Adam Kokesh and His Guns

Status
Not open for further replies.

mynym

Banned
Banned
In this thread? I didn't spot that. Did anyone answer?

If people didn't have a system in which oligarchs were borrowing money into existence from a private banking cartel creating it out of nothing every time they spent money, then groups of people might be able to form governments to create money out of nothing to finance more roads or whatever else.

They'd have to keep the amount of money they created and spent into existence on infrastructure or whatever else in line or balanced with wealth creation. In any event... you realize that the way that you want the government to "fund" or "finance" whatever you consider important is ultimately owned and operated by an international private banking cartel, correct?
 

Alhazred The Sane

Senior Member.
If people didn't have a system in which oligarchs were borrowing money into existence from a private banking cartel creating it out of nothing every time they spent money, then groups of people might be able to form governments to create money out of nothing to finance more roads or whatever else.

They'd have to keep the amount of money they created and spent into existence on infrastructure or whatever else in line or balanced with wealth creation. In any event... you realize that the way that you want the government to "fund" or "finance" whatever you consider important is ultimately owned and operated by an international private banking cartel, correct?

Not everyone lives in the US. You're moving the goalposts too. I'm not discussing the pros or cons of any one type of government, merely pointing out that there is a need for government.
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
Not everyone lives in the US.

Almost everyone lives in oligarchies created by central bankers and everyone tends to need dollars as their reserve currency. And even if they don't yet, everyone is typically on their way to being incorporated into "One World Trade" in a post 911 world where the New World Order Inc. is emerging.

You're moving the goalposts too. I'm not discussing the pros or cons of any one type of government, merely pointing out that there is a need for government.

Your goalposts are defined by pointing out that there is a need for government? Why do you seem to be moving your goalposts away from the topic and Kokesh? He's American and anti-Fed, as far as I know. (Being against the Fed and the growing Oligarchy Inc. of the American government that never saw an insider trading opportunity or a false flag idea that it didn't like, for the most part, is not the equivalent of being against government. Indeed, the only protection against criminals of this sort will probably be a government of "We the peasants..." that's by the people and for the people again. Not that it lasts long before oligarchs and central bankers get a hold of it... but another Whiskey Rebellion against the very people that lead any supposed "rebellion" by peasants and debt slaves might be fun.)

Does even someone like Kokesh supposedly deny your point that "there is a need for government"? I doubt it. In fact, he'd probably want to be a leader in a new form of government and so forth.

As far as I know, it's almost always the extent that's debatable. And at this point, the nature of the government involved is debatable too... you seem to think that "the government" isn't composed of central bankers mixing and blurring themselves together with the government in order to establish a monopoly on creating money out of nothing based on the government's monopoly on violence and coercion through auxiliaries like the Praetorian Guard/Secret Service/FBI/CIA/NSA/DHS/Team America. Meanwhile, back in reality... that's usually the case.

We're not talking about a representative form of government (democracy, democratic Republic, whatever) where people have given another group of People Inc. in the "common wealth" a Constitutionally/lawfully limited monopoly on violence and coercion in order to protect themselves and their wealth from criminals. Instead, at this point we're generally talking about a government composed of banksters and criminals reliant on lawless intelligence services that serve the interests of oligarchs and financial empires. (Thus many never saw a false flag that they couldn't turn a blind eye for their portion of the ponzi. There are only a few exceptions. Sibel Edmonds, Edward Snowden and other sticklers for the Constitution and patriotism that aren't as corrupt as the degenerates, oligarchs and banksters running the government into the ground in general now, etc.)

It's been said by people like Kokesh who wish to rebel against the current system of criminality that the Federal Reserve is as federal as Federal Express. But that's not the case. Is Federal Express run by criminals partnered with oligarchs taking advantage of what most peasants still perceive as a Constitutionally limited monopoly on violence and coercion granted to them by peasants in order to try to protect themselves from... terrorists and criminals? Can Federal Express force people to buy into their systems of trade or their products at the barrel of a gun or threaten to put people in jail or harass them with the FBI/DHS/NSA if they don't use or incorporate themselves in their business and profits? Can they threaten that there won't be enough "money" within their systems to build the roads if demands based on their own acts of financial terrorism aren't met? Etc.

Anyway, anyone know what Adam Kokesh's views on the gold standard are?

All I could find so far:
Sounds like foolishness to me. It's the role of the government to create money out of nothing and spend it into existence on infrastructure projects, balanced with wealth creation as a population grows and so forth. It might also up to people if they want "economic growth" all the time, given that the world is finite.

Guess I'll have to look up open currencies to see what he was saying there.
 

Alhazred The Sane

Senior Member.
Almost everyone lives in oligarchies created by central bankers and everyone tends to need dollars as their reserve currency. And even if they don't yet, everyone is typically on their way to being incorporated into "One World Trade" in a post 911 world where the New World Order Inc. is emerging.

Your goalposts are defined by pointing out that there is a need for government? Why do you seem to be moving your goalposts away from the topic and Kokesh? He's American and anti-Fed, as far as I know. (Being against the Fed and the growing Oligarchy Inc. of the American government that never saw an insider trading opportunity or a false flag idea that it didn't like, for the most part, is not the equivalent of being against government. Indeed, the only protection against criminals of this sort will probably be a government of "We the peasants..." that's by the people and for the people again. Not that it lasts long before oligarchs and central bankers get a hold of it... but another Whiskey Rebellion against the very people that lead any supposed "rebellion" by peasants and debt slaves might be fun.)

Does even someone like Kokesh supposedly deny your point that "there is a need for government"? I doubt it. In fact, he'd probably want to be a leader in a new form of government and so forth.

As far as I know, it's almost always the extent that's debatable. And at this point, the nature of the government involved is debatable too... you seem to think that "the government" isn't composed of central bankers mixing and blurring themselves together with the government in order to establish a monopoly on creating money out of nothing based on the government's monopoly on violence and coercion through auxiliaries like the Praetorian Guard/Secret Service/FBI/CIA/NSA/DHS/Team America. Meanwhile, back in reality... that's usually the case.

We're not talking about a representative form of government (democracy, democratic Republic, whatever) where people have given another group of People Inc. in the "common wealth" a Constitutionally/lawfully limited monopoly on violence and coercion in order to protect themselves and their wealth from criminals. Instead, at this point we're generally talking about a government composed of banksters and criminals reliant on lawless intelligence services that serve the interests of oligarchs and financial empires. (Thus many never saw a false flag that they couldn't turn a blind eye for their portion of the ponzi. There are only a few exceptions. Sibel Edmonds, Edward Snowden and other sticklers for the Constitution and patriotism that aren't as corrupt as the degenerates, oligarchs and banksters running the government into the ground in general now, etc.)

It's been said by people like Kokesh who wish to rebel against the current system of criminality that the Federal Reserve is as federal as Federal Express. But that's not the case. Is Federal Express run by criminals partnered with oligarchs taking advantage of what most peasants still perceive as a Constitutionally limited monopoly on violence and coercion granted to them by peasants in order to try to protect themselves from... terrorists and criminals? Can Federal Express force people to buy into their systems of trade or their products at the barrel of a gun or threaten to put people in jail or harass them with the FBI/DHS/NSA if they don't use or incorporate themselves in their business and profits? Can they threaten that there won't be enough "money" within their systems to build the roads if demands based on their own acts of financial terrorism aren't met? Etc.

Anyway, anyone know what Adam Kokesh's views on the gold standard are?

All I could find so far:
Sounds like foolishness to me. It's the role of the government to create money out of nothing and spend it into existence on infrastructure projects, balanced with wealth creation as a population grows and so forth. It might also up to people if they want "economic growth" all the time, given that the world is finite.

Guess I'll have to look up open currencies to see what he was saying there.

Didn't read all that. Whereas this thread began debunking Kokesh I have said nothing on the subject. I merely replied a few times to those talking about there being no need for government. I disagree, and for the reasons I've mentioned.

One thing I'm curious about: do you use 'and so forth' to sound like Noam Chomsky? I ask merely for information.
 

JeffreyNotGeoffrey

Active Member
A good story of why government is needed is the story of Deepak Desai and his chain of endoscopy clinics. This man was rich, very much so. He had several clinics in the Vegas valley that did brisk business, small surprise people like knowing if they have cancer. This man wasn't happy with well enough. His greed got the better of him, and he started cutting corners. Some of his cost cutting measures were inhumane (only allowing for pea sized amounts of lube to be used on the equipment) and others were completely illegal. Those measures involved reusing needles, vials of medicine, and "racing" to finish procedures that missed the cancers they were screening for. It finally took our mayor to pull his license to end the madness. Now the valley has god knows how many people infected with Hepatitis C, because of this jerk hole and his staff. If there were no government how would we fight this guy and punish him. Just saying his business would be done isn't going to comfort those that have Hep C from him, nor will it comfort the families of the departed. The only recourse would have been violence, and this idiot was smart enough to try to run. Thankfully he was stopped, caught, assets frozen, and is now sentenced to life. There's government at work protecting the people.
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
I doubt that very much

This seems accurate:
Not sure why this is debatable. The law:
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
Didn't read all that. Whereas this thread began debunking Kokesh I have said nothing on the subject.

Indeed.

I merely replied a few times to those talking about there being no need for government.

Who said that there was no need for government?

One thing I'm curious about: do you use 'and so forth' to sound like Noam Chomsky? I ask merely for information.

No. Do you think that people who usually have no idea what they're talking about usually begin talking about talking or the nature of talking and so forth instead? The facts remain, even if you can't be bothered to educate yourself about "the government" that Kokesh is talking about.... Kokesh is correct about the nature of the American government and the way that it is based on international bankers creating "money"/debt/petrodollars out of nothing while pulling everything away from local forms of representative government and toward the financial "special interests" that are created in the process.

And this is disastrous as far as wealth disparity and so on, given that a government of the people has been given a monopoly on violence and coercion in order to protect them. Not to mention that their representative government is also the only protection for peasants against criminal international bankers that have no allegiance to any government as well.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
A good story of why government is needed is the story of Deepak Desai and his chain of endoscopy clinics. This man was rich, very much so. He had several clinics in the Vegas valley that did brisk business, small surprise people like knowing if they have cancer. This man wasn't happy with well enough. His greed got the better of him, and he started cutting corners. Some of his cost cutting measures were inhumane (only allowing for pea sized amounts of lube to be used on the equipment) and others were completely illegal. Those measures involved reusing needles, vials of medicine, and "racing" to finish procedures that missed the cancers they were screening for. It finally took our mayor to pull his license to end the madness. Now the valley has god knows how many people infected with Hepatitis C, because of this jerk hole and his staff. If there were no government how would we fight this guy and punish him. Just saying his business would be done isn't going to comfort those that have Hep C from him, nor will it comfort the families of the departed. The only recourse would have been violence, and this idiot was smart enough to try to run. Thankfully he was stopped, caught, assets frozen, and is now sentenced to life. There's government at work protecting the people.

No doubt the town would have to lynch him if there were no government.
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
Probably because it's suitably vague and you can fill in the gaps with anything you want.

It's probably because people can avoid information they don't like by saying that it was too long to read and so forth. So it's not as if one needs to try to fill every gap in the big picture about their statements about "the government" and so forth for them. They have their own little almost impossibly provincial worldviews in which "the government" is spending money into existence on roads and so forth. Meanwhile back in reality, it's borrowing money into existence from international bankers at interest while creating debts that cannot be repaid... which will inevitably lead to there not being enough "money" for the government to build and maintain enough roads in the end. And then who will build the roads? (Chicago has already sold its parking meters to the sort of international corporations formed by petrodollars. And now that Dubai owns them, what will the rates be? And other politicians are already looking into how to sell the roads too. Etc.... wait, does "etc." sound like Chomsky?)

Apparently people making statements about "the government" here can't be bothered with familiarizing themselves with what's actually going on with respect to the sort of pseudo government being created/financed and then looted by banksters, a process that Kokesh seems to be criticizing and rebelling against. Apparently you're not even writing about what he's actually saying, so that's that.

People can become debt slaves and serfs building the roads. But the real questions seems to be, not who will build the roads... but who will sell them to the international corporations that tend to form when central bankers create money/debt and credit out of nothing?

In any event, if I tried to fill in with details or facts everything that seems vague to people that apparently like to think of themselves as "skeptics" or debunkers when they aren't even familiar with the facts then my comments would be even longer.
 
Last edited:
J

Joe

Guest
A good story of why government is needed is the story of Deepak Desai and his chain of endoscopy clinics. This man was rich, very much so. He had several clinics in the Vegas valley that did brisk business, small surprise people like knowing if they have cancer. This man wasn't happy with well enough. His greed got the better of him, and he started cutting corners. Some of his cost cutting measures were inhumane (only allowing for pea sized amounts of lube to be used on the equipment) and others were completely illegal. Those measures involved reusing needles, vials of medicine, and "racing" to finish procedures that missed the cancers they were screening for. It finally took our mayor to pull his license to end the madness. Now the valley has god knows how many people infected with Hepatitis C, because of this jerk hole and his staff. If there were no government how would we fight this guy and punish him. Just saying his business would be done isn't going to comfort those that have Hep C from him, nor will it comfort the families of the departed. The only recourse would have been violence, and this idiot was smart enough to try to run. Thankfully he was stopped, caught, assets frozen, and is now sentenced to life. There's government at work protecting the people.
That is really their only job . and most of the time they fail at that . Benghazi ? Fast and Furious ? Probably kill more then they save .
 
J

Joe

Guest
Yeah I have Joe, and I'm sure I know A LOT more about WWII and the Holocaust than you do. So you still don't want to retract the whole "UN is taking our guns" thing, considering it won't take your guns. Unless you have a bunch of illegally bought and internationally supplied guns. Just keep making bad holocaust references. Don't worry we're all laughing at you.
Thats good because you guys have me ROTFLMAO all the time . Laughter is good . when did you go to DC ? My brother worked at the Museum last year . Scary to see how those Nazis loved american progressives and our propaganda .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States
 

JeffreyNotGeoffrey

Active Member
Thats good because you guys have me ROTFLMAO all the time . Laughter is good . when did you go to DC ? My brother worked at the Museum last year . Scary to see how those Nazis loved american progressives and our propaganda .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States

Actually if you read a damn about Hitler and the Nazis, they really didn't like any political party other than the Nazis. And it wasn't the "evil American progressives" that did all the eugenics. It was a worldwide phenomenon, which showed how terrible and deeply rooted social darwinism had become. Notable was that the Nazis went further than anyone else in actually murdering these people. So while Hitler liked American productive capacities, he often wrote us off as shopkeepers and degenerates. He loved Henry Ford, and Ford loved him. Other than that Hitler hated our inclusive politics, but supported segregation and miscegenation. There isn't a lot of American love in Nazi Germany. It is sad watching those on the right constantly try to pin Hitler on the left, when Hitler was brought to power by the right. The left constantly fought him, and consequently were the first to go to the concentration camps. In fact the first batch of persecutions were against only KPD members and SPD members who didn't toe the line. Hitler was a reactionary conservative, brought to power by conservatives, to prop up a conservative agenda. So how many more times will you inaccurately try to pin Hitler to the left. It's funny to watch but sad. It shows that you don't have much professional history under your belt.
 
J

Joe

Guest
Actually if you read a damn about Hitler and the Nazis, they really didn't like any political party other than the Nazis. And it wasn't the "evil American progressives" that did all the eugenics. It was a worldwide phenomenon, which showed how terrible and deeply rooted social darwinism had become. Notable was that the Nazis went further than anyone else in actually murdering these people. So while Hitler liked American productive capacities, he often wrote us off as shopkeepers and degenerates. He loved Henry Ford, and Ford loved him. Other than that Hitler hated our inclusive politics, but supported segregation and miscegenation. There isn't a lot of American love in Nazi Germany. It is sad watching those on the right constantly try to pin Hitler on the left, when Hitler was brought to power by the right. The left constantly fought him, and consequently were the first to go to the concentration camps. In fact the first batch of persecutions were against only KPD members and SPD members who didn't toe the line. Hitler was a reactionary conservative, brought to power by conservatives, to prop up a conservative agenda. So how many more times will you inaccurately try to pin Hitler to the left. It's funny to watch but sad. It shows that you don't have much professional history under your belt.
National Socialism isnt right wing as in American politics , yes in Europe they were considered right wing , In America right is less government left is more government .
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
Unless you are discussing religion and moral stands, then it is the right that wants to define marriage, the right of a woman to control her own body, the right of teens to have access to birth control.
 

JeffreyNotGeoffrey

Active Member
And that is your opinion that wasn't backed up by the political compass thread we had. This was discussed and that position was dropped in favor of the dual axis model. Hitler is still right wing, or is "American" conservatism the special kind? Also the right in America is all for expanding government to watch pregnant women, keep down the gays from doing much of anything, and a number of other laws that seem to target specific groups much like a certain 1930/40s German political party did.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
I'm just disgusted by how much you think you can liken the US to Hitler and the Nazis. WHat is wrong with you Joe?
 
J

Joe

Guest
And that is your opinion that wasn't backed up by the political compass thread we had. This was discussed and that position was dropped in favor of the dual axis model. Hitler is still right wing, or is "American" conservatism the special kind? Also the right in America is all for expanding government to watch pregnant women, keep down the gays from doing much of anything, and a number of other laws that seem to target specific groups much like a certain 1930/40s German political party did.
political compass was bullcrap , not defined enough as you can see with the results . probably made by CGI group .
you are clueless unless your talking about John Mccain who is a progressive RINO (lefty ) http://freedom4america.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/linear-political-spectrum-parties-3a.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
J

Joe

Guest
I'm just disgusted by how much you think you can liken the US to Hitler and the Nazis. WHat is wrong with you Joe?
A history of Nazi influence on Long Island at Camp Siegfried http://longislandreport.org/feature...luence-on-long-island-at-camp-siegfried/11638 Just because I feel we are headed that way ? Its not like any country in the world trust us anymore ? We are becoming a socialist state (thats a Fact ) there is a lot or corporate fascism between Government and Major corporations . The media seems like a propaganda arm for the government . Should I add more ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

JeffreyNotGeoffrey

Active Member
And the GOP is for aggressive wars, the death penalty, banning abortion, and banning gays from public life. That in a nut shell is the Nazi social program which fits exactly with the GOP. Get some history first son, before you start sprinkling Rush's sad attempts to shoehorn the Nazis into the "left". As said, your sad political spectrum is held by really only you. The Nazis were to the right of the political spectrum. Sorry, until you have some degrees in poli sci, that won't budge. Plenty of historians have tread this ground, and it came up with surprise the Nazis are a creature of the right. You can try to do whatever pathetic thing you are doing, but the Nazis were a reactionary conservative movement. They grew up from the disaffected right after World War I in Europe. It was the conservative parties that courted them. It was the conservatives that gave them the keys to power. It was ONLY the left in the Socialists and Communists who actually fought Hitler in Germany. Hitler's worst enemy, other than the Jews, was the Soviet Union, which if you don't remember he tried to destroy. They are a right wing phenomenon. Maybe read the Continent's newspapers. They don't call Neo-Nazi groups radical leftists; they are called radical right wing racists, which is what they are.
 

JeffreyNotGeoffrey

Active Member
And OMG! I checked this German-American Federation. Turns out they weren't associated with any political party other than the Nazi Party back in Germany. They were openly Nazi and piqued the ire of the LOCAL government for a variety of reasons such as, being in the country illegally, tax evasion, and their anti-Semitic activities. Eventually even a Democrat in Congress took up the challenge and suppressed them and groups like them through legal means such as punishing them for draft evasion. In fact the Democrats in New York and Congress took their threat very seriously. So PLEASE Joe tell me how that reflects on the "progressives" when it seems they were going after them and stamping out their organization when they could? Or is this another one of those articles you didn't read/research and posted for shock effect?
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
A history of Nazi influence on Long Island at Camp Siegfried http://longislandreport.org/feature...luence-on-long-island-at-camp-siegfried/11638 Just because I feel we are headed that way ? Its not like any country in the world trust us anymore ? We are becoming a socialist state (thats a Fact ) there is a lot or corporate fascism between Government and Major corporations . The media seems like a propaganda arm for the government . Should I add more ?

What does that have to do with what I said?
Edit: I would add, Joe, that maybe it's because of people who think like you that "no country in the world trust us". When a vocal bunch of our own citizens who hate the president so much they will pin any lable on him they have constantly bellyache, criticize, and obstruct. Obama is the magic president: he's a commie, he's a nazi, he's a socialist, he's a fascist, he's Muslim...he's whatever you want him to be!
 
Last edited:

mynym

Banned
Banned
Actually if you read a damn about Hitler and the Nazis, they really didn't like any political party other than the Nazis. And it wasn't the "evil American progressives" that did all the eugenics. It was a worldwide phenomenon, which showed how terrible and deeply rooted social darwinism had become.

For example:
Notable was that the Nazis went further than anyone else in actually murdering these people.

Oh, that's great. I guess that means that "hidden hand" Masonic Marxists had better attitudes toward Jewish peasants or were not taken with Masonic/Darwinian creation myths that were a projection of colonialism/banksterism onto nature? When Marx struck out it was only against Jewish peasants and the upper middle class, it wasn't at the banksters that financed him through Engels. Right or Left, it's the hidden hand. I guess in the end it's a matter of spiritual insight, so you're going to keep trying to say that it's the "Right" or the "Left" hand of puppets like Marx instead of looking for where strings are most likely to be attached. What's next, do you think that Lenin and Trotsky were authentic voices of the peasantry and not the controlled opposition of bankers centralizing power?

It is sad watching those on the right constantly try to pin Hitler on the left, when Hitler was brought to power by the right.

National Socialists. Nationalism/Right and Socialism/Left. It's a fusion of the Right/warfare and the Left/welfare/Nazi doctors. There isn't necessarily a Right or Left to find in it.

Hitler was a reactionary conservative, brought to power by conservatives, to prop up a conservative agenda.

Their conservatism:
I could go on. But I wouldn't want to stress anyone's ability to read more than two sentences at a time.

So how many more times will you inaccurately try to pin Hitler to the left. It's funny to watch but sad. It shows that you don't have much professional history under your belt.

That was ironic. Because I hadn't noticed you quoting any peer reviewed journals of history to support your ideas about either Nazism or Marxism. It would seem that Metabunk often = provincial progressive worldview and all the distortions and ignorant reasoning that tends to go along with the progressive view.

Not that anyone here would be thinking this way but a sample of ignorant progressive reasoning would look something like this: "The Nazis were conservatives, pretty much just like the Tea Party or somethin'. Just look at Ernst Roehm, the Nazi homosexuals and the anti-vivisection laws and all of it. It's all just like the Tea Party. After all, I don't like the Tea Party and I don't like Nazis, case closed. But Marx was better because he was on the Left and wasn't a racist... and stuff.. or somethin'."

If that ignorant reasoning looks like anything that might show up in threads of thought here, it might be because people here apparently get a little tired after reading two sentences or coming across something that doesn't fit their provincial worldview. And that's probably why they remain ignorant. Because peer reviewed journals of history and so forth are too long.
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
Whoever I was replying to at the time. And so forth ...

I doubt that they or Kokesh were saying that there's no need for government or the concept of people incorporating in corporations and a common wealth, at all.

Because if they were honestly saying that then they'd be living off the grid in a hut alone (With no roads! Just kidding... they could still make a road to their hut.) instead of posting on Facebook or trying to become leaders in social movements to take on other forms of pseudo Government Inc. by criminal banksters and oligarchs, as Kokesh apparently is.
 

Alhazred The Sane

Senior Member.
I doubt that they or Kokesh were saying that there's no need for government or the concept of people incorporating in corporations and a common wealth, at all.

Because if they were honestly saying that then they'd be living off the grid in a hut alone (With no roads! Just kidding... they could still make a road to their hut.) instead of posting on Facebook or trying to become leaders in social movements to take on other forms of pseudo Government Inc. by criminal banksters and oligarchs, as Kokesh apparently is.

Don't guess or speculate on what someone wrote, and that I replied to; go back and follow the thread. Before you interjected your weighty piece my contribution was just a response to the Swedish gent who considered no government to be better than government. I disagreed. We had no need to get 'Hidden Hands' or Praetorian Guards involved at all.
 

mynym

Banned
Banned
Unless you are discussing religion and moral stands, then it is the right that wants to define marriage, the right of a woman to control her own body, the right of teens to have access to birth control.

Are libertarians like Kokesh "the right"? Both liberals and conservatives want to define marriage through the government, they merely differ over how best to use an institution of the government that arose from racism and the "You'll need a license for that now." eugenics movement in order to impose their values and view of the world on others.

Women can control their own bodies. It's the bodies of others that people tend to be concerned about.

I wasn't aware that teens have a right to access to birth control or what the basis of that right is in a world where it is simultaneously being said that the same person actually didn't have any rights as an individual when they were dependent on their mother in the womb. Perhaps one could work backward to say that the monopoly on violence and/or coercion delegated to the government should be used to protect the right to life of others, in order to safeguard their apparent right to access to birth control later?
 
J

Joe

Guest
What does that have to do with what I said?
Edit: I would add, Joe, that maybe it's because of people who think like you that "no country in the world trust us". When a vocal bunch of our own citizens who hate the president so much they will pin any lable on him they have constantly bellyache, criticize, and obstruct. Obama is the magic president: he's a commie, he's a nazi, he's a socialist, he's a fascist, he's Muslim...he's whatever you want him to be!
He is the No accounability president . I didnt know .
 
J

Joe

Guest
And the GOP is for aggressive wars, the death penalty, banning abortion, and banning gays from public life. That in a nut shell is the Nazi social program which fits exactly with the GOP. Get some history first son, before you start sprinkling Rush's sad attempts to shoehorn the Nazis into the "left". As said, your sad political spectrum is held by really only you. The Nazis were to the right of the political spectrum. Sorry, until you have some degrees in poli sci, that won't budge. Plenty of historians have tread this ground, and it came up with surprise the Nazis are a creature of the right. You can try to do whatever pathetic thing you are doing, but the Nazis were a reactionary conservative movement. They grew up from the disaffected right after World War I in Europe. It was the conservative parties that courted them. It was the conservatives that gave them the keys to power. It was ONLY the left in the Socialists and Communists who actually fought Hitler in Germany. Hitler's worst enemy, other than the Jews, was the Soviet Union, which if you don't remember he tried to destroy. They are a right wing phenomenon. Maybe read the Continent's newspapers. They don't call Neo-Nazi groups radical leftists; they are called radical right wing racists, which is what they are.
Who likes the GOP ? Im not a party person . I vote for the individual . It just happens to be all democratic canidates are the same . They suck and there are no more conservative democrats . Such as Larry Patton Mc Donald since the commies killed him . conservative differ from country to country , the Uk has a conservative party and they are about as far left as our democarts here in the states . Nazi nationalist socailist party . Not natioanist conservative party . socialist . So stop with your revisionist history .
 

solrey

Senior Member.
The National Socialist German Workers Party were "socialist" in name only. The Nazi's went after socialists and communists before they targeted the Jews. Talk about revisionist history. And ignorant? You wanna see ignorant? Take one look in the mirror, dude.
 
J

Joe

Guest
The National Socialist German Workers Party were "socialist" in name only. The Nazi's went after socialists and communists before they targeted the Jews. Talk about revisionist history. And ignorant? You wanna see ignorant? Take one look in the mirror, dude.

Ill take that as a direct insult . They were big government leftist Fascist communist socailist all big government total control . Communist killed far more then even the Nazis .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism_and_socialism
 
Last edited by a moderator:

solrey

Senior Member.


Ill take that as a direct insult . They were big government leftist Fascist communist socailist all big government total control . Communist killed far more then even the Nazis .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism_and_socialism

Right, "a very different kind of socialist".

And recite this while you're staring into that mirror Joe...

"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak out for me."

Ya see, you'll be that guy Joe, because you don't strike me as somebody who would speak out for dreaded liberal minded people like me. Don't even go down this road, I read Mein Kampf when I was a kid because I wanted to understand what would drive an entire nation to do that after my grandfather showed me pictures of the war and concentration camps with the body parts sorted and stacked like chord wood. He was a cook for the lead troops so he was among those that liberated the camps. You don't have a clue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
J Adam Kokesh Open Carry March Agent Provocateur General Discussion 2
Mick West TFTRH #16: Adam Taylor – Retired 9/11 Truth Activist Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 0
Mick West Adam Taylor's Withdrawal from the 9/11 Truth Movement Escaping The Rabbit Hole 4
Belfrey Debunked: Claim that injury makeup shows Alison Parker and Adam Ward as "crisis actors." Conspiracy Theories 8
Mick West Hoax: AirAsia QZ8501 Black Box Voice Recorder [Alleged Adam Air 574 in 2007] General Discussion 0
jvnk08 Debunked: Sandy Hook: "End the life of Adam" Sandy Hook 13
jvnk08 SSDI says Adam Lanza died a day before Sandy Hook massacre Sandy Hook 20
MikeG VA Taking Veterans' Guns Conspiracy Theories 0
Mick West Debunked: LaVoy Finicum Only Carried his Gun on His Right. [He Carried Two Guns] General Discussion 24
deirdre Claim:Republicans block bill to stop terrorists from buying guns General Discussion 9
Mick West H.R. 5344 - Bill Banning Enhanced Body Armor Conspiracy Theories 92
Hingefactor Dept of Agriculture Orders Submachine Guns with 30 Round Magazine General Discussion 66
Libertarian Needs Debunking: More Guns = More Crime General Discussion 156
Mick West Connecticut Gun Owners Refusing to Register Their Guns? General Discussion 6
BlueCollarCritic Debunked Conspiracies Update - The Government Is Not Confiscating Guns General Discussion 18
Mick West Debunked: Sandy Hook: The Guns, Assault Rifle, Gun in the Trunk, Handguns Sandy Hook 15

Related Articles

Top