Sorry, but in all honesty, your entitlement argument is very unimpressive if you have to brag about YOUR FUCKING PARENTS working themselves up in society. It's literally the definition of entitlement that you get to go to a private school because your parents have fat wallets. If your parents worked themselves up in society they get to make that argument, but you don't until you've actually had some accomplishments in life.

That's a problem which large scale military intervention will not solve. Refugees allegience to ISIS is pure speculation though, imo I'd find it more likely they are fleeing from ISIS.

Not only is that literally false information, but ISIS isn't even a threat to the west. They are losing the war in Syria and Iraq on all fronts. They are losing ground to the Syrian army, Syrian rebel groups, Iraqi army and Kurdish groups, while their own offensives have consistently failed. No need for the west to do a large scale intervention.

Hillary has a strong voter base in the south, but most of the south has already voted by now. It's likely that Sanders will win the majority of the remaining states, especially after his performance in Michigan. The big question is if he can turn his delegate deficit around and win the nomination. He needs some big wins in key states, and not too many losses or close wins in other states.

You are entitled to your opinions and if you worded it that way from the get go I wouldn't have responded. However, this discussion stems from some questionable claims you made before in the thread, where you referred to Clinton as a criminal as if it was general knowledge or concensus, which isn't true:

Not sure why you are using quotation marks, they are literally opinion pieces, not news articles. Whether they have some truth or not, they are still inherently biased and have an agenda, which is why they are posted in the "opinion" section on the news sites.

And no, there is no conspiracy here. It's been pretty public that there are ongoing investigations on Clinton, on the e-mail issues. I just don't think describing her as a criminal is fair, even though she is a dishonest liar (which most politicians are). If you don't want to be challened on calling her out as a criminal then you didn't have to make that statement.

In both of these definitions they are listed as the adjective in the dictionary you linked to, but you used the noun to describe her. The adjective criminal and the noun criminal have entirely different connotations and meanings.

For example,
1. "That guy is a criminal" (noun)
2. "That guy is criminal" (adjective)

Completely different meanings between the statements despite using the same word. The first statement refers to the de facto legal status of someone, as it heavily implies conviction of some sort (your dictionary agrees). The second statement is merely a description of someone's behaviour and is of a more subjective nature. So no, Hillary Clinton is not a criminal, but her behaviour can be described as criminal if you wish. But if you want to call out on people being criminals, you better have something concrete to back it up, that's not opinion pieces.

Hillary isn't a criminal because she hasn't been convicted so far. Innocent until proven guilty.

dd5f would win that category.

EDIT: Can't we have some more creative awards? Like play of the season or something.

think matchmaking needs classlimits. playing more than two of a class is not a valid strat and is not fun to play against.

will g2 suddenly not show up to lan in overwatch too once they realise they won't win

oh wait there are no lans in overwacth nvm

http://i.imgur.com/aFB67hF.jpg

That would involve getting Silentes to LAN, so no.

Merc

Back in 2012 when I was still playing in low divs I used to play against a guy called Jahrein. Four years later I find his stream watching random csgo streams and it turns out he is a big Turkish streamer. He had 14k viewers so I was quite amazed.