Posts made by Frederick

@obras62:

@Frederick:

@dist:

It's a free service. You don't like it? Get out. People seem to forget they are grown and should take responsibility for their own decisions. If you make your life public online and want to be a part of that community, you need to deal with the good and the bad. I deleted mine years ago. Not because of whatever agenda people think they may have. I just was fed up with idiotic selfies and generic food pics.

It  is NOT a free service… it is ad generated.. and they also sell your information to whomever will pay for it, such as the government, marketers, or investigators.   Have you never noticed that often when you purchase something, you mysteriously are inundated with ads related to that purchase?  That is because mega companies such as Facebook are allowed to collect your "cookies" AND used them!   This issue arose in the USA a couple of weeks ago.  Only a very few companies are allowed to actually sell your information.. and Facebook is one of them.

Facebook is what it is.
If you don't like it don't use it; it is as simple as that.

It's the same concept for products, movies, TV shows, etc.; if you don't like it nor want to support it, then don't.

BTW, it is not only Facebook that sells your information.
Google collects massive amounts of information on each and every user, whether you're using Chrome of Google search or other Aps.
If you get points at your grocery store then you too are being tracked and sold.

Here is the page to look at and edit your FaceBook information

www.facebook.com/ads/preferences/edit/
You can clean it out but remember every Like puts more information into this file.

As for Google search you can use another search engine like DuckDuckGo that doesn't collect nor sell your information (Ok DuckDuckGo doesn't show you 15,000,000 sites for what you're looking for but you can find what you're looking for.)

Go here to help get rid of targeted ads in your browser, it's like a do not call list.
http://optout.aboutads.info/#/

Just remember, nothing is free, someone needs to pay for the services and that usually is the user.

Facebook is what it is alright.. and one of these days. they will get sued by someone who knows how to hit them where it hurts.. and their bubble will burst.  In fact, that day might come this year.

@raphjd:

Why do liberals find it so hard to tell the truth?!

A user reported me for calling him a "faggot nigger" in a post.   He went on to demand that I get banned from the site.   He forgot that the post he claims this happened in is still there.   I guess he was hoping that a mod would see his report and just ban me.    He's never posted before, so how would I even know who the fuck he is to call him that?!

Another user has been claiming that I have been targeting him, yet he's still here posting.   If I was targeting him, I must suck at it considering I could  ban him and be done with it.

"Mouldylocks" the female antifa rioter who got punched at Berkley, told countless lies in the interview she did on TV.   She tweeted that she was going to the protest to commit acts of violence.   She was putting M-80s into wine bottles and throwing them at the "nazis".

We have that elementary school teacher who teaches her students "by any means necessary".   On Tucker Carlson, she said that nothing was taboo.  She said that lies and violence were good things to use against "the enemy".

CNN, Don Lemon, Simone Sanders, etc refused to call the Chicago kidnapping a hate crime, even after the 4 blacks admitted it was a hate crime and they were charged with hate crimes.

Feminists routinely claim that 1/3rd (or 1/4th or 1/5th) of all women will be raped in their life time.  Gloria Alred made this claim on the Donahue show back in the 90s and she still maintains it as "truth".   This number seems to come from the highly pathetic CDC study, as well as other places, that counted "attempted unwanted kiss" and "he said he was rich to get me to sleep with him" as rape/sexual assault.

Don "Sour" Lemon is the epitome of fake news and bias.  He is gay himself.. which is regrettable!   Send him to the straight people!  
Gloria Allred has made a career out of hating men and wearing crimson red dresses.  While I don't doubt that 1/3 of women claim to have been raped… just how many of those were actual rapes?   I don't consider someone having sex.. deciding that it was a rape 3 weeks later because the guy dumped her and didn't call her back.  "He used me!  Wahhh!"

You better watch it Raphjd!  I don't remember who the mod of the forums is... but if that guy reports you to him, you could be BANNED from the site!!!  Maybe you should give yourself a spanking!
!
if that doesn't work.. remove the three X's
wwwX.youtubeX.comX/watch?v=qCUUw2PRxh0

!
If that doesn't work.. removes the three X's
wwwX.youtubeX.comX/watch?v=GZY0SdiNzfw

@raphjd:

Virtually all social media outlets are cucks to SJWs and identity politics.

Experiments have been done on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, where they make exactly post/tweet/video; 1 anti white and 1 anti black.

In each of the experiments, the anti white one as allowed to stay, but the anti black one was removed and the account was deleted.

The Facebook/Twitter posts simply said; "fuck white people" and "fuck black people".

You can find ISIS beheading people on Facebook, but don't dare say anything bad about it.

Once again.. I agree 100% with Raphjd.  Why?  Because he is CORRECT!  Libtards dwell on fantasies and opinions..  people like Raphjd and myself stick to the facts and reality.  I would add another example to what Raphjd said.  If a white person says 'nigger', they get severely punished, ostracized, and attacked.  Consider such people as detective Mark Fuhrman (whom I hate), Paula Deen, and former comedian Michael Richards.  On the other hand.. black people use that word all the time.. and also attack white people by calling them "honky", "cracker", "redneck", etc.  and get away with it!  Nobody dared attack Sheik Barack Obama (other than Putin calling him a monkey), but there is an endless parade of libtards attacking Trump.

@dist:

It's a free service. You don't like it? Get out. People seem to forget they are grown and should take responsibility for their own decisions. If you make your life public online and want to be a part of that community, you need to deal with the good and the bad. I deleted mine years ago. Not because of whatever agenda people think they may have. I just was fed up with idiotic selfies and generic food pics.

It  is NOT a free service… it is ad generated.. and they also sell your information to whomever will pay for it, such as the government, marketers, or investigators.  Have you never noticed that often when you purchase something, you mysteriously are inundated with ads related to that purchase?  That is because mega companies such as Facebook are allowed to collect your "cookies" AND used them!  This issue arose in the USA a couple of weeks ago.  Only a very few companies are allowed to actually sell your information.. and Facebook is one of them.

@unpleased:

Have a look here: https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms

That's a very interesting page.  I liked this part most of all:
"You own all of the content and information you post on Facebook"

They don't follow their own policies.
I know quite a bit about law.. in fact, more than most lawyers and judges do.  Judges are unsuccessful lawyers.  Lawyers are usually in it for the money, and don't care about justice.  All they care about is winning.

Anyway.. if any part of a legal document is unlawful / contrary to established laws.. the entire document is invalid.  That certainly applies to that page you referred me to. 
Also, that agreement / contract is nothing I ever agreed to.. nor did you.. nor did over 99% of the users of Facebook.. because they never READ it..  to be valid, a contract has to be read, witnessed, notarized, etc. 
Finally.. many other social networking platforms have come and gone into oblivious.. such as MySpace, AOL, ICQ.  Facebook can't survive if they lose the trust, confidence, and support of their users.  Even if they are on rock solid ground legally.. that doesn't mean diddly squat, because at some point, their users will revolt.. and something else will replace them.  There is ALREADY a russian clone of Facebook called. VK.COM    In fact, now that I think of it… I am going to start using my VK account and encourage all 500 people in my facebook group to do the same. 
As you can see from most of the posts in this thread... Facebook has more enemies than friends.

@gaypraha2:

you forgot to add in your pool" never had and never will have facebook account".
Also Facebook US blocks all account supporting Marine Lepen.. so… yeah.. they are indeed crazy fuck  ;D

That does not surprise me at all.
The philosophy of Facebook is "Freedom Of Speech"  (as long as we agree with it)

I've had several accounts nuked, with no warning, and no explanation.
Sometimes they ask for facial recognition of friends, or photo ID, name, birthday, phone numbers, (even social security numbers which is illegal).  Even when I give them what they want, they STILL don't reinstate my accounts.

YouTube behaves in a similar way.

@mhorndisk:

Are you ok with Hillary supporting such a racist woman as Margaret Sanger who promoted Eugenics, claiming that black people were weeds that need to be exterminated? Yes, or No.

No.
I had a facebook account permanently disabled because I posted something very similar about Hillary Clinton.
Perhaps the moron who disabled my FB account thought I was making it up, when in fact it is true.

There is a never ending debate about abortion. 
One problem with that debate is defining the parameters of abortion.

Some people consider any type of birth control to be a mortal sin, against god's will.
Some people are OK with contraception, but are against "day AFTER pills"
Some people are OK with abortion up until a certain time after conception.
But then there is Hillary Clinton, who ENTHUSIASTICALLY and vigorously fights for
tax-payer subsidized, guilt-free, on demand abortions.. up until the very day of DELIVERY!
Hillary supports partial birth abortions, in which the arms and legs and body are removed
from the mother.. but the head is INTENTIONALLY left inside.  Then they reach in with very
long scissors, penetrate the base of the neck, and snip the brain stem - killing the baby, then
removing the head.  If they removed the head from the mother before killing the baby, it
would be considered murder, and forbidden.  Anybody who supports what Hillary does, is
a monster.  It is not possible that most of the people that voted for Hillary are aware of
what she supports - even though she confirmed her position on abortion in the 3rd and
final debate. 
I bet there is not one person in this forum who would support partial birth abortions.

@mhorndisk:

The brain starts developing after 5 weeks.

While that is true, about 50% of people's brains never fully develop.  Those people are called "Liberals".

The only way you will ever see Oprah run is if she's chasing after an ice cream truck.

@jbo1:

@oliverqueen3:

Regardless of your political leanings or feelings toward Clinton, she was the most "qualified" person to have run in the 2016 election.

Clinton was definitely the most qualified candidate, but at the end of the day, what matters is the candidate's ideas and platform, not qualification. If you base your vote on qualification as opposed to ideas, then ordinary people will never hold these high elected positions. This is the kind of elitist/born into privilege mentality that has driven away some old school/labour movement types from the Democratic Party.

I don't think you meant to say that Clinton was most "qualified".  I think you meant to  say that she was most "experienced".  She has spent her lifetime in politics.  If she had won, she would finish off destroying what Obama missed.  I think it is disgusting that a huge part of her platform was "government subsidized, guilt-free abortions on demand.. even up until the day of delivery".  Even the supporters of that goal should be horrified that it would comprise a major part of her platform.  Abortion is bad.  Perhaps not as bad as giving birth to a child that nobody can or will take care of, but it is bad nonetheless.  It's nothing to be proud or supportive of.  Anybody in favor of abortion rights should do so with great REGRET.  Hillary was far too enthusiastic about it.  You won't believe this.. but one of Hillary's biggest supporters was this crazy woman who said she wished she had gotten pregnant so she could exercise her right to have an abortion!  How sick is that?

@Dene:

Anyone got Porn Actors that you think they look good in pics but they look bad in film/porn? Or the way they act/have sex is just blerch to you?

For me its Topher Di Maggio - I don't know why but there is something about him that turns me off

I would have to say Cody Cummings.  For YEARS, I and many other people were eager for Cody to have sex with a guy instead of just bi stuff and blowjobs.  Cody looks great… but.. when he finally went "gay" it was a massive disappointment.

To me, looks are not as important as camera angles and whether the performer is enjoying himself. 
It annoys me when the performer's face is not in view for extended periods of time. 
Far too often, the performers look like they are bored and just going through the motions to get it over with. 
Surprisingly, "Straight" (gay for pay only) performers seem to enjoy themselves or at least ACT as if they are enjoying themselves more than gay performers.  I remember many years ago, there was a live webcam site that had daily male duos.  On one performance, the bottom was laying on his stomach with the top laying on top screwing him.. and while this is going on, the bottom was reading a book!!!!!!!

@brianboru72:

Hmm, Interesting. For me it's not so much a turn-off as there just seems to be a spark lacking in general from the actual performances, even though they look great in stills.

I can't single anyone out- I will more use a studio like Staxus for the most part as an example. Also some scenes from Helix. I love the stills and they have some hot models, and the teasers they release look great. But the sex itself feels mechanical- like it's something they need to get done, and there is something that makes them unable to connect with their partner.   

You pick on Staxus, Helix, and Trump. 
I think if we ever met, it would be like matter meeting anti-matter and the universe would implode.

Dare I ask.. what studios you DO like?

@MikeChang:

A "Ceremony/Joining" Religious or Not is required to become married this is the legal part as you call it.  There isn't always a need to obtain a marriage license, these are only required under certain circumstances.

The term / institution of marriage was adopted by the church and not invented/created by it, therefore they cannot enforce any of their doctrines other than within the church.  While Catholics may have their own ideas of marriage they have no legal standing.

As for the child issue neither a husband or wife has any legal obligation to take on the responsibility of their new partners children unless they legally adopt or take on legal guardianship of said child.  An example of this is when the biological parent dies their spouse does not automatically gain/take over legal responsibility for the child, who can be taken into care, handed to a member of the deceased's family such as a grandparent or even handed to the other biological parent.

I think you are correct about all of that, with the possible exception of the responsibility for the children.  I have seen cases where the non-biological father was forced to pay child support even without adopting.

@vaylon:

Depending on where you live? That will determine what a marriage is.
Being married in the USA is diff from being married in the mid east , UK or Russia.

Here in the United states it changes from state to state. Some states require a ceremony of some kind. While others just require the paperwork.

Marriage here in the states is more of a legal contract than a religious symbol. By being married, it gives people legal responsibility for the other person and their affairs and property.
For example.
Say two people live together for 30 years and then one passes away.
If they were married? then all property and assets as well as liabilities transfer to the spouse.
But!
If they never legalized their union? After the death of one spouse, that spouse's family can come in and lay claim to everything in that person's name. Straight or gay.

Like I mentioned, it all depends on where you live.

I'm pretty sure you are correct.  It's bizarre how a marriage in one state has vastly different consequences than in another state.  It can have a massive effect on who get's what in a divorce.

People have been able to have civil unions for quite a long time.  I'm not sure how that compares to gay marriage.

In a "traditional" marriage, I think that once the legal part of obtaining a marriage license is obtained, two people are legally married.  A religious ceremony nor any ceremony is necessary.. which blows the plots for so many TV shows and movies….  (correct me if I am wrong).

Also, I'm pretty sure that according to Catholic doctrine, the only valid marriage is one that results in procreation.  So, if someone is unable to produce children, or even if they do not decide to have children.. the marriage is considered null and void.  That probably is applied in the reverse perspective in that the Catholics don't consider a marriage to be binding until a child is produced.. which makes some sense.  Certainly once a child is produced.. the parents need to be held responsible and liable for caring for the child.

Another weird aspect of marriage and children is.. even if a child is not the biological child of a man... but the man acts as the child's father, that man is legally obligated to care for that child as if it were his own.  That sometimes comes up when a man finds out that a child is not his biological child.. but is STILL legally responsible for raising that child.

I'm not 100% sure of any of the above.. but please do a little research before disputing me about it.  Laws and religion are mercurial things... arbitrary and ambiguous if you will...

@raphjd:

I guess nobody remember's the infamous Coke commercial against the Vietnam war.    It was about peace, harmony and love.

If that commercial played today, the SJWs would have it removed as well.

I was thinking about that commercial (apple trees, turtledoves, etc.)
One could argue that what defeated the American Indians was not guns, but booze.  American Indians are extremely susceptible to the effects and addiction of alcohol.  Once the Europeans began supplying them with booze, and showing them how to make it.. that spelled the doom for American Indians.  Likewise in Vietnam.. the drug use was out of control.  Readily available marijuana / hashish, opium / heroin, etc.  not to mention a very high rate of suicides and fragging (killing off one's own officers to avoid conflicts).  So much for peace and harmony!

@raphjd:

It's your side that keeps the "not our president" and "yeah, but if Hillary won" crap going.

There are still teachers/professors calling the election an act of terrorism/violence on the people of the US.

You guys are just as bad as the Tea Party wanting the country to fail to prove Obama was bad.

With Obama.. even though I despised him, I never hoped for the country to fail.  I dreaded how much damage Obama would do and whether the country could ever recover from it.  During the 8 year regime of Obama, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that Obama promised to end within the first year of his presidency are still going on.  ISIS was born and has thrived.  Terrorism has spread all over the world.  The debt went from $10 trillion to nearly $20 trillion. 
One reason Trump got elected is because there were enough people that realized that the USA could not endure another 4 years of the misguided policies of liberals like Obama.  The single biggest issue that boosted Hillary to nearly winning the election was her vow to make  taxpayer funded, guilt-free abortions, on-demand.. even up until the day of delivery.  Hillary must be very proud!  Evil Bitch!

@raphjd:

@royalcrown89:

The overwhelming majority of raphjd's opinions are wholly irrational based on wild generalizations. He uses the same exact examples to back up many different arguments, such as some situation where black students made white students walk through a creek or something and BLM protesters interrupting a Bernie Sanders rally. He uses very, very rare instances to generalize whole populations of people; hence, why I consider 95-98% of what he says to be wholly irrational. That's basically the best response you can give to him on here because once you try to bring rationality into the argument, he deflects. He's often deflected to arguments that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic, which is why this thread (that he started by the way) was about the Pepsi ad and you're now arguing about domestic violence, feminism (he hates women with a passion), and gay bashing. I just use the typical 95-98% irrationality statement with him because it's basically the only response you can give to almost anything he says. Very rarely he'll make sense, but most of the time it's like trying to have a discussion with a real life Archie Bunker minus the occasional sympathy.

LOl, so says the person that screams RACISM any time a white person disagree with black people no matter the topic.  You are just another anti-white racist who is guilty of the dictionary fallacy, so you can claim that you can't be a racist.

I pointed out 2 proven lies by a Congressman, so I am racist in your eyes.    His being a liar has nothing to do with me or racism.

You are a liar and you know it.    I hate  feminism, not women and equality.     I have pointed out a countless examples of ways feminists fight against equality.   The only thing people like you have to refute my points is "you're irrational".   People like you have your religion, but haven't actually read your bible so you are clueless to the facts.

As for the topic shift, go back and read the thread, without your usual white hating racist lenses, and see that it shifted by itself.

I get attacked similarly.  Like you, I often point out actual examples to substantiate my comments.  In return, I get accused of being irrational, delusional, etc… yet they offer nothing credible to dispute my assertions.

I feel compelled to add something to your comments regarding people of a certain race.  When i was living on campus at a University, there was one fraternity comprised of people of one particular race.  If they ever had a fraternity comprised of exclusively white members, there would be lawsuits and a riot!  Anyway, this one fraternity was unlike any other in that they forced their pledges to undergo severe hazing and public humiliation.  Everytime that fraternity had a party, you heard about it because someone was always getting raped or shot.