. term which defined by preexisting conditions or predominating conditions. Hence, more precisely our subject has been the concepts originated from predominating conditions according to you. LOL.
Cheers. :D
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC lol are you high dude?Your last comment made no sense and was completely irrelevant. Have you figured out how to prove hetero people are the only ones who can have children?Or are you gunna just spout some more idiot babble to change the subject?
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
LMAO.
Hence, you didn't comprehend my preceding comment. It follows that you are a simple man. ROFL.
:D I will let you have the last words. Please, go ahead. LMAO. :D
Cheers.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC i comprehend what you were saying but I dont understand your point. What is your point?
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc I
You seem genuine this time, so I explain.
You started with saying, I was wrong. So I asked which part: IR (Individual Right) or BL (Biology); note that my initial comment has only two parts. You came back with 'adoption' argument against 'straight ppl being the foundation of family'. So I said kids are made by straight ppl. And then you came back with SGT (synthetic gay tech) argument along with the hypothesis; world can be composed of ... .
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@qualityrkc II
But all the terms we used are defined based on preexisting conditions or predominating conditions (lexicography), e.g. BL, procreation, etc, i.e. your SGT & hypothesis couldn't prove me wrong: IR or BL, since I only use axiomatization or lexicography which are only ways any human being on earth to define anything. So, you are checkmated, i.e. I proved that you couldn't prove me wrong: IR or BL.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC Yeh I should have figured I was talking to an insane person. "which are only ways any human being on earth to define anything" PSYCHO BABBLE
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
!!!:D
Things which you aren't capable of comprehend aren't necessarily false. ROFL.
So, tell me, am I lying?!!! LMAO.
Good bye. :D
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC Yes you are lying.You have been this whole time. Not only to me but to yourself also.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
!!! :DX(1.0X10^9) This is what you are saying;
Things which you can't understand are false. LMAO.
Propn. If a 3D manifold is compact V has no boundary & if V is simply connected, then V is homeomorphic to a 3D sphere.
So, tell me, is the proposition above true??!! LOL.
Stop fumbling around & go back to your jerkin off. LOL.
Actually I will let you have the last words. Please, go ahead, don't be too timid. ROLF.
"NEXT!!!"
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC
(correction)
Propn. If a 3D manifold V is compact, if V has no boundary & simply connected, then V is homeomorphic to a 3D sphere.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC you know you cant debate the issue so you try to distract. You seem very unstable. Anybody reading this conversation knows whats going on right now. Seriously seek mental help. Dude you live in your moms basement and it is incredibly obvious you arent a mathematician. Get a job,a clue, or a spine. When you debate the issues Ill be here.Funny you had to correct yourself.Had trouble copying the first time of wikipedia?lol pathetic.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
!!! :D
BTW our debate about gay thing is long gone finished.
Now we are debating:
Is it true or even reasonable that one claims that things which one couldn't understand are false. LOL.
This is what we have been debating. Since, that's what you claimed.
"NEXT!!!"
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
!!! :D Note that if I copied & pasted, then why do I have to correct myself. LOL. Perhaps, you are suggesting that wiki on that thm is incorrect, since you can't understand it. LMAO.
Also, note that I type what I think or know directly on YT unlike you; your comment has a term, "cant", this suggest me that you write on Word (word processor) first, check syntax, & then copy/paste onto YT. LMAO.
Cheers.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC btw yes it is true v would be homeomorphic to a 3d sphere. I learned that as a freshman in high school you idiot. Good job copying and pasting right from wikipediA. You have to understand you arent fooling anybody fat person.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc I
So, either you are lying or you are only at most 21, since it was proven, what? 2006 or 2007, i.e. prior to 2006 or 2007 nobody knew it was true. LOL. So, If you are a liar, don't lie. If you are a child, learn more.
BTW, do you understand the propn?? LMAO.
OK, that one was easy, since it's famous so you could find it in stuff like wiki. So, I give you another one:
Propn. There exists a numerable set X such that the set of all condensation points E of X is not perfect.
T or F ??
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC
(correction)
Propn. There exists a numerable set X such that the set E of all condensation points of X is not perfect.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@qualityrkc II
It's a small result, so stuff like wiki might have it or not. But if it has it, then you are gonna look for it hard. Also, I give you one hint. Since, my comments are written such that one who's craft but not so well disciplined can guess certain answer. ROLF.
"NEXT!!!"
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC
(correct)
who's crafty but not so well disciplined
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@qualityrkc III
In addition, your Ch says that you are 37; I just checked. LMAO. Hence, you are lying. ROFL. Note that 20 yrs ago the proposition was only a conjecture, i.e. nobody knew it was whether it was true. LMAO.
There is another possibility which is that you finished your high when you were 33 or 34. ROFL.
Good Bye. LOL.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC
(correction)
nobody knew it was whether true or false.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC
(correction)
There is another possibility which is that you finished your high school when you were 33 or 34. ROFL.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC im 24
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc hahaha looked at your channel! you have the gayest video on earth right on ur channel and you have the nerve to rip on gay people???lol now i see the problem. Self hating homo needs to rip on gay people to feel better about himself. Keep telling yourself you arent gay and gays are evil you psycho religious freak.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
"hahaha looked at your channel! you have the gayest video on earth right on ur channel"
Are you a homophob?? ROFL.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
Your Ch says 37, you are saying 24, i.e. at least one time you lied. And now I should believe you.
Assuming you are 24, you graduated you high school when you were 20 or 21, then, i.e. you are a Slow Learner. I graduated a high school when I was 14. LMAO.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@qualityrkc III
Also, note that I didn't denied the existence of SGT; I said, I didn't know. So, you can't attack me as if I denied it. :D
I gotta hit the sack, dude. I've done enough explaining today. If ppl read stuff carefully & contemplate, then I don't have to explain fuck all. But, ..... .Well, shit happens.
Cheers.
Cheers.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC
(correction)
Also, note that I didn't deny the existence of SGT;
'Cheers.' (this should be only once.)
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC you are a very strange person... I didn't take the time to read what you're actually talking about but what caught my eye is seeing someone saying "NEXT!!!" like 10 times. This is a royal rumble you freaking weirdo.
TheHardMoneyMan 1 year ago
@TheHardMoneyMan
:D The eyes of the beholder. :D Furthermore, even if everybody on earth thinks that I'm a weirdo, that's OK. Since, I decided that to be OK. :D
:D Cheers. 10X("NEXT!!!!"). 10X(LOL).
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC I think you are afraid to clearly state your pov bc you are embarrassed by your bigotry.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC you have been dominated
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC "That is called artificial not biology" lol ok so you are saying that artificial insemination is not a synthetic biological process?
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
!! :D
"artificial insemination is not a synthetic biological process?"
At least you are honest in some ways, since you wrote the term "synthetic" there. LOL.
The following is the lexicographical definition of "synthetic": Not natural or genuine; artificial or contrived.
My trade is Pure Mathematics, so I talk, work, breath, eat, shit, piss, fart, sleep, dream Logic. LMAO.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC the foundation of a family is biology? im so confused by your logic. My friend is adapted,never met his biological parents, never wants to. Does this mean he does not have a family or that he is anti family bc his parents/siblings are not biological?
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
Procreation is an intrinsic property of human beings (Biology); of course there are ppl who have physical defects, so they can't make offspring, for this case the subject becomes Medicine. Adopting a child is a personal individual choice. So, you can form a family in this manner. However, adoption requires two parties: ppl who are pursuing an adoption & a child who exists & waits for an adoption, i.e. a child must be there, i.e. straight ppl are foundation of a family.
"NEXT!!!"
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC haha you made the same mistake. You still live in the 18th century.The world could be completely composed of gay people and yet we would still be able to have children as long as there were still lesbian women and gay men bc of synthetic biology. Egg and a sperm are the foundation for procreation. Love is the foundation for a family. And sexual preference has nothing to do with either.BOOM.Gotta go to work. How does it feel to be dominated with pure fact.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
"The world could be completely composed of gay people and yet we would still be able to have children"
So, is the world composed of gays & children of gays, now?!! LOL How many ppl so far have born through this gay synthetic process of which you are talking?!!! LOL.
You are the one who's living in wrong time & wrong planet, simple man. LMAO.
"NEXT!!!"
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC your thesis is "straight people are the foundation of a family bc they are the only ones who can have children". I have already proven a gay woman and a gay man can have a child therefore this conversation is over. Just as I was hoping you stated you lackluster thesis making it incredibly easy to debate you with fact.Consider yourself neutralized. Stop worrying about gay people and worry bout yourself queer.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
!!! :D Read my preceding reply. I already answered this one. :D
"NEXT!!!"
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
Iraq, Afghanistan. Now they want a war in Korea, furthermore they want a war in the US. LMAO. These ppl never know when to stop.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
@nonaCbarC
You forgot Iran.
slumlord2007 1 year ago
@slumlord2007
:D Sorry dude. :D Thank you for reminding me. :D
Cheers, Bro, Sir.
nonaCbarC 1 year ago
Did Dylan do his MSNBC stint and working for TYT on the same day?
ZandRTheFlop 1 year ago
If there is a draft there's going to be a lot more openly gay people in america.
KoschKff 1 year ago
The Obama administration is Bush's THIRD term. Obama follows orders of the ruling elite.
The gay issue is mostly a distraction from real issues.
airborne373 1 year ago
@airborne373 Yeah cause Bush totally passed health care reform.
DigitalAquarius 1 year ago
@DigitalAquarius GITMO - Still open, Torture and Assassination - Still official policy.
Wars - Expanded. Govt. spending - tripled. Bank Bailout - Started by Bush, finished by Obama. The so called "Patriont" Act and warentless wiretapping - Started by Bush, continued by Obama. Threatening new wars in Iran and N. Korea - Obama.
airborne373 1 year ago
@DigitalAquarius Health Care reform when it started was supposed to have a Public Option, was supposed to regulate for preexisting conditions. We didn't get that because they couldnt get 60 votes. They water it down and still cant get 60 votes so they come up with a method to get the watered down version with less then 60 votes.
If they can pass with less then 60 why didnt they do that for the Public Option?
You did NOT get health care from Obama, you got government mandated
HeinousOne101 1 year ago
@HeinousOne101 private insurance and that is it. Your enamored Democrats sold out to Big Business Insurance. Instead of them having more competition we now HAVE to buy Big Business's product.
How can you brag about that?
HeinousOne101 1 year ago
@DigitalAquarius dude the healthcare reform fucking sucks. Who profited most from the recent bill??HEALTHCARE COMPANIES. If you dont believe me then say so and I will prove it to you.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
In the Bush Years the admin was about as diabolical for monied as can be. We might not believe it, but Cheney and his Ilk might have made this thing happen in the gulf of Mexico. They blamed some swarthy enemy types for 911, who could not have pulled that off.. If you are going for some kind of order, you don't just fuck stuff up and watch them scurry. This is messed up Repbublican politics and probably their national policy of taking over using this disaster. It's a perfect Cheney move.
hypnofan35 1 year ago 2
What have we seen so far from obama's new "doctrine" put in action?
1) Troops in Afghanistan trippled!
2) Guantanamo still not closed.
3) An increase in secret military operations throughout the ME, over which neither Congress or the White House has much control.
4) Unmanned aerial vehicles bombing people in nortern pakistan.
Sorry, I'm still looking for the "change we can believe in".
Cocalighto 1 year ago
@Cocalighto
The President has not eliminated terrorism or ended war.
The change is that Bush started torture and Obama ended it.
ReliableInsider 1 year ago
@ReliableInsider Who cares for a few nutcakes less getting waterboarded when the whole war (in which people are actually being killed and not simulated) is just going on just like Bush intended?
Cocalighto 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Cocalighto
Bin Laden and Bush got us into Afghanistan.
Obama wants to start pulling us out in July of 2011.
Which approach to life do you prefer?
ReliableInsider 1 year ago
@ReliableInsider not true. We still use extreme rendition. Wat is the difference between having the cia torture someone or having the cia send someone to saudi arabia to have the saudis torture someone with a cia agent present. Snap out of it, Obama has only continued what bush started. He even ramped up the war in afghanistan. Not what we voted for.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
You mean 'extraordinary rendition', rendering foreign nationals to their home country in order to be tortured.
Do you actually have any examples of this?
This is what Obama stopped doing because he's not a psychopath like Bush.
If we can't make crucial distinctions like that between candidates then we can't have a functioning democracy.
Has Obama's administration been liberal enough for my taste? No. Let's elect a liberal Democrat in 2016.
ReliableInsider 1 year ago
wrong again. I dont know how to send links on yt but just type in obama extreme rendition and read all the articles talking about how he continued this specific policy. On february 9,2009 .The Obama Administration today announced that it would keep the same position as the Bush Administration in the lawsuit Mohamed et al v Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
Continuing secrecy about actions taken by the Bush administration is not the same as engaging in extraordinary rendition.
The ACLU isn't accusing Obama of extraordinary rendition. They're accusing him of secrecy.
The Obama administration engages in RENDITION--transferring people from other countries to the U.S. to be interrogated or transferring them from one country to another.
But it does not engage in EXTRAORDINARY rendition, i.e. allowing torture.
See the difference?
ReliableInsider 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
The word 'rendition' means 'moving a guy from one country to another'.
The fear always is that turning someone over to the government of another country could lead to mistreatment since we might not be able to monitor effectively what the other government is doing. And yes we would be responsible for anything the other government does.
ReliableInsider 1 year ago
@qualityrkc
Here's sort of a middle-of-the-road article on it that gives both sides:
/2009/08/25/us/politics/25rendition.html
That's an article on the New York Times website, so add
the appropriate domain name
at the beginning.
ReliableInsider 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ReliableInsider
i.e.
nytimes . com/2009/08/25/us/politics/25rendition.html
I would just like to say, at this juncture, that the YouTube policy forbidding posting URLs drives me nuts.
ReliableInsider 1 year ago
lol appreciate the article but it doesnt help your argument much when you link me to articles proving what I said was correct. Obama has continued bush's policy of rendition despite railing against it. Obama is a fraud and a liar but that is no surprise to me bc I am aware that the republican party and the democrats are the exact same.
qualityrkc 1 year ago
@Cocalighto Preach it brother.
chillwill120 1 year ago
Obama, GOP & DEMS are Fake Wrestling Actors & the CEO of this Stage Show are Banks, Health Insurance, Wall Street, Fed Reserve, War Industry, Israel, AIPAC, PNAC, JINSA, CFR, Rothschild, Rockefeller, Oil Industry & Corporate Lobbyists. WashingtonDC the City of Deception & USA Backstabbing which contains 2 Fascist Neocon Parties who are the Same- 2 Wings of the Corporations, Neocons, Zionists, Bankers, War & Federal Reserve Cabal who owns USA, all USA politics will ever do is Deceive & Betray YOU
halcyon0830 1 year ago
obama doctrine = for any big decision: play golf, party with hollywood celebrities, wait 35 days, make 3 speeches, blame bush, make decision when polls look good
Roachenator 1 year ago
@Roachenator Would you like some cheese with that whine? =)
jawayetti 1 year ago
@jawayetti -yes and give me a kebab too ahmed
Roachenator 1 year ago
@Roachenator
döner kebap are delicious. I think I'm gonna go get one now :P
KoschKff 1 year ago