Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Temper, Temper...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by American87 View Post

    Yeah it doesn’t take banning assemblies to prevent political parties. Just limit the amount of money candidates receive and you will have more candidates, with less obligations to others, and people will vote for who they want. It will be like the primaries, but with presidents. And if none of them win the electorate, the House of Representatives will decide.
    So you're talking about overturning Citizens United v FEC?

    Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), is a landmark U.S. constitutional law, campaign finance, and corporate law case dealing with regulation of political campaign spending by organizations. The United States Supreme Court held (5–4) on January 21, 2010, that the free speech clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for communications by nonprofit corporations, for-profit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.[2][3]

    In the case, the conservative non-profit organization Citizens United sought to air a film critical of Hillary Clinton and to advertise the film during television broadcasts shortly before the 2008 Democratic primary election in which Clinton was running for U.S. President.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
    That's a pretty brave stance for a Republican.

    Originally posted by marktwain View Post

    Interesting, to see two of the most insightful posters on the forum trading Allegations.

    As Semenko said of Gretzky fighting:
    " both of them should get two minutes for delay of game"
    Didn't Cement-Head suffer quite a few of brain injuries?

    Should've seen Slick Jr sink one from about 3m out: made the goalie look like a marionette.
    I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

    Comment


    • Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

      This is exactly my point. I'm not taking anyone serious who's clearly biased and hypocritical. Secondly, this is a history forum, we should be able to discuss the darker sides of history without anyone getting offended. As I said in those posts which he leaves out, I do not agree with how the Jews were treated or persecuted but what I laid out was, sadly, historically accurate. If anyone gets offended by history, then that's their own problem. But, yes says a lot when examining what's passable language towards everyone else, meanwhile you can't even discuss history when it comes to the Jewish. He doesn't want to accept the truth.
      OK... what you have to accept in the foras forums?) is the right wing / conservative tendencies of most of the posters. Unfortunately, the " You hate Israel /Jews" label gets applied much too easily and quickly.

      I'm a defender of the rights of Christian Palestinians - and no more anti Israel than Ben Dunkleman was. gotta live with it, Mon.
      The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

      Comment


      • Originally posted by marktwain View Post

        OK... what you have to accept in the foras forums?) is the right wing / conservative tendencies of most of the posters. Unfortunately, the " You hate Israel /Jews" label gets applied much too easily and quickly.

        I'm a defender of the rights of Christian Palestinians - and no more anti Israel than Ben Dunkleman was. gotta live with it, Mon.
        My objection to TactiKill J.'s posts has nothing to do with my political sentiments: it has everything to do with his recycling of old antisemitic tropes that predate The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, that read like the script to Josef Goebbels' Titanic. That crap is Antisemiticism 101. What's next: Jews stir the blood of blonde-headed Goyim babies into their matzah brei,

        https://www.timesofisrael.com/temple...ildrens-blood/

        If you don't want to like Jews then don't like Jews. Just oblige us by generating something a little more original than The Turner Diaries as all.
        I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

        Comment


        • Originally posted by marktwain View Post

          OK... what you have to accept in the foras forums?) is the right wing / conservative tendencies of most of the posters. Unfortunately, the " You hate Israel /Jews" label gets applied much too easily and quickly.

          I'm a defender of the rights of Christian Palestinians - and no more anti Israel than Ben Dunkleman was. gotta live with it, Mon.
          Indeed. When it comes to Israel too many people have adopted a 'pick a side' mentality. Personally, I recognize that both sides share fault in that situation, but because I don't place 100% of the blame on Muslims I'm labeled an anti-semite.

          In this case, if I express criticism to individual Jews like Soros, I'm again an anti-semite. But if I criticize individual Muslims, no one would say anything. Heck, I can criticize the entire religion and hardly anyone would really care. It's very interesting how biases come into play in what we deem socially acceptable.

          I don't take these labels seriously, but it's sad because for how smart we are as humans, we allow our emotions to turn us into very binary beings.
          "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
          - Benjamin Franklin

          The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

            Indeed. When it comes to Israel too many people have adopted a 'pick a side' mentality. Personally, I recognize that both sides share fault in that situation, but because I don't place 100% of the blame on Muslims I'm labeled an anti-semite.
            This has nothing to do with Israel. At no point until just now has the State of Israel even been mentioned. Speaking personally, I'm rather ambivalent about Israel -- but that's immaterial to this discussion.

            Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
            In this case, if I express criticism to individual Jews like Soros, I'm again an anti-semite. But if I criticize individual Muslims, no one would say anything. Heck, I can criticize the entire religion and hardly anyone would really care. It's very interesting how biases come into play in what we deem socially acceptable.
            And what of your critiques of the Rothschild's, which almost verbatim echo the propaganda of the past?





            Indeed, your tripe echos the antisemitic propaganda produced today.





            What have you said that's substantively different from those characters? From where I sit, not a damned thing.

            You're also omitting your characterization of Karl Marx as a Jew. Given the family in which he was raised -- his father was described earlier in this thread as a "Prussian patriot" -- and the life he led as an adult, only by the employment of a Nazi formula



            The diagram shows the pseudo-scientific racial division, which is the basis of racial policies of Nazi Germany. Only people with four German grandparents (four white circles - the first table on the left) were considered to be "full-blooded" Germans. German nationals with in your family tree three or four Jewish ancestors (fourth and fifth column from the left) were recognized by the Nuremberg laws for Jews. The center column shows the people of "mixed blood", depending on the amount of Jewish ancestry. All Jewish grandparents were automatically defined as members of the Jewish religious community, regardless of the extent to which they identified with this group.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Themes_in_Nazi_propaganda
            could one such as Karl Marx ever be characterized as a Jew.

            Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
            I don't take these labels seriously
            So when you declare Donald Trump be a racist, should we not take you seriously?

            Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
            but it's sad because for how smart we are as humans, we allow our emotions to turn us into very binary beings.
            What's really sad is when we regurgitate the dime-store propaganda of the past and pat ourselves on the back for original thinking. That's sad. It's also mendacious. The question that begs asking now is, since your claim of harboring no biases has been debunked, why are you still repeating the garbage of years long past?
            I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

            Comment


            • Nobody wants to answer my question. What is wrong with being anti=semeitic? How is it worse than being anti-WHAT ever?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
                Nobody wants to answer my question. What is wrong with being anti=semeitic? How is it worse than being anti-WHAT ever?
                I believe that I answered that question back in post #28.

                How about my question: why does Tac's stuff resemble that anti-Semitic stuff of old?
                I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                Comment


                • Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

                  So you're talking about overturning Citizens United v FEC?



                  That's a pretty brave stance for a Republican.



                  Didn't Cement-Head suffer quite a few of brain injuries?

                  Should've seen Slick Jr sink one from about 3m out: made the goalie look like a marionette.
                  I'm not a "Republican" I don't know the details of the case; I'm not trying to "limit expenditures" in a general sense. But we should reduce campaign spending, Ted Cruz or no Ted Cruz.
                  "It is a fine fox chase, my boys"

                  "It is well that war is so terrible-we would grow too fond of it"

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Bow View Post

                    Geez!! HP you still drinking that **** ant stuff American beer at 3.5 %......my cat pees stronger stuff than that....A good Bavarian pint would/will do you a world of good...…………...I guess you never attend the Munich Beer Fest...…..HP you disappoint me...……..but I guess IF you become to Europafied The Donald wont let you back to the land of round door knobs...…
                    When I must, on vacation at home, I drink some very select American beers. None of the national colored water. I'd rather drink the water without the coloring

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

                      I believe that I answered that question back in post #28.

                      How about my question: why does Tac's stuff resemble that anti-Semitic stuff of old?
                      Does it?

                      Does it reach the level of Unite the Right touch light parades? Those are something to worry about.
                      Last edited by Half Pint John; 20 Nov 18, 08:34.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
                        Does it?
                        Let us read together.

                        Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

                        We can start and end with the fact that Jews created our central banking system and still control it to this day.

                        "When a government is dependent for money upon the bankers, they and not the government leaders control the nation. This is because the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Financiers are without patriotism and without decency."

                        - Napoleon



                        Karl Marx was of prominent Jewish descant. He is Jewish.



                        Not to be rude or offensive to anyone, but if we're going in that direction we have to provide the full historical context.

                        Jews saw these restrictions because they consistently tried to manipulate government for their own benefit and often to the detriment of the country's natural inhabitants. I'm not at all proclaiming that the way they were treated was right, however it is important to note the reason and sequence of events.

                        Similarly, I can say that African's were enslaved because they were viewed as inferior humans. That doesn't make it right, but that was the reason.

                        Jews were held from certain positions in Europe because they abused positions of power. They would come into a foreign country, take over powerful positions, prop up their own people and damn everyone else. Doesn't make the response right, but that's the reason for the restrictions you're referring to.

                        We still see this behavior today. Soros being a prominent example. Busing thousands of people across the US to start riots and cause political turmoil in our country. This is nothing new and standard practice when looking at their history. I'm speaking to only a certain segment of the Jewish population, specifically the globalists. Who yes, are a significant threat.



                        We're not being antisemtic we're just discussing factual history.
                        - emphasis mine

                        My apologies for reproducing the entire post, but I'd hate to be accused of taking any of the above statements out of context.

                        This is culled from a review of the infamous propaganda film The Eternal Jew published in an NSDAP publication in 1940.

                        . . . . Just like rats, the Jews 2000 years ago moved from the Middle East to Egypt, at that time a flourishing land. Even then they had all the criminal traits they display today, even then they were the enemies of hard-working, creative peoples. In large hordes they migrated from there to the “Promised Land,” flooded the entire Mediterranean region, broke into Spain, France, and Southern Germany, then followed the German colonists as they moved into the countries of the East. Along they way they remained eternal parasites, haggling and cheating. Poland above all became the enormous reservoir from which Jewry sent its agents to every leading nation of Europe and the world. . . . .

                        https://research.calvin.edu/german-p...chive/ewig.htm
                        And this is directly from the film The Eternal Jew.

                        Out of a thousand workers in Berlin, only two were Jews. For the start of 1933, out of one hundred prosecutors in Berlin 15 were Jews. Out of a hundred judges were 23 Jews. Out of a hundred lawyers 49 Jews. 52 Jews out of a hundred doctors. And out of every hundred of businessmen 60 Jews. The average wealth of Germans was 810 marks each. The average wealth of each Jew amounted to 10,000 marks.
                        The evidence for these assertions is unstated in the film. The occupational information is found in Germany's June 1933 census, which proves the claims made in the movie to be greatly exaggerated.

                        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Et...conomic_impact
                        So both TactiKill J. and the National Socialists maintain that Jews came into other people's countries, took the leading positions for themselves, and then manipulated the political and economic systems to their own advantage, and to the detriment of the indigenous inhabitants.

                        You're fairly fluent in German, aren't you John? Does the above translation jive with the original 1940 film?

                        https://archive.org/details/DEREWIGE...rnalJewENGSUBS

                        Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
                        Does it reach the level of Unite the Right touch light parades? Those are something to worry about.
                        The mouth-breathing morons singing songs at "Unite the Right" rallies can barely construct a proper sentence collectively, much less inspire thousands to follow their brand of stupidity. No, they're just sheep, existing for no other reason than to be led to slaughter. TactiKill J., on the other hand, he knows how to construct a sentence. He knows how to craft an argument. He even knows how to make Der Ewige Jude sound almost palatable to a 21st century audience. He's infinitely more dangerous than any dimwit waving a flag. He can fashion the very flag that he wants waved. Now that's dangerous.
                        I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                        Comment

                        Latest Topics

                        Collapse

                        Working...
                        X