Justice

To answer these questions one must first understand why Islam was brought to the world in the first place. Jesus didn't fight back and he was "crucified" for it. You're saying Islam needs to be reformed. Well that isn't gonna happen and that is the reason why Islam is here today, because other faiths reformed.

Sure you can. Both sides lie.

I agree. It's refreshing to see a guy follow through with his promises. He can save himself the trouble by choosing his words more carefully, though.

This presidency is too much to stay retired. I'm sure you guys are pissed I'm back, but I can't resist. This is some made for tv entertainment right here. You want to talk about the media's portrayal of Trump, but what about how Donald and his administration have portrayed themselves? 1. He hastily rushed out a sloppily done EO on a Muslim ban. He calls it a Muslim ban and at the same time says it isn't. 2. They referred to a terrorist attack in Atlanta on at least three different occasions. 3. KellyAnn Conway said there was a massacre in Bowling Green. 4. He insinuated there was a terrorist attack in Sweden. Whether he did that on purpose or not is irrelevant. 5. He had numerous opportunities to condemn antisemitism. He finally did, but he should've done it a while ago. Especially when asked about it by that Jewish journalist. 6. He spoke about himself at the CIA headquarters. 7. He falsely claimed he had the biggest inauguration turnout. 8. He falsely claimed he had the biggest victory in election history since Reagan. 9. He refuses to condemn Russia for interfering in the election. 10. He mishandled Flynn's situation, by taking too long to fire him. 11. He said he doesn't watch the fake news and at the same time he said he watches them all the time. All this in one month. If he's being portrayed negatively by the media it's deservedly so.

Clay is doing the right thing. To those of you that think he won't be missed you're wrong. His blocking at the TE position is elite. Also, he gets open. It's not his fault his QB doesn't throw it to him. You gotta feel bad for Whaley and Rex, though. Especially Whaley. Our medical room always stays full and now this. Must be hard fielding a team week in and week out around here. One guy comes back and we lose 2 or 3 more.

What? Nobody keeping watch at the hospital? Nobody standing guard at the airport? Lol. How many of you sick individuals looked up all the flights going to the Bay Area today?

Tough assignment going against B. Albert in his first ever NFL action.

Ok. I'm a liar. You got me. He schooled me. So long, fellas. I'm done here. Can't take being called a liar or deal with this level of stupidity. Cancel my account. I'm done. I've never been welcome here. Never will be. It's useless. Ban me for life please. Signing off. -justice out

Dude. This has nothing to do with you saying I was defending an idea I already said was a bad one. Let me ask you this. If you admit you had a bad idea and then someone goes back and questions you on something you said before you admitted it was a bad idea then wouldn't you explain your stance on the matter from that time???????? And oh yeah. You were real supportive of the idea. You loved it. [heavy sarcasm]. In order to call someone a liar you'd have to know intent. In this case I don't recall you saying it's possible. I was too busy hearing you dog the hell out of the idea. See!??? See I respond to everything you say but you ignore my points. Those are the actions of someone that's lying. I was obviously speaking in the past-tense, but you just ignored it when I called you out on it. You left that part out on purpose. Then you brought it back and tried to twist it after I called you out on it. "I said" is clear proof was speaking in past terms.

Really? Kicking my ass? Jeez. I guess you guys are incapable of seeing the truth. Facts 1. I admitted to it being a bad idea. 2. I changed subjects 3. I responded to Greg's response from something I said at 6:15 4. I used the word "said" in my reply to him two times proving I was speaking from my opinion at that time (6:15). 5. I went an hour without bringing up that topic. I only brought it up when he brought it back up. I know you guys are just egging me on. I'm done with it. Think what you want. I don't care.

Sad. Pathetic. I went through great lengths to prove to you you're wrong but yet here you are calling me a liar. I guess you don't know what said means.

I've reached my limit. Please. Pretty please. Stfu.

Hey, Greg, you see that word, "said". I used it twice. Past tense, buddy, meaning I'm explaining myself from before the "gotcha. Bad idea". That whole paragraph is in context and a reply to your stupid ass, unnecessary remark about $100,000,000 being used to install trackers on all guns already made and sold, when I clearly said install the trackers on all guns made from here on out. I only brought it up again because I was responding to YOU. I'll take courses in physics if you take them in English. Reading comprehension isn't your strong-suit.

Quit calling me dishonest. I have some of the most unpopular opinions on the board and that's evidence of my honesty. Why don't you try going back and reading all the posts from when I first brought up the idea. Then hopefully your reading comprehension skills kick in and you'll see how things really went down. Keep it in context and pay attention to who and what I'm replying to.

Don't tell Greg Focker that. It's impossible and always will be.

After I said "bad idea" at 6:43 you should've let it go, but noooooo, you had to dig up a quote from 6:15. It's you that's being untruthful, not me. I tried to change subjects until you brought it back up. Once you brought it back up I was explaining my thought process that I used during THAT TIME before I said, "bad idea". Duh.

You certainly are helpless. I admit to a bad idea and I'm the untruthful one? Then you take one line out of what I said without showing the rest and what I was responding to and I'm the dishonest one? Please.

I admitted it was a bad idea but you kept badgering me on it. I asked about house arrest monitors.

Once again. I'm not a leftist. I want to monitor guns. Not the person. Btw. Your idea sucks ass. More guns? Lmao. See Australia.

No thanks. I started that idea by asking those that know more if it's even possible, but if you want to keep reminding me how much I don't know go right ahead if it makes you feel better.

I never said add trackers to already existing guns. I said from here on out. How often do you see a gun from 100 years ago? Eventually all guns will be equipped with it.

But it's not a tracking device though?

I don't want to beat a dead horse but how does that technology work that keeps people on house arrest and why can't people disable it? I can go either direction depending on the subject.

Gotcha. Bad idea.

Getting pulled over by chance is different than my idea. If it prevents one shooting it's worth doing. You have a better idea? What makes you think I lean left?