Title: Brother, beware of white girls who look like this Source:
underprivilegedJournalism URL Source:http://underprivilegedjournalism.wordpress.com/ Published:Aug 18, 2008 Author:underprivilegedJournalism Post Date:2008-08-18 09:22:44 by Jethro Tull Keywords:None Views:1657 Comments:166
Poster Comment:
I see, black on white rape is the fault of the white girl....
Interesting website, who put it up and why? Do you know? I am curious. It is either very good dis-infermation by Storm Fronter types, or people as ignorant, malicious and shallow as them but come from the other side of the hating spectrum as far as race goes.
It is amazing what some people put up on the Internet.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
You know, we're a nation of statistics, but we fail to keep records of black rape on white women. Or better said, we keep the records but shield them from public view for fear of offending the rapists.
Tell the truth now, under your diapers and bed sheet robe, you are basically an animal lover like Neal Horsley here. ;-D
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
The site anchoring the thread is beyond belief stupid, extremist and not worth the light of day. But of course, racist filth in here grab that baton and run with it.
I don't give a shit if you don't like the fact that does not sit well with me.
Got it?
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
If your Dad had jerked off into a napkin instead of your mom to make you, the world would of been better off.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Their website is hilarious. Most of it is something about blacks using their melanin to channel energy through their pineal gland and zapping their enemies with it. I wonder if "Pastor" Wright believes in this stuff.
Rube Pup fuckin and Turtle engaged in some male bonding after a day of posting on the vanilla Storm Front site on the web, freedom4um.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
I see, black on white rape is the fault of the white girl....
The Illuminati and The Council on Foreign Relations
"...."We must realize that our party's most powerful weapon is racial-tension. ..... the "Council on Foreign Relations;" the new name under which the Illuminati [operates]...conspiracy by which the Illuminati planned to use wars and revolutions to bring about the establishment of a one-world government....
K.J.A.V. Ezekiel 33:6 But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take [any] person from among them, he is taken away in his inequity; but his blood will I require at the watchman's hand.
Because of the corruption of Christ's teachings by the so-called Christian religions, things have never changed. It was the predecessors of the Illuminati in the Sanhedrin that had Jesus the Nazarite, the revolutionary, crucified. What have you done about it? What do you intend to do about it?"
Zec 14:2 For I will gather all nations against JerUSAlem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
And his feet shall stand in that day upon the {c} mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst of it toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great {d} valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
(c) By this manner of speech the Prophet shows God's power and care over his Church, and how he will as it were by a miracle save it.
(d) So that out of all the parts of the world, they will see Jerusalem, which was before his with this mountain: and this he means of the spiritual Jerusalem the Church......"
"...as long as there..remain active enemies of the Christian church, we may hope to become Master of the World...the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before Christianity is overthrown - B'nai B'rith speechhttp://www.biblebelievers.org.au/luther.htm / http://bible.cc/psalms/83-4.htm
Is Plan For Racial Strife Another Hoax? By Henry Makow PhD 6-14-8
Wikipedia will tell you that the book "A Racial Program for the 20th Century" (1912) is another anti-Semitic hoax. It says the book and author Israel Cohen didn't exist.
The reason for this lie? This book contains a famous passage that reveals the Illuminati-Communist race strategy, later applied to women and other minorities in the guise of "feminism" and "diversity":
"We must realize that our party's most powerful weapon is racial tensions. By propounding into the consciousness of the dark races that for centuries they have been oppressed by whites, we can mold them to the program of the Communist Party. In America we will aim for subtle victory. While inflaming the Negro minority against the whites, we will endeavor to instill in the whites a guilt complex for their exploitation of the Negroes. We will aid the Negroes to rise in prominence in every walk of life, in the professions and in the world of sports and entertainment. With this prestige, the Negro will be able to intermarry with the whites and begin a process which will deliver America to our cause."
Rep. Thomas Abernathy read this passage into the Congressional Record on June 7, 1957 (Vol. 103, p. 8559, top of page.) Wikipedia tells you Abernathy read the quotation in a Letter to the Editor of the "Washington Star," and the newspaper subsequently determined it was a hoax and apologized. "The quotation has retained some popularity among racists and anti-Semites to this day," Wikipedia chortles .
I have subsequently added this line to the Wiki entry: "However, the author fits the description of Israel Cohen (1879-1961) a prolific Zionist author who wrote the Foreword to Israel Zangwill's 'The Schnorrer' as well as 30 other books. Like many purported 'hoaxes,' the quotations does describe events as they subsequently unfolded and the operations of the US Communist Party." (http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp/ArticleDisplay.php? Article=FinalWarn04)
MYRON FAGAN
"International" Jews, like other globalists, serve the Rothschilds' sick megalomaniac program of world government dictatorship. "National" Jews, like other patriots, owe their first loyalty to their country and fellow citizens. Like Benjamin Freedman , Myron Fagan (1887-1972) was one of the latter, a courageous American who fought the bankers' Communist agenda for the greater part of his life.
Myron Fagan, a successful Broadway playwright and director, met Israel Cohen, Israel Zangwill and George Bernard Shaw at a party to celebrate the opening of Zangwill's play "The Melting Pot" in 1910. He knew the three men to be founders of the Fabian Society. Cohen told Fagan he was planning to write "A Racial Program for the 20th Century" as a "humanitarian" follow up to "The Melting Pot." At the time, Fagan didn't realize that the play, which described how Jews and Blacks triumph against White prejudice, was pure propaganda, part of the Communist campaign of fostering "guilt" in white Liberals described above.
It all fell into place in 1957 when Fagan read the "Washington Star" quotation in the context of the debate over school desegregation. In 1966, he recalled:
"That book was published in 1913 ... the NAACP and the ADL were created [by the bankers] almost simultaneously to carry out those directives. That was more than a half-century ago. Can there be any doubt that that was intended to launch our present Negro upheaval for a Black Revolution?
"If that isn't enough evidence, in 1935, the Communist Party's 'Workers Library Publishers' issued a pamphlet entitled 'THE NEGROES IN A SOVIET AMERICA.' It urged the Negroes to rise up, especially in the South, and form a Soviet State in the South, and apply for admission into the Soviet Union ... it contained implicit assurance that the 'revolt' would be supported by all American Reds, and on page 38 it promised that a Soviet government would confer greater benefits on Negroes than on Whites and that 'Any act of discrimination or prejudice against a Negro will become a crime under the Revolutionary law ...
" ... When Abernathy published that Israel Cohen excerpt in the Congressional Record, we (Cinema Educational Guild, Inc.) promptly issued a 'News-Bulletin' in which we published the entire story -- and warned of the coming Negro uprisings...
"Two years went by and nobody even tried to deny the matter, but, suddenly, after two years, during which the ADL and similar groups had ferreted out ALL copies of the book and destroyed them, they announced that the whole thing was a fraud, that there never had been such a book, or an 'Israel Cohen' ... Why did they wait two years? And how could they deny the existence of a writer named Israel Cohen in the face of all the books he had written? Copies of which I have. More important, bear in mind that Israel Cohen had been a prime mover in all 'Fabian Socialist' and Communist movements in England -- also that I had met him in person when he actually discussed the book at that banquet."
(Fagan, "UN is Spawn of the Illuminati," 1966)
IMPLICATIONS
1. Communism and Zionism are Rothschild proxies: two pincers in the banker's plan for world government dictatorship, currently masquerading as "globalization."
2. Through Communism and Zionism, the Rothschilds duped many Jews into advancing their demented plan to enslave humanity. Happily the majority of Jews are not duped. They are either indifferent or opposed to world government and war.
3. The promotion of women and minorities is part of an agenda to undermine the European heterosexual Christian character of Western society. So is mass immigration and interracial marriage. Most of what passes for modern culture (TV, movies, literature, punditry etc.) and politics are propaganda and social engineering. For example, opprobrium for "sexism" and "racism" are actually designed to undermine gender and race.
4. "Guilt" is a huge weapon for them. Women were taught they were "oppressed "for centuries by virtue of having to raise their children while men performed hard labor and died in battle. Similarly the Illuminati have used guilt to give their Zionist and Communist agents immunity. The charge of "anti-Semitism" is a canard designed to disarm opposition to an evil and all pervasive occult power that holds mankind in its thrall.
5. Another "hoax" --the "Protocols of Zion" states "We shall erase from the memory of men all facts of previous centuries which are undesirable to us, and leave only those which depict all the errors of the government of the goyim." (16-4) We'll never know how many other books the bankers suppressed like /"A Racial Program for the Twentieth Century."
CONCLUSION
I believe people should be promoted on the basis of merit, not race or gender. But let's not pretend the bankers really care about women, homosexuals or minorities. As the above quotation implies, they are just a means to an end.
Western society has been subverted by a satanic cult, Kabalistic Freemasonry, led by the central bankers. (Zionism and Communism are both branches of Freemasonry.) Their pyramid and Eye of Horus are on the US dollar and on corporate logos everywhere. To reach the top, you must literally serve the devil (or his disciples.) After instigating 9-11, they are using the "war on terror" as a pretext to erect a police state.
On June 12, the Irish people temporarily stalled the advance of world government tyranny. Nevertheless, a Satanic Dispensation --the New World Order--has risen in our midst. We must find new ways to expose and resist it.
---
Watch this 8-minute You Tube http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=ji6wLInmuX4&feature=related and hear Fagan describe how the bankers created the "Civil Rights" Movement.
On line books By Myron Fagan http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupname? key=Fagan%2C%20Myron%20C
See also my "Communist Takeover Began Long Ago" http://www.henrymakow.com/000843.html
and "Red Rose Parks-Fabricating an American Icon" http://www.savethemales.ca/001228.html
Henry Makow Ph.D. is the author of "Cruel Hoax: Feminism and the New World Order." (www.cruelhoax.ca) His articles can be found at his web site www.henrymakow.com He enjoys receiving your comments, some of which he posts on his site using first names only. hmakow@gmail.com
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Actually, even the right hates the genocide you allude to. Get it right, it's a fascist v. constitutional republic conflict.
Don't do it unless you do it right you say? Who the fuck are you to call for genocide if you are not a fascist?
You are such a loser.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
".....Western society has been subverted by a satanic cult, Kabalistic Freemasonry, led by the central bankers......"
"....We have founded many secret associations, which all work for our purpose, under our orders and our direction. We have made it an honor, a great honor, for the Gentiles to join us in our organizations (such as Masonry), which are, thanks to our gold, flourishing now more than ever. Yet it remains our secret that those Gentiles who betray their own and most precious interests, by joining us in our plot, should never know that those associations are of our creation, and that they serve our purpose. One of the many triumphs of our Freemasonry is that those Gentiles who become members of our Lodges, should never suspect that we are using them to build their own jails, upon whose terraces we shall erect the throne of our Universal King of the Jews; and should never know that we are commanding them to forge the chains of their own servility to our future King of the World . . . " [B'Nai B'rith speech; see my tagline]
"...as long as there..remain active enemies of the Christian church, we may hope to become Master of the World...the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before Christianity is overthrown - B'nai B'rith speechhttp://www.biblebelievers.org.au/luther.htm / http://bible.cc/psalms/83-4.htm
You, as a supporter of undeclared war with Afghanistan, wouldn't know a constitutional republic from a clam.
That's it. I'm going out for some seafood and beers. Less than 2 weeks to CFB opener ya know! ~{;^D
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
As a proponent for genocide you have zero room to preach to me about low intensity or asymmetrical conflict; or constitutional republics either for that matter.
Clam up.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Me too, counting the days. I bought the ESPN package, and we just got the Big Ten Network. I added the TiVo thingie to my High Def TeeVee, so I'm in hog heaven. Now if we only had a QB, and some D-tackles to keep the OGs off our 'backers. Eight to nine wins and that's the way it will be until Joe retires.
Are these the clever words you neos and 'piles use to discuss unconstitutional war? Me thinks you've been hit in the head with one too many asymmetrical tree limbs.
As a proponent for genocide you have zero room to preach to me about low intensity or asymmetrical conflict...
Clam up.
Stupid is as stupid does Mrs Torrance.
And they write innumerable books; being too vain and distracted for silence: seeking every one after his own elevation, and dodging his emptiness. - T. S. Eliot
Once I become everyone's American Idol I can get a discount on the chicken lunch box.
And they write innumerable books; being too vain and distracted for silence: seeking every one after his own elevation, and dodging his emptiness. - T. S. Eliot
"Are these the clever words you neos and 'piles use to discuss unconstitutional war? Me thinks you've been hit in the head with one too many asymmetrical tree limbs."
I don't question your superior knowledge through experiance of many aspects of police work. Therefore, seeing how I dealt specifically with the varieties of war happening over there in Special Forces, suffice it to say that is where that came from.
If you would like to debate what is happening there and why I want to see continued suppression of insurgents there, I would not have any problems with that. I do have strong opinions on that conflict, some of which are heavily influenced by my experiance and trainig in the U.S. Army where I was an NCO.
I will agree with you on one thing, the war should not go on unless Congress weighs in and gives their sanction. The fact Bush did not get a declaration is just another trapping of the brand of neocon fascism we are afflicted with with him blighting the White House.
I also will say that in spite of the anger your casual admonition that a genocide should happen, I have to back down on the accusation you are a fascist. In doing so, I violate the Mandel Rule.
I invalidate my argument by using such an accusation. Therefore I will leave this at my dissapointment you seem to care so little for human life, and I am willing to listen to what you have to say to clarify or expand on this comment of yours'.
I still like you as a person, and appreciate the friendship you have shown, and I never throw that away casually.
Anyone using labels such as fascist, communist, or any other hard to define in a way to label another in political debate in a way to try to win it quick, cheaply and in an intellectually lazy way loses the argument/debate by default.
Used at the Well, and in the old Time.com /politics forum moderated by journalist David Mclemore of Texas
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
And who the heck is Mrs Torrance? Is this some sort of Forest Gump related thingie you refer to?
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
If you would like to debate what is happening there and why I want to see continued suppression of insurgents there, I would not have any problems with that.
Yes, lets.
Who are insurgents and how do they differ from freedom fighters? Under what constitutional authority was our military sent and what is our exit strategy?
"Who are insurgents and how do they differ from freedom fighters?"
Insurgency is warfare in which the combatants cannot control territory and sustain conventional military operations unless they have developed overwhelming support, winning the hearts and minds of the people where it occurs.
Insurgents are indigenous or infiltrated outsider combatants who operate usually in a cellular organization where knowledge of who and where all cells and other elements is on a need to know basis for security reasons.
Insurgent is a label derived from the study of insurgency and counterinsurgency. Freedom fighters is a subjective term used by supporters of an insurgency, who are called rebels by the governing authority they are acting to hurt, demoralize, bedevil and ultimately destroy.
Insurgents usually hit and run because it turns logistical weakness into the strength of demoralization caused by each insurgent seeming like fifty to conventional troops and civilian police authorities.
They also sap logistical strength and cause expense to governing authorities by necessitating the guarding and higher security of soft targets like infrastructure such as dams, power stations or supply dumps for example.
As an insurgency wins the hearts and minds of the local population, they are able to step up the level of their efforts.
A good example of what I speak of here was General Westmoreland's foolish statement in Vietnam where he was the U.S. commander about how now N.V.A. and Viet Cong elements were using tanks and other more conventional forces we now could defeat them.
However, in actuality, this was a reflection how support from the general population had swung in a large way from the corrupt Saigon government and their U.S. allies to those conducting insurgency from North Vietnam.
"Under what constitutional authority was our military sent and what is our exit strategy?"
An insurgency is generally considered a low intensity conflict. They are present in various places in the world in our age continuously, and we render varying degrees of support to those friends of ours who are faced with having to conduct counterinsurgency operations.
This can be as little as shipments of military equipment and providing training at the School of the Americas, the Special Forces Qualification Course, or other courses or efforts by specialists in this sort of conflict through the John F. Kennedy Center for Military Assistance at Fort Bragg, N.C., to providing Special Operations Command (SOCOM) units and conventional forces to support them to both directly deal with insurgents and train and organize military elements effective at dealing with the special aspects of insurgency.
As with insurgency, counterinsurgency has the same core mission of winning the hearts and minds of the locals, denying aid and comfort to those being opposed.
As a Special Forces Soldier, I was trained to be empathetic and diplomatic with the locals. SF and other special operations elements go through an extended isolation phase before deploying to digest the large amount of information concerning where one is going.
You learn and are expected to be sensitive to social, religious, cultural and historic aspects of the inhabitants of an area in a manner conventional U.S. forces could never do.
Special Forces has a strong bond of teamwork and is oriented to teaching and organizing where an element such as a Ranger Battalion is a highly trained and extremely fierce and tough military unit that moves fast with a light load accomplishing a mission with far less people then a conventional unit could.
Therefore, an exit strategy in a low intensity conflict such and an insurgency involves how well the mission of training and organizing counter-insurgent element goes. It is highly dependent on winning the hearts and minds of local inhabitants much as is true for an insurgency if they wish to succeed.
Winning, and reaching the exit point often involves resisting the use of conventional forces without training in insurgency as what small gain you get in force and security is lost because of the way conventionals alienate and antagonize locals just by being themselves.
There is no easy answer for establishing a concrete exit strategy in a conflict such as we see in Afghanistan, but I know that if after a set time period no improvement is seen in the situation, or if things just get worse, it makes sense to just call it a day and let the chips fall where they may.
The U.S. and other developed countries need to acknowledge and respect the fact that for all their might, money and know how, sometimes the insurgents win. If ultimately the people vote for them overwhelmingly with there support, one needs to have the presence of mind to recognize this and respect it by leaving.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
"Why would we waste the life of one American in Afghanistan, and under what constitutional authority is our military there?"
If the political, economic and social consequences of allowing an insurgency to be established is too high -- maybe their success would precipitate others in neighboring countries to try to emulate what they did, or maybe a situation where the insurgency is derived from an earlier insurgency we precipitated and nurtured to bedevil an entity such as the Former Soviet Union as is the case with the one in Afghanistan and it could be argued an obligation exists to set things right, or treaty or other relationship with another country that has an insurgency happening that generates a request to us for assistance in dealing with it.
As I said, the brush fire war called insurgency is always present somewhere in the world. Aid to deal with it should have Congressional oversight to it as should be the case with any and all military expenditure and deployment.
But with insurgency and low intensity conflict, the Executive Branch should be given leeway to deal with insurgency -- such as that granted in the War Powers Act that was prompted by the abuse of authority which gave us the illegal and immoral conflict we took part in in Indochina in the 50s-70s.
If they are of the size and scope of a situation like that existing in Afghanistan, after a set time period -- as was the original intention of the original War Powers Act -- Congress should always have the authority to end or endorse the military action as per the intention of the Founding Fathers in establishing the U.S. Constitution with checks and balances between the three main branches of government.
Only Congress should ever start a war like that in Iraq, but the special needs and situations involved with insurgency, and the wide continuum of response to it necessitate some leeway to always be given to the Commander in Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces to approve a response to it.
If handling an insurgency problem keeps it from precipitating into a larger war, or neighboring countries suffering the same sort of warfare because of success of an earlier one elsewhere, it can save U.S. lives by nipping things in the bud before things get so bad we have no alternative but to do something that involves more time, manpower, money and collateral damage that creates longtime resentments and scars in those affected most by the warfare.
It can be argued that as the conflict in Afghanistan has become more directly organized, run, and controlled by el Qaeda then the Taliban, that we dare not leave them ceding the area to their control because they simply will use this win to create more insurgency and asymmetrical operations (this is military jargon for terrorism) elsewhere.
At this point, it is cheaper in the long run to chop the head off the el Qaeda snake there then to see a resumption of undisrupted business as usual of building support and funding for training and development of improved tactics and techniques in conducting low intensity conflict and asymmetrical warfare in that part of the world.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Negro parents, as a rule, seem disposed not only to give larger liberty to their children than they ought, but they give absolute license in too many instances. In illustration of this fact, in cities particularly, children are allowed to go from their homes in the night-time and wander the streets amid their baleful associations until nine, ten, eleven o'clock and longer. And when they return home they do so unattended... This condition does not obtain alone among children of ignorant and poor parentage, but absence of good manners is also often found among children and youths who have had fair common and high school advantages. -- John Henry Smyth, 1902
I thought only Marines were brainwashed to this degree. The U.S. could solve their problems with the Arab world tomorrow if they wanted. Give Israel the old heave ho and get the fuck out of there. We should take a lesson from the French and Algeria. Eventually, those folks will get their shit together and force us out.
"I guess I'm not understanding the strong feelings against Iraq, yet the bloodlust for Afghanistan."
I guess I don't understand the strong feelings you claim to have for those whose ancestors came from Europe and your feeling that you should not genocidically kill anyone who's ancestors came from Africa unless you do it right.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
More deflection, vis a vis, your blood lust in Afghanistan.
My HIV comment was a comment on Obummer's nutty black pastor, the Rev. Wright. He claimed whites developed HIV in some govt. lab for the purpose of genocide. My remark was a comic reply to his nuttery, which was totally lost on your multicultural-loving ass.
Now, tell me the constitutional authority that guides our military in Afghanistan?
"More deflection, vis a vis, your blood lust in Afghanistan."
Actually if you recall, I made a point at the start of this to ask for your clarification.
I also offered to discuss the war in Afghanistan, and it has turned into you trying to cross examine me with no real input from you other then an imitation of the D.A. cross examining someone on the stand.
If you don't buy the well examined need to give whomever is president the prerogative for some leeway in deploying military in situations like in Afghanistan, tell me why as well ask questions repeatedly as if I am not answering them.
That doesn't cut it with me.
The question was dialogged extensively during the period the War Power Act came into being, and Congress decided to give it when it passed the act.
As I said, I am happy do dialog, but I will not tolerate a cross examining atmosphere like the one you seem to wish to create here.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
"My HIV comment was a comment on Obummer's nutty black pastor, the Rev. Wright. He claimed whites developed HIV in some govt. lab for the purpose of genocide. My remark was a comic reply to his nuttery, which was totally lost on your multicultural-loving ass."
He isn't his pastor, he WAS his pastor. See what I am seeing about your bias?
And your 'remark' clearly stated that if one was to do genocide, one should not do it unless someone does it right.
Then you stonewalled giving any clarification until now.
Taken in the context of all the bait and hate in here directed against Americans of African ethnic origin that happens constantly with such extreme bias and hatred in this forum, it is important when making such a stupid and blood thirsty comment to clarify what in blue blazes you are talking about and why.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
"That's exactly what the apparent black author suggests."
And apparently by posting this thread, you wish to turn a probable black author into a definitely implied to be black author.
Lynching is often fueled by a spike in emotionalism and unwarranted bigotry. Those seeking to create the climate for it often lie or exaggerate to create the climate necessary to make it happen with no consideration given whether that lynching is true justice or not.
I submit you don't give a rat's ass whether it was a black man or woman or group of them who made this ridiculous website. It is only important to you to imply it was and to use shamelessly the emotionalism this causes.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
He isn't his pastor, he WAS his pastor. See what I am seeing
about your bias?
And we know this b/c Obama, a
politician seeking the presidency, says so? I submit he can no more toss the
Rev. Wright, a man who married he and Michelle & baptised his children) under
the bus than he can his own white grandmother. Pardon me, but unlike you I
don't hold his words very seriously. Obama is an acolyte to black liberation
theology as are his fellow Chicago street activists. And isn't it odd how the
racial flacks would tear RP, or any other white candidate a new 'hole for past
associations with groups (a visit to Bob Jones Univ. or the C of C as an
example) but cut Obama a break for his past radical ties? The dual racial
double standard you live by is un-American and divisive.
Still no answer to
the constitutional authorization for war with Afghanistan?
And apparently by posting this thread, you wish to turn a probable black author into a definitely implied to be black author.
It's always best to let the person making the statement say what they meant, rather than for you to ascribe motive. The author is black, and his comment is clear; some white girls are looking for rape by blacks by the way they dress and look. The site I referenced is black owned and operated from all I can tell, if you can prove otherwise, I'll stand corrected.
"I thought only Marines were brainwashed to this degree."
I took an Article 15 to Special Court Martial in 1977 as a member of 1/17th (ABN) Air Cav, 82nd Airborne Division because I am not thusly 'brainwashed.' (I won.)
The charge that I had flipped the U.S. Flag off during an awards ceremony at the 82nd Airborne Division Museum grounds emanated from a desire to give me several legal actions of the non-judicial kind and then to throw me out as unable to adapt to military life.
I then got out in 1980 after making it to the level of crew chief on a UH-1H helicopter making sergeant E-5 in the process because of my skill as a mechanic and crew member.
I discovered Special Forces while at a National Guard NCO school session at Camp Williams, UT. Utah has the first battalion of the 19th Special Forces (National Guard component).
I did not go for demolitions (engineer) or weapons, I went for MOS 18E, Special Operations Communication Sergeant. I was fascinated with the 'Free the Oppressed' (De Oppresso Liber) aspect of SF, and the training and empowerment missions they had.
I am no fan of the 'Rambo' type or any such Hollywood fiction. I joined because I liked the concept of empowering people to better help themselves.
I got out with only nine years active duty, because sadly, there are too many blood thirsty people everywhere in the military who are brain washed for blood as you speak of, and because I found the invasion of Panama to be a contrived for political reasons war.
Because of the nature of the mis-use of the military by neocons like Bush and Cheney, I want the obviously illegal war in Iraq ended, and I want the war in Afghanistan vetted on a Congressional level.
I have thought long and hard on this, and decided long ago that I don't wish to do a knee jerk reaction and act like those starting illegal wars and rashly judge the war in Afghanistan ultimately merely as a political backlash to those turning troops into whores for Halliburton for political reasons.
I know well that low intensity conflict such as that in Afghanistan is hard to judge at face value on what one sees in the media and with no real schooling in just exactly what Guerrilla Warfare is, how it works and why people go there.
Concern about Afghanistan is justified, but I want it clearly and rationally vetted before we quit our military involvement there.
If we can analyze and address the errors made there so far by conventional troops and train and build a stabilizing force that can end the perpetual warfare and cultural fratricide of that conflict so deeply set into that country's socio-political fabric, this is an incredibly great gift we can give the people of this country.
By the way, two terms of endearment for me while in the military were 'Mr. Specific' in Basic Combat Training (BCT) for saying "specifically speaking..." when trying to school a drill sergeant concerning hypothermia during a class on frost bite, frost nip and trench foot, and 'Spock' by my A team because I always used the five dollar word when a 1.17 cent one would do. I was never, ever considered a brainwashed Rambo for good reasons; I'm not.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
"Still no answer to the constitutional authorization for war with Afghanistan?"
I responded to this, you just choose not to take up the thread of that response. This is your prerogative, but don't whine to me about your own intellectual dishonesty.
Congress in passing the War Powers Act of 1972 acknowledged the need to grant leeway in the deployment of military assets prior to any Congressional approval for them.
That was Congress' prerogative to do, and the Constitution grants them this prerogative because it does not forbid such measures based on the changing nature over time of which things as how warfare is waged.
There is a definite problem with the Commander in Chief not abiding by the need to get this deployment vetted by Congress, thus I do acknowledge the need for Congress to rule on out involvement in Afghanistan.
What I am seeing here is you don't wish to discuss this, as it suits your own political agenda to ignore my words and to play DA with me.
That is why we are apparently at an impasse here with no real discussion happening.
And I have been doing most the talking and getting only clipped and unfriendly cross examination that ignores what I am saying.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Anyway, this article looks like something that obviously a joker wrote and I'm not surprised if two people on opposite ends of the racially-opinionated-communicative spectrum would only seriously consider other possibilities.
It is irrational once you've realized that the so-called choice between establishment Democrats and establishment Republicans is a big scam. Which takes about the same amount of thought to figure out as realizing that Pro Wrestling is fake.
Congress in passing the War Powers Act of 1972 acknowledged the need to grant leeway in the deployment of military assets prior to any Congressional approval for them.
Helloooooooooo..........
Did he subsequently comply with the constitutional statutes of the Act?
Ask him about the glowing yellow stuff that spilled out of one of the WTC towers. You know, the glowing stuff that the liberal and conservative zionist media gatekeepers want you to ignore.
"Ask him about the glowing yellow stuff that spilled out of one of the WTC towers. You know, the glowing stuff that the liberal and conservative zionist media gatekeepers want you to ignore."
9-11 was an inside job.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
You don't have to repeat yourself. This is forum, not chat, I had to go somewhere and do something and now I am back. Don't hyperventilate on me, please.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
I've knocked both sides but it gets awfully boring after a few months..... unless one is into exploiting pure zionist politics as a tool to divide people.
I am not anti-Semitic just because I do not like Zionism.
One thing you have to deal with is racism and anti-Semitic sentiments cheapen the fabric of any forum or even any dialog.
I respect the First Amendment and freedom of religion, or not to have one, and I support human right regardless of where someone's ancestors or the person came from or what color they are.
You seem more concerned with making the false flag operations Zionist in nature then in getting across to people what really happened.
My priorities are let's get it validated that September 11th 2001 was a day we killed our own for political gain before using it to beat Israel over the head with it.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
"Not a zionist inside job too?" I am not anti-Semitic just because I do not like Zionism.
Look, you unclever undercover zionist retard piece of shit coverup clown, you've turned a simple question into an excuse to smear me instead of giving zionists credit for their inside job. Good work, asshole.
Me hyperventilate over an Obama cultist, who has taken a FReeper-Bush position on Afghanistan, with one exception; they claim to buy into the war on terror, whereas you have offered no reason whatsoever for the slaughter of innocent people. No hyperventilation here, just a firm conviction you're vapid war monger.
You seem more concerned with making the false flag operations Zionist in nature then in getting across to people what really happened.
You're insinuating the official 9/11 false flaggers are not zionist in nature and their aim was not a zionist aim, and that's zionist bullshit. You're also suggesting it was a non-zionist inside job, and that's bigger zionist bullshit.
If you want to suggest that the US and zionism have common fates and cannot be separated in that way, you're just another war-happy profiteering zionist patriot supremacist retarded piece of crap.
I'd wouldn't vote for any known candidate out there in any party you ever heard of, because they're all walking shitbags, unless someone gets the drop on me and holds a gun to my head.
The 9/11 cover-up involved collaboration between the CIA, Israel, and the Saudis. There was an Israeli angle (Mossad Agents posing as art students high- fived when the twin towers fell), but that was far from the only interest involved. For example, after 9/11, the only non-military planes in the air were taking Saudis home, where these former Bush business associates would be safe from interrogation.
.... and nobody told the uber-zionist Rotshield-Rockefeller-Mellonballs first, did they...
PNAC pukestains. Masonic belly-button soup. Jesuit toecheese. Feed me more useless well-known shit. Yes, a veritable hurricane of stench, all circling about a wholly-optional familial core of ancient supremacist talmudic satan- worshipping pseudo-religious ass-jelly. Right, now beam me the fuck up, Magellan.
"I repeat, what have the occupants of this nation done to us?"
Who said they did anything to us? I sure did not.
Conversely, what did you do to anyone to have to go out and oppress, occupy and enslave the people of your city of employment as part of the evil police?
You are playing, "So tell me, how long have you beaten your wife" games with me.
I make clear I support providing military aid that includes training and participation in operations by U.S. military cadre in brush fire wars that low intensity conflict is.
I also support conventionals being deployed to support this effort, as any military operation has a head to tail ratio to it where combat arms needs support units to handle the logistical chores of any operation.
We are there ostensibly to aid that country achieve stability and to get back on a sound social and economic footing. There is not a thing wrong with doing so.
Under President Obama we should have the cool heads and smarts to analyze the situation and alter the deployment based on how what is happening there is sized up.
Under President McCain, we have more of the same as we do with Bush and Cheney, a gutting of the prerogatives and mechanisms of Congress to reel in and alter or halt inappropriate military operations.
We are going to get one or the other as president JT. And we also are not going to suddenly become isolationists unwilling to provide training and material support to friends and allies who are dealing with insurgencies.
I fully agree more teeth and will to act should exist in Congress regarding the oversight of war making. The U.S. Constitution insists this be so, and we need to remember the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in instituting this check and balance regarding war making.
We need a return to Congress as the agency that rules on war making. You have no argument from me about that whatsoever. But I have to agree with Barack Obama that to unconditionally withdraw from Afghanistan is to throw the baby out with the bath water.
Our mission there should be stabilization and training only, and I support Obama as the best man to remember and honor the fact that the military is not in existence merely top destroy and oppress; it is a there also to build and empower.
In this unit crest, along with the crossed arrows denoting unconventional warfare, and the De Oppresso Liber motto is the sword of righteousness which is also on the 'electric butter knife' shoulder patch of most S.F. units.
It means something. And it is to that meaning I am still dedicated as a former member of the United States Armed Forces.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
"Look, you unclever undercover zionist retard piece of shit coverup clown, you've turned a simple question into an excuse to smear me instead of giving zionists credit for their inside job. Good work, asshole."
Seems to me you are the one here engaged in ad hominem attack. I said nothing about you personally, I gave opinion concerning the false flag operations on September 11th.
I do not support what Israel is doing to the Palestinian people, and I support showing them the door to anymore aid or support until they change their ways. And if this means changing the very nature and make-up of what Israel is as well as how they do business, that is fine by me too.
How this makes me a Zionist is beyond me. ;-)
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
For example, after 9/11, the only non-military planes in the air were taking Saudis home, where these former Bush business associates would be safe from interrogation.
Ah, so Bush got naughty on all the most elite zionists (you can't be an elite in the US unless a zionist, by the way) post-9/11 with his treatment of the Saudis did he? .... AND THESE (NECESSARILY) ZIONISTS, THE ONLY ONES THAT COUNT, THE ONES WE ALL KNOW AND LOVE, THE ELITE WAR PROFITEERS, THEY JUST SAW MONEY, NOT ZIONISM, AS THE GOAL? Blinded by th' ol' cashola, they were, eh? Guess they owe someone or two a donation, huh? My guess is politicians (necessarily zionist in the US if you want to get elected) and other true-believer religious zionists will get a good lot. At least Bush blamed it on a bunch of Saudis (your taxpayer dollars at work sending the required hush-money to the Saudis, no doubt).
Just one more question. Isn't this almost stupid enough for Fox?
"You're insinuating the official 9/11 false flaggers are not zionist in nature..."
Actually, personally I do not doubt Zionism and our support of it is an element that made it all possible for those doing 9-11 to dare do what they did.
However, someone with the eye on the prize of jumping the obstacles thrown in the way of informing the public of the true nature of 9-11 does not muddy the water with making such an bald attack on Zionism.
All you do is turn some people of who might otherwise be receptive to the message, and give opponents a strong means to further belittle and dismiss what happened as an el Qaeda attack that was not groomed and used to cover-up false flag operations.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Actually, personally I do not doubt Zionism and our support of it is an element that made it all possible for those doing 9-11 to dare do what they did.
Dude, you cannot continue to backtrack on me and tell me you're about moving forward. That bit hardly explains you pulling out the the smelly old "anti- semite" smear.
You ever heard about Harken Oil and Arbusto (George W's oil companies that barely drilled a single drop of oil but made him a multimillionaire nevertheless)? It was a money laundering operation for Saudis, with whom the Bush family has long had business relations. Just like China, which Daddy Bush gave Most Favored Nation trade status after Tiananmen to keep his brother's investments there safe.
"Well jeez...but...but....you said you supported military intervention in Afghanistan???"
I do not support a general invasion and conquest of Afghanistan. I do support giving them the means to establish domestic tranquility and to provide for the common welfare.
At this point in their history I sure don't see how this can be done without help in building the security and defense infrastructure that allows this to happen..
So yes, I see a defensible and rational role elements of SOCOM and those supporting Special Operations Command in helping build something that is necessary to establish a healthy, thriving and peaceful nation there.
"Why would you take this position if they haven't done anything to us???"
Did Operation Overlord happen because France did something to us? Think that maybe France might of been happy to see D-Day come?
With all due respect, perhaps it is you who has the problem visualizing the mission of the military there as training and building, not oppressing and destroying, not me.
"I suspect it's b/c you're an Obama cultist, and in your case, you support him b/c of white guilt related to wacky liberal politics."
Except I have no sense of 'white guilt,' I would never have gone into the military, would not own firearms, would be for abortion, and would accept other trappings of classic liberal dogma if I were a cultist or a liberal of the stripe you broad brush me as being here.
I disagree with Obama on abortion and regarding firearms, but then again, I would support Ron Paul over him despite Obama being far closer to many more of my personal political views then the Senator from Illinois is.
You see JT, I know full well I am never going to - or would really want for that matter - a candidate with whom I agree fully on every issue out there.
I submit that even if Obama were so anti-gun and pro abortion that's all he could talk about or act on, public opinion and Congress would hold him in check.
I see him as a man, not a black man, not a half black or half white man, and I see him as having human flaws and as much feet of clay as any other imperfect human being.
I find this buzz phrase you are fond of using amusing. But as I know it is election rhetoric meant to cheapen and belittle how and why people such as myself decide to vote for Barack Obama, I am not bothered by it, just amused.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
"Dude, you cannot continue to backtrack on me and tell me you're about moving forward. That bit hardly explains you pulling out the the smelly old "anti- semite" smear."
Dude, thanks for calming down a wee bit, I was truly afraid you were hyperventilating into a panic attack. ;-)
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Every body, LISTEN UP!!!!! nobody here is anti-Zionist, but this does not mean he is anti-Semitic in anyway.
There, is that better? I am not out to attack your character in anyway or assign to you any believes you do not truly hold dear in any way.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
I do support giving them the means to establish domestic tranquility and to provide for the common welfare.
Ah, nation building.....but who invited us, and what about the art of diplomacy? Isn't that Obama's solution to Iran? Why not here? And wouldn't a little domestic tranquility be a nice thing to establish in Harlem, New Orleans or South Central LA? Why in Afghanistan before America First? And how much will this cost? Shall we put it on the tab for future generations, or simply print FRNs?
Good post, but it is 10:45 AM here PDT and I have to do let my mundane little old life interfer with my world saving chore as an interlocutor here once more. (Life is so unfair, ain't it?) ;-D
I will be back as soon as I can to respond, so don't fret. I actually do care about responding to this.
Thanks for the discussion and dialog now going on in here, it is very much appreciated.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
I have no love for Israel and I hate its US lobbies (AIPAC, ADL), but what I can't stand even more are people who shout "Zionist," "Jew" or "Jew tool" at everyone and anyone who suggests that not every problem in the world is caused solely and uniquely by Jews and Israel.
Lookee pal, were the 9/11 attacks a zionist inside job or not?
If you want to take solace in the notion that you have to be zionist anyway to be a successful prominent person in the US, then that's your choice.
If you want to believe that makes the zionism incidental to all this, then sorry to hear about your loss of olfactory sensation. Maybe someone will prey for you.
Don't you, magic Jesus, and the sulfurous zogmedia expect the colors of blackbody temperatures to change, though.
Both the Zionist extremists (Jewish neocons and Christian Rapture Cultists) and their one-note opponents have one thing in common. If you don't agree with every word on their side, you must be 100% on the other. If you disagree with a Zionist, you're an "anti-Semite," if you disagree with the Jew-obsessed, you're a "Zionist stooge."
Just like how Bushbots think that any criticism of their hero makes you a "liberal Democrat" and the Obamaites think that any criticism of their Messiah makes you a "McCain supporter." Don't I have the right not to like either?
End result is the distraction of discussion onto sidebars, tangents and deadends.
All coming from the zionists.
The point is simple, zionists are shitstains.
That's leaving out that they're nepotistic moneygrubbing greedy overcontrolling murderous contrived supremacist global-population-conscious globalist shitstains, as much as you may like to kiss their asses for their might.
Zionists were being perfect little necessarily-screw-the-US-people zionists when they did the 9/11 zionist inside job, except they fucked up and some thermite spill was seen, among other things.
End of story, zionist apologists. That includes Mr. non-zionist inside job backtracker.
Here we go again. You follow the same old brilliant-but-worn-out bullshit zionist formula to stop the ugly antizionist complaining about the zionist 9/11 inside job. This place is full of you zionist apologist assholes.
Eat it from me all day and night, zionist. Eat the complaining about murderous rich zionist assholes. Pretend your delicate ears can't take accurate comparisons of zionists with shit.
Yeah, it was when you insinuated that knowing the essential shit-filled nature of zionism is some kind of "inside" knowledge when it's actually as plain as the zionist apologist olfactory zit on your face.
I'm actually shtupping every zionist right now, with a yellow-hot poker. So far you're the only one to complain. Well, maybe that leaves out bumpkin and adl- reflex boy. Guess nobody wants to talk radiative spectra and potential chemical compositions of yellow-glowing flux with me anymore.
"Only a zionist would call someone an antisemite for noting that 9/11 was necessarily a zionist inside job."
I said I was not anti-Semitic. I said nothing about you being that. You infer that I did, and this is your problem, not mine.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
What is with this guy anyway? I see he's working hard to win friends and influence people in here.
He isn't anti-Semitic, he seems to be just anti anyone he wants to poke with a fire hardened stick.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Under President Obama we should have the cool heads and smarts to analyze the situation and alter the deployment based on how what is happening there is sized up...and I support Obama as the best man to remember and honor the fact that the military is not in existence merely top destroy and oppress; it is a there also to build and empower.
In this unit crest, along with the crossed arrows denoting unconventional warfare, and the De Oppresso Liber motto is the sword of righteousness which is also on the 'electric butter knife' shoulder patch of most S.F. units.
It means something. And it is to that meaning I am still dedicated as a former member of the United States Armed Forces.
SF sure has become sterile and politically correct (and Obamaesque) since I served 40 years ago.
SF always served the CIA, but now they do the bidding of Mossad/Israel, under cover of democratic imperialism and ridding the Mid-East of all those evil new Hitlers.
Ferret Mike:...I support Obama as the best man to remember and honor the fact that the military is not in existence merely top destroy and oppress; it is a there also to build and empower.
Hypocrisy Cop: SF always served the CIA, but now they do the bidding of Mossad/Israel, under cover of democratic imperialism and ridding the Mid-East of all those evil new Hitlers.
I'm a non-military taxpayer and both of your remarks are rather troubling to me.
Ferret Mike, why should US Armed Forces be used "for build and empower"? Silly me, I always believed my taxes supported the USAF to defend America. When did the Constitution call for our military to "build and empower" - I'm assuming you mean nation-building in foreign locations.
Hypocrisy Cop, why are SP "serving" the CIA? The CIA operate with a secret humongous budget and I thought there were many many many CIA agents on the payroll to do whatever the CIA is supposed to do besides wasting a ton of tax money that we are not allowed to know any detail about. Frankly the last thing I would want from a taxpayer's perspective is for the CIA to have any authority over military divisions or operations. The CIA couldn't even accurately identify a Chinese consulate on a map before it was inadvertedly bombed. The CIA is an incompetent bureaucratic morass.
One thing you have to deal with is racism and anti-Semitic sentiments cheapen the fabric of any forum or even any dialog.
Look, you tapdancing backtracking cretin, you're the one who has to "deal with" your inability to answer a simple yes/no question about the zionist 9/11 inside job without lecturing people on the imminent dangers of "anti-semitism," not me.
Hypocrisy Cop, why are SP [sic] "serving" the CIA? The CIA operate with a secret humongous budget and I thought there were many many many CIA agents on the payroll to do whatever the CIA is supposed to do besides wasting a ton of tax money that we are not allowed to know any detail about. Frankly the last thing I would want from a taxpayer's perspective is for the CIA to have any authority over military divisions or operations...The CIA is an incompetent bureaucratic morass.
You won't get any argument out of me, Scrapper, as I share your conclusion about the CIA/Mossad.
When I wrote SF (not SP), that's Special Forces, the U.S. Army's elite "green berets" whose shoulder patch and motto, 'de oppresso libre,' were mentioned.
The "new" SF isn't your daddy's SF. When we were liberating the oppressed South Vietnamese people back in the 1960s we were nearly all White and were likely to have voted for the George Wallace/Curtis "Bombs Away" LeMay ticket in '68, certainly never for a Halfrican-American named Barack Hussein Muhammed Obama. Let's say we hadn't entirely lost our implicit racial consciousness as a nearly homogeneous majority White nation 40 years ago. The U.S. wasn't quite yet the mongrelized, polyglot obomination it is today.
Read up a little on the CIA's Phoenix Program. It was SF personnel doing the dirty deeds for them, under cover of our U.S. Embassies, the USAID program, etc.
Now, I suppose, the CIA can use private armies such as Blackwater Inc. to do its deeds. It's becomming increasingly difficult for SF to retain career personnel with the proliferation of these private forces that recruit almost exclusively from Special Operation Forces, pay much better, and are unaccountable to either military OR civilian justice.
I see, black on white rape is the fault of the white girl....
It didn't take long for this thread about Yakub/Jacobs and inter-racial rape to get way off topic.
Apologies to all for my part in that. Don't blame Sambo for taking Whitey's women. He's merely following Nature's imperative to take what the competing subspecies is willing to give up, without a fight. Sambo is the symptom, Yakub Jacobs the disease.
When I wrote SF (not SP), that's Special Forces, the U.S. Army's elite "green berets" whose shoulder patch and motto, 'de oppresso libre,' were mentioned.
Ooops - my bad typing - I meant to type SF.
Thanks for the referral to John Perkins' book. I'll definitely check into it.
It didn't take long for this thread about Yakub/Jacobs and inter-racial rape to get way off topic.
No apology necessary, HC. Threads that run counter to the PC trade winds usually suffer the same fate, whether intentionally or not. Your contribution is much appreciated.
The article was apparently written by zionist nitwits who think they can pull off looking like something else, so how the fuck is talking about lying zionist nitwits and their stooges offtopic here, unless one is a zionist asshole?
Calling people zionist assholes is like saying they watched/read too much TV/newspaper "news" when they grew up. Now zionist assholes are trying to make it look like the internet is the problem, not the MSM, so the zionist assholes rig up internet articles like this.
The other point I wanted to make is that you're just an inept low-IQ race- baiter, which fits the "idiot zionist stooge" profile perfectly.
If you don't agree with every word on their side, you must be 100% on the other. If you disagree with a Zionist, you're an "anti-Semite," if you disagree with the Jew-obsessed, you're a "Zionist stooge."
Revolution requires elimination of the political middle. Both sides do their best to make the middle uninhabitable.
In Africa they do it with machetes, tires, and gasoline.
On what point do revisionist and orthodox historians agree? That the answer to the question is important.
But it is not the answer to the question that is important, it is the asking of it.
When a person can ask it without fear or malice, they are free.
Howard Dean said “If you look at folks of color, even women, they’re more successful in the Democratic party than they are in the white, uh, excuse me, in, uh, Republican party.”
All-in-all, wasn't the McCain campaign right to pounce on that?
Both sides do their best to make the middle uninhabitable.
The "middle" here is false-flagging zionist nitwit assholes, including the ones who come here and suggest I'm a jew because I complain about mass-murdering zionist assholes and their 9/11 false-flag inside job.
If you don't agree with every word on their side, you must be 100% on the other. If you disagree with a Zionist, you're an "anti-Semite," if you disagree with the Jew-obsessed, you're a "Zionist stooge."
This place is packed solid with zionist assholes pretending to not be zionist assholes, it's THAT FUCKING SIMPLE. For that simple observation, some cocksucker here will no doubt suggest I'm paranoid, whereas it's the paranoia of zionist assholes that actually packs this place with play-acting zionist assholes pretending to be something they aren't.
Is there an actual picture of this fucktard delusion somewhere on the web? Somehow I doubt it. Tried google image search already. I'm going to assume it's the alias for a group effort of ex-door-to-door framed "art" sellers, at least until further data comes in.
This place is packed solid with zionist assholes pretending to not be zionist assholes, it's THAT FUCKING SIMPLE. For that simple observation, some cocksucker here will no doubt suggest I'm paranoid, whereas it's the paranoia of zionist assholes that actually packs this place with play-acting zionist assholes pretending to be something they aren't.
enough with the accusations, ad homs, and vulgarity. you add nothing to productive discussion.
Oh, you've screened the clientele and rooted out the zionist clowns, have you?
People with their selective outrage at "vulgarity" specifically aimed at someone who is putting the heat on mass-murderer zionists who walk around freely, what to say to them?
If you own this site, just terminate my association with it.
It didn't take long for this thread about Yakub/Jacobs and inter-racial rape to get way off topic.
9/11 is not "off-topic," it's mentioned in the article, asshole.
Uh, Mr. Nobody, I was addressing Ferret Mike in my post #139, as you should still be able to see (before it scrolls off). In his post #98, FM took a fantastically imaginative leap, trying to tie together SF and support for an Obamination. I simply disagreed and followed him off topic momentarily.
I'll stipulate to the fact I can be an asshole. Try me some time and you'll find I can give as good as I get.
You're correct; the anti-Aryan Jew psychobabblist Jacobs did mention 9/11 with his anti-White quote. That Yid's guilt trip on Whitey sure did make me feel responsible for 9/11.
In his post #98, FM took a fantastically imaginative leap, trying to tie together SF and support for an Obamination. I simply disagreed and followed him off topic momentarily.
And I added to the off-topic digression by asking you and Ferret questions.
I apologize, nobody. I didn't mean to consciously direct the discussion further off course.
Here's my 2 cents, now worth half of one in most places around the world.
He's a classic agent provacateur.troll entity.
He's similar to some of the denizens of other forums - the constant references to analism and feces is a sure and smelly giveaway.
I had the misfortune to be the target of one of those types, however, the instrument in that case was a baton, and rather more targetedly carnal, when I had the temerity to google "eating shit" and putting a pic of really two lovely women, one "pitching" and one "catching" caught in that perfect moment of leaving one before being "caught" by the other.
One of those classic Attack threads with BAC when his asskissing sidekick, Alcuin went anal and fecal on me.
For that reason, the Goldie lady banned me.
The MO is similar here, and the over the top vitriol points not to an unhinged mind, but to a deliberate provocation.
Heck, I'd ask him to drop his pants and see if he was circumcised. Not a conclusive conclusion but known to be occasionally fatal historically . But some things one can be absolutely happy about missing with no deprivation regrets.
So, all in all, he's a putzier putz. He's a Jew, But he won't tell u.
"I'll stipulate to the fact I can be an asshole. Try me some time and you'll find I can give as good as I get."
Heh, I'll second the notion. It amazes me constantly that people consider barking on the porch that is a forum something worth getting into a dither about. Going eyeball to eyeball in the course of a political endeavour is much more a test of one is made of then wetting oneself because they got excited about a political eunuch like nobody screeching at them like a monkey angry because gloves were duct taped to it's hands to kep it from masturbating in the monkey house when it wants to.
"You only have power over people so long as you don't take everything away from them. But when you've robbed a man of everything he's no longer in your power -- he's free again. Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Heh, I'll second the notion. It amazes me constantly that people consider barking on the porch that is a forum something worth getting into a dither about. Going eyeball to eyeball in the course of a political endeavour is much more a test...
What I liked most about freedom4um when I was first introduced to it a couple of weeks ago was the generally serious tenor of some fellow thought criminals who share information/news here, and the apparent lack of hostile Jews and other non-Whites constantly disrupting that flow with flame wars. Being the 'Net freedom4um isn't perfect, but it's pretty good compared to most "free speech" discussion boards I seen that deal with hot topics like race, religion and war.
We'd get along fine, face to face like men, Mike. We share an appreciation for the great Russian nationalist, Mr. Solzhenitsyn, after all. That's a good start.
"Concern about Afghanistan is justified, but I want it clearly and rationally vetted before we quit our military involvement there."
"If we can analyze and address the errors made there so far by conventional troops and train and build a stabilizing force that can end the perpetual warfare and cultural fratricide of that conflict so deeply set into that country's socio-political fabric, this is an incredibly great gift we can give the people of this country."
You might want to take into account that the last time the Afghans were conquered it was Ghengis Khan.
Sounds great. Where is the Constitutional mandate for your Crusade?
...[B]lame white women for wanting a little spice once in a while.
A "little spice," you say? Now who would have introduced such a carnivorous bug into the ears of suggestible White girls that they should copulate with NAHAs?
THE SADDEST STORY EVER TOLD
When a white girl marries a negro, her sun of life goes down. And glaring spots of sin appear on her white wedding gown.And white and black men stand aghast, while viewing this range role: And mutter, “they will wreck themselves, and damn each other’s soul.”
We know a carnivorous bug has crept into her brain And gnawed away here self-respect, which left her half insane.
Now all her racial pride has flown beyond redemption’s fold And she begins life’s saddest tale that ever yet was told.
Three days and nights she felt black lips press smug against her own. And on the fourth, her troubled soul, let out a frightful groan.
And so the weeks and months flew by, and then a baby came; She looked at it with tear filled eyes, and hung her head with shame.
And then she dreamed of other days, sweet girlhood days gone by, And of the white friends left behind, and so we hear her cry;
“O, could I turn life’s pendulum backwards a few short years I would not bear this cross today, nor shed these bitter tears.”
“My baby would be white as snow, and sleep upon my breast Like a little fledgling robin that slumbers in its nest.
While now, O God, my mongrel child just whimpers through the night Till in my sleepless dreams I scream, not white, O God, not white!”
And so I stagger through my days far from God’s love and grace, Till now, I know, no black man lives, can take a white man’s place.
My offspring shall be mongrel bred, their hue-skin shall remain, For even God with all his power, cannot remove the stain.
I sold my birthright for a mess, I mixed my white-born blood With black blood, so I languish here like one bogged down in mud.
Though God may grant a pardon, I never can retrace My footsteps down life’s narrow road, back to the white man’s race.
So now I groan, “It might have been,” had racial pride been mine. Today I’d hug a pure white child, and call him half divine.
I’d lift him up before the world, and praise his father’s name, While now, my baby’s mongrel face, reminds me of my shame.
All other crimes may be forgiven when prayer its power fulfills; The scheming crook may find new hope, and even the man that kills,
But all my prayers can never clear my baby’s mongrel skin, Nor make him white as driven snow, nor cleanse my soul of sin.
I was my father’s future hope, my mother’s joy and pride But I got lost on life’s dark road, and there my spirit died.
I smeared my all-white heritage and left the white man’s track, Now my descendants for all time shall be forever black.
I try to hide from all the stars, the moon and the setting sun; For all mankind of my white race, condemn what I have done;
I tremble and my teardrops flow, I pray, but pray in vain; For nevermore shall I be one with my white race again.
And so dark clouds above me roll, deep waters crash below, I sink, and reap what I have sown, and drink my cup of woe.
My mother sleeps deep in her grave, my dad lies at her side, For both were crushed when I became a negro’s common bride.
Now, should I decide to leave him, where could I choose to go? My misspent life will follow me like footprints in the snow.
Before me lie dark jungles where paramours seek a prey: Behind me death keeps whispering, “I am the only way.”
This black and white, prenuptial mess, this racial suicide; Must be forbidden by the law, men must find racial pride!
Then, never again, forever, shall tales like mine unfold, With all its shame, the saddest tale, that ever yet was told.
Vicki Iseman 
