Triggered: Stories to make you mad.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
I call BS on that. You're probably taking something he said out-of-context as lefties have a tendency to do so often.

He did, but it was a mistake. It was not an example of "oh shit Tim exposed his true beliefs and then quickly edited it". Only someone ignorant or acting in bad faith would believe that was the case.

It was, of course, an unfortunate mistake because weasels will indeed try to use it to say he is pro Hitler, but ah well...when used it is a sign that person has nothing else to offer up.

Trigger warning, Tim Pool video:

Women's March FINALLY Ousts Linda Sarsour, Bernie Must Regret Bringing Her Onto His Campaign

YouTube video

Originally posted by Dr Will Hatch
Didn't Tim Pool call Hitler a hero during one of his videos and then shamelessly edit it out?

So my prediction it'd be used when one has nothing else to offer has come true. Nice. Anyways, lol:

NYT News Department, Washington Post Turned Down Kavanaugh 'Scoop' Over Lack Of Evidence

Funny, Tim Pool hasn't had to make as nearly as many corrections as the NYT 🙂

Trigger warning Tim Pool video:

Christian Artists Win Appeal, Will NOT Have To Make LGBT Wedding Invitations

YouTube video

👆

Religion should repent rather than play the gollum.

Originally posted by Wonder Man
Religion should repent rather than play the gollum.

Doorknobs are the entryways to our quarterly reports for chicken pot pie.

So Justin Trudeau was caught wearing brownface in a photo from 2001.

Since comedians should be fired from mediocre comedy shows over saying something racist surely the left will be asking Mr. Trudeau to resign.

Giggle.

https://arktimes.com/arkansas-blog/2019/09/03/a-coachs-reported-disapproval-of-dreadlocks-stirs-a-fuss-at-ua-fort-smith

Consider me conflicted.

Did the coach deserve everything he had coming to him? I'd say yes. He had no business dictating hair style.

The thing that conflicts me, is this justified backlash only seems to have taken root on the basis of race. I realize it's common parlance for racists to say "Blacks have special rights that whites don't", but in this case I really do think the coach has no busimsss telling ANY student to cut their hair, but that there would be no action against him has he not attacked a student who could file a discrimination lawsuit on the basis of race.

That's a bit of a problem, when the only effective defense against such a man is to be capable of leveraging anti discrimination laws.

Originally posted by cdtm
https://arktimes.com/arkansas-blog/2019/09/03/a-coachs-reported-disapproval-of-dreadlocks-stirs-a-fuss-at-ua-fort-smith

Consider me conflicted.

Did the coach deserve everything he had coming to him? I'd say yes. He had no business dictating hair style.

The thing that conflicts me, is this justified backlash only seems to have taken root on the basis of race. I realize it's common parlance for racists to say "Blacks have special rights that whites don't", but in this case I really do think the coach has no busimsss telling ANY student to cut their hair, but that there would be no action against him has he not attacked a student who could file a discrimination lawsuit on the basis of race.

That's a bit of a problem, when the only effective defense against such a man is to be capable of leveraging anti discrimination laws.

There's a legit reason why football coaches do not want players with dreadlocks and they should be cut:

https://trudreadz.com/2018/09/08/nfl-dreadlock-tackles-should-the-hair-tackling-rule-be-revised/

Hair Tackles are permitted in the NFL and the NFL debated making a rule against long hair and dreadlocks so that the nameplates and jersey numbers would not be obstructed from view while playing. They ultimately did not go through with the ruling.

But hair-pulling tackles are still allowed in the NFL since 2003.

Also, the NCAA does not prohibit hair-pull tackles. So hair tackles do not count as illegal tackles and they do not count as a horse-collar tackle, as well.

The coach is right to tell his players to make their hair short especially for offensive leaders who will get the ball quite often.

It should read, "I don't care about your preferred hairstyle. You're not models. You're physical performers. Keep your hair completely inside your helmet at all times. No exceptions."

Originally posted by Dr Will Hatch
Didn't Tim Pool call Hitler a hero during one of his videos and then shamelessly edit it out?

LoL, wouldn't surprise me.

Originally posted by Surtur
As you can see in the clip, he referred to him as a hero, but not on purpose it was a dumb slip. I'm glad people like you are smart enough to recognize he isn't truly pro Hitler, and instead stick to valid criticisms instead of clinging to such lunacy simply because you have no valid response 👆

^ and of course the Poolites come in with the excuses whenever Timmy is caught being Alt/Far-Right, never fails. 'But, but, but it was just a slip of the tongue!'

PS, that's call a Freudian Slip.

YW

The 3 r's
Religion.
Everyone should pick up a good book and find their place.

Originally posted by Robtard
^ and of course the Poolites come in with the excuses whenever Timmy is caught being Alt/Far-Right, never fails. 'But, but, but it was just a slip of the tongue!'

PS, that's call a Freudian Slip.

YW

You're trying so hard. Shall I give props for the effort?

Originally posted by Surtur
You're trying so hard. Shall I give props for the effort?

Tim Pool literally referred to Hitler as a "World War II hero". So it's you who is literally trying hard to spin that into something else.

"I don't think Trump is literally the reincarnation of a certain [Hitler] War World II hero. I can't say his name, youtube." -Tim Pool (before he edited it out like a coward)

I don't need to spin it. If you'd like to present additional materials that show it revealed some hidden inner truth and it wasn't just a slip, knock yourself out 👆

It's not up to me to prove Pool meant what he literally said with his own mouth and words. That's not how the burden of proof works, sporto.

He said it, if you want to claim he meant something different, that's on you.

Originally posted by dadudemon
There's a legit reason why football coaches do not want players with dreadlocks and they should be cut:

https://trudreadz.com/2018/09/08/nfl-dreadlock-tackles-should-the-hair-tackling-rule-be-revised/

Hair Tackles are permitted in the NFL and the NFL debated making a rule against long hair and dreadlocks so that the nameplates and jersey numbers would not be obstructed from view while playing. They ultimately did not go through with the ruling.

But hair-pulling tackles are still allowed in the NFL since 2003.

Also, the NCAA does not prohibit hair-pull tackles. So hair tackles do not count as illegal tackles and they do not count as a horse-collar tackle, as well.

The coach is right to tell his players to make their hair short especially for offensive leaders who will get the ball quite often.

It should read, "I don't care about your preferred hairstyle. You're not models. You're physical performers. Keep your hair completely inside your helmet at all times. No exceptions."

This is basketball, though.

And I seem to remember reading a cap, or pinbacks, being options.

Originally posted by Robtard
It's not up to me to prove Pool meant what he literally said with his own mouth and words. That's not how the burden of proof works, sporto.

He said it, if you want to claim he meant something different, that's on you.

In other words, you can't provide any additional examples. Thought so.

Originally posted by Surtur
In other words, you can't provide any additional examples. Thought so.

Since you do realize the burden is on you to prove that Pool meant something different than what he literally said, you're doing flips again. /noted

"I don't think Trump is literally the reincarnation of a certain [Hitler] War World II hero. I can't say his name, youtube." -Tim Pool (before he edited it out like a coward)