Phase 5 of converting the U.S. to full fledged communism is now under way

[Esmeralda]

I did - no hits.

You can thank Obama for that. Alot has been removed from the internet and Google since he took office. You'll have to ask around and let someone tell about it. It is hardly a secret. A good contact would be Act! For America! Brigitte Gabrielle's website - they surely have the information - another source you can look up directly - WND - World Net Daily did the actual stories on Houghlin - Mifflin school books and the story on John Walker Lindh - also the story about the Clintons opening door for Muslims on the Islamic teaching school books - also the story about the Iranian replaced by the blonde Swede was ran by World Net Daily and several other sites as well. Do a search on World Net Daily and it will give you the articles. Check the archives.. - Jeremiah

You’ve got to be kidding…

This is one of many reasons why you and most on the right are rarely, if ever, taken seriously.

Exactly!

 

[P@triot]

Anecdotes from one person with an agenda, but which are contradicted by history does not equal documentation.

The most obvious bullshit meter moment of the story was the part about equality of women. The complete opposite was Nazi policy, as is widely documented, and not just by some speaker at a teabagger rally.

"Today women's battalions were being formed in Marxist countries, and to that one could only reply, "That will never happen here! There are things a man does, and he alone is responsible for them. I would be ashamed to be a German man if ever, in the event of war, but a single woman were made to go to the front." The woman had her own battlefield. With every child to which she gave birth for the nation, she was waging her battle for the nation. The man stands up for the Volk just as woman stands up for the family. A woman's equal rights lie in the fact that she is treated with the high regard she
deserves in those areas of life assigned to her by nature."
-- Adolf Hitler; from speech to NS Frauenschaft (September 13, 1935)

"Whereas previously the programs of the liberal, intellectualist women's movements contained many points, the program of our National Socialist Women's movement has in reality but one single point, and that point is the child, that tiny creation which must be born and grow strong and which alone gives meaning to the whole life-struggle"
-- Adolf Hitler; from speech to the National Socialist Women’s League (Sept. 8, 1934)

Hey Agit8r, I know the only way one becomes a liberal is by being uneducated, by might I suggest you break with tradition just this once and read a book about the Holocaust. It's called: "How Do You Kill 11 Million People?" by Andy Andrews.

Well, since the left is not particularly literate, how about some quick audio? I urge everyone to listen to this. The answer to the question "How Do You Kill 11 Million People?" is astounding.

[ame=http://youtu.be/mDKcF--1hEc]"How Do You Kill 11 Million People?" by Andy Andrews - YouTube[/ame]

I disagree Rottweiler; I know it's possible to be an educated liberal because I had a couple professors in college who were radical leftist.

The only real requirements are they must abandon all common sense and become proficient at ignoring reality.(of this I am 100% serious)

BTW, great video and very relevant because of the overwhelming trust so many Americans are putting in government in the 21st Century.

It's beyond frightening, isn't it? These idiots actually believe Obama cares about them. They actually believe Nancy Pelosi is working to improve their lives. They actually believe Harry Reid worries about their needs.

Meanwhile, all 3 of these assholes take private jets to Martha's Vineyard and suck down $1,000 bottle of wines while laughing at the ignorant liberal who thinks their party gives a fuck about them....

 

[P@triot]

I did - no hits.

You can thank Obama for that. Alot has been removed from the internet and Google since he took office. You'll have to ask around and let someone tell about it. It is hardly a secret. A good contact would be Act! For America! Brigitte Gabrielle's website - they surely have the information - another source you can look up directly - WND - World Net Daily did the actual stories on Houghlin - Mifflin school books and the story on John Walker Lindh - also the story about the Clintons opening door for Muslims on the Islamic teaching school books - also the story about the Iranian replaced by the blonde Swede was ran by World Net Daily and several other sites as well. Do a search on World Net Daily and it will give you the articles. Check the archives.. - Jeremiah

LMAO Unbelievable. It must be spooky as hell to live inside your brain. You are a perfect example of why the average citizen should not have access to weapons, as is Rottweiler. Crazy, fucking nutjobs.

Yeah, the Obama administration would never scrub information from web sites or alter information on web sites.....

Obama W.H. change official biography pages of past presidents? ? Cafferty File - CNN.com Blogs

Obama Inserts Himself into White House Website Biographies of Previous Presidents - The Rush Limbaugh Show

Obama's fatal flaw revealed in White House website's presidential bios | Fox News

What not to do when updating the White House web site | Fox News



You want to keep going, stupid bitch?

 

[Agit8r]

This is the mindset of a liberal under the spell of Obama. They will believe the lies of Hitler and Obama before listening to Kitty Werthmann who was there, lived through it and knows exactly what it is all about! The liberal is determined to condemn the evidence without examination of it ( you can bet he didn't read the full article ) in order to remain in eternal ignorance and continue on... it is the way they are wired perhaps? - Jeremiah

DID examine. DID fact-check. The OBVIOUS inaccuracies suggest that the whole tale is false.

url=Women in the Third Reich

It is not wise to link to a site to support an argument without reading the whole article that you are linking to. In fact, the link site supports the fact that women were used in the Nazi army. "The need for labor prompted the state to prod women into the workforce (for example, through the Duty Year, the compulsory-service plan for all women) and even into the military itself (the number of female auxiliaries in the German armed forces approached 500,000 by 1945). " Last sentence of the link (link had to be deleted as I am below 15 posts).

On the other hand after rereading the story by Kitty, it seems that she was referring to women being used in the military before the period where the need for labor was so great that women were used in the military. So I can't say that there is no contradiction with the Kitty story.

Clearly, the part about Hitler introducing women's equality is bogus. At best, she has taken a kernel of truth and wrapped it it the talking points of the group she represents:

as shown here: http://www.eagleforum.org/misc/descript.html

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

I did - no hits.

You can thank Obama for that. Alot has been removed from the internet and Google since he took office. You'll have to ask around and let someone tell about it. It is hardly a secret. A good contact would be Act! For America! Brigitte Gabrielle's website - they surely have the information - another source you can look up directly - WND - World Net Daily did the actual stories on Houghlin - Mifflin school books and the story on John Walker Lindh - also the story about the Clintons opening door for Muslims on the Islamic teaching school books - also the story about the Iranian replaced by the blonde Swede was ran by World Net Daily and several other sites as well. Do a search on World Net Daily and it will give you the articles. Check the archives.. - Jeremiah

LMAO Unbelievable. It must be spooky as hell to live inside your brain. You are a perfect example of why the average citizen should not have access to weapons, as is Rottweiler. Crazy, fucking nutjobs.

I can see that you are a very hate filled person who cannot tolerate truth that doesn't line up with your agenda. I find it very sad when I happen to come across people such as you. If you died tonight do you know where you'd be? You'd be in hell. You are as lost as it gets. Find a bible and find God because without him? You haven't got a chance of making it through what is coming. Much less what comes afterwards. - Jeremiah

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Serious question: why do you liberals insist on being this stupid? I'm a die-hard conservative. I believe in small government. I believe in governmentn with limited power. I believe in freedom. How in the hell does that even remotely resemble Ahmadinejad who is a big-government, unlimited power, totalitarian like you liberals?!?!

You're neither. You're a bought and sold sheep to the corrupt partisan system that has wrecked this country but you don't care, Crotchrottweiler. You only care about YOUR side winning and the hell with America.

Says the dolt whose side is collapsing America with socialism/marxism/communism.

Keep surrendering your freedoms and rights to Obama or some other "dear leader" in exchange for government table scraps, you government-dependent little infant.....

And you refer to KnobbyWalsh as a ‘dolt’?

lol

 

[P@triot]

You're neither. You're a bought and sold sheep to the corrupt partisan system that has wrecked this country but you don't care, Crotchrottweiler. You only care about YOUR side winning and the hell with America.

Says the dolt whose side is collapsing America with socialism/marxism/communism.

Keep surrendering your freedoms and rights to Obama or some other "dear leader" in exchange for government table scraps, you government-dependent little infant.....

And you refer to KnobbyWalsh as a ‘dolt’?

lol

Yes. Which part did you not understand - the DO or the LT?

I forgot, I'm dealing with a person here who feels they can't put their shirt on in the morning unless the government helps them.

I'm dealing with a GREEDY and LAZY liberal who would rather trade the most valuable thing man has ever known (freedom and rights) for some worthless government table scraps...

 

[P@triot]

I have no idea where you are going with this....it's almost like you are suggesting Hitler was really left wing, which is obviously nonsense.

Um, Hitler was the very definition of left-wing.

I noticed you ran from my post like a little girl (because, well, as usual it exposed you for the ignorant dumb-ass that you are) - so I'm going to ask this again. For once, can you try to be rational? Just once?

Conservatives believe in small government with limited power (Hitler had unlimited power with a huge government controlling everything). Which means the more "radical" you go right, government continues to get smaller and less powerful (Sovereign Citizen) until you reach the most radical form of all - no government (ie Anarchist).

Liberals believe in large government controlling everything. Which means, the more "radical" you go left, government continues to get bigger and more powerful until you have fascism, totalitarianism, communism, etc.

Hitler was the ultimate left-wing radical. How ANYONE could refer to Hitler as "right-wing" is beyond stupefying. Hitler was a small government, limited power freedom lover?!?! Really?!?

Jesus H. Christ is Saigon the most ignorant mother-fucker (typical of socialist Europeans).[/QUOTE]

 

[P@triot]

I have no idea where you are going with this....it's almost like you are suggesting Hitler was really left wing, which is obviously nonsense.

I want to officially apologize to Saigon. Anytime you address a person or a group of people, the first thing you should do is consider your target audience and adjust accordingly.

Well, I failed to account for the fact that I'm dealing with a mental-midget, and that is my fault. I would like to correct that mistake right here and now, and dumb this down to your level. So we're going to start here:

Yes or No, Saigon - did Adolf Hitler believe in limited power?

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Anecdotes from one person with an agenda, but which are contradicted by history does not equal documentation.

The most obvious bullshit meter moment of the story was the part about equality of women. The complete opposite was Nazi policy, as is widely documented, and not just by some speaker at a teabagger rally.

"Today women's battalions were being formed in Marxist countries, and to that one could only reply, "That will never happen here! There are things a man does, and he alone is responsible for them. I would be ashamed to be a German man if ever, in the event of war, but a single woman were made to go to the front." The woman had her own battlefield. With every child to which she gave birth for the nation, she was waging her battle for the nation. The man stands up for the Volk just as woman stands up for the family. A woman's equal rights lie in the fact that she is treated with the high regard she
deserves in those areas of life assigned to her by nature."
-- Adolf Hitler; from speech to NS Frauenschaft (September 13, 1935)

"Whereas previously the programs of the liberal, intellectualist women's movements contained many points, the program of our National Socialist Women's movement has in reality but one single point, and that point is the child, that tiny creation which must be born and grow strong and which alone gives meaning to the whole life-struggle"
-- Adolf Hitler; from speech to the National Socialist Women’s League (Sept. 8, 1934)

Hey Agit8r, I know the only way one becomes a liberal is by being uneducated, by might I suggest you break with tradition just this once and read a book about the Holocaust. It's called: "How Do You Kill 11 Million People?" by Andy Andrews.

Well, since the left is not particularly literate, how about some quick audio? I urge everyone to listen to this. The answer to the question "How Do You Kill 11 Million People?" is astounding.

[ame=http://youtu.be/mDKcF--1hEc]"How Do You Kill 11 Million People?" by Andy Andrews - YouTube[/ame]

I disagree Rottweiler; I know it's possible to be an educated liberal because I had a couple professors in college who were radical leftist.

The only real requirements are they must abandon all common sense and become proficient at ignoring reality.(of this I am 100% serious)

BTW, great video and very relevant because of the overwhelming trust so many Americans are putting in government in the 21st Century.

That is brilliant. The only real requirements are they must abandon all common sense and be proficient at ignoring reality. I have never heard anyone say that before but you have nailed it in a single sentence. Perfectly. What a bright mind you have! Bravo!

- Jeremiah

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

The video is excellent. The very last words reminded me of Obama so very much! He is using the same exact method as Hitler did. A very dangerous man. Just as Hitler was. Thanks for the video! - Jeremiah

 

[Faun]

Firearm bans aren't predicted to reduce all violence -- they're predicted to reduce murder by firearms. Violent people will still be violent even without a gun.

So you're flat out admitting that you don't give a fuck if people die, you only care that they die by guns...

No, but then I'm not one bit surprised an imbecile like you translated my words into your words.

What a fuck'n tool. Ladies & Gentlemen - this is the modern day idiot liberal dumbocrat. They don't give a fuck about human life, they just have an irrational hatred of guns.

And you gathered that idiocy from me pointing out that there were 9,369 murders by firearm in the U.S. compared to 14 in the U.K.? That's what leads you to believe I "don't give a fuck about human life?" You're a fucking retard.

If you want to take an automobile and plow through a street cafe, they are ok with that. If you want to take a bomb and blow up a movie theatre - they are cool with that. If you want to stab a family of 4 to death, they are down with that. But don't you dare pick up a gun![/B]

This is the evidence that you're a retard as I never said I am ok with someone murdering people with a car. That's your lunacy driving your demented thoughts; nothing I said.

 

[P@triot]

Firearm bans aren't predicted to reduce all violence -- they're predicted to reduce murder by firearms. Violent people will still be violent even without a gun.

So you're flat out admitting that you don't give a fuck if people die, you only care that they die by guns...

No, but then I'm not one bit surprised an imbecile like you translated my words into your words.

What a fuck'n tool. Ladies & Gentlemen - this is the modern day idiot liberal dumbocrat. They don't give a fuck about human life, they just have an irrational hatred of guns.

And you gathered that idiocy from me pointing out that there were 9,369 murders by firearm in the U.S. compared to 14 in the U.K.? That's what leads you to believe I "don't give a fuck about human life?" You're a fucking retard.

If you want to take an automobile and plow through a street cafe, they are ok with that. If you want to take a bomb and blow up a movie theatre - they are cool with that. If you want to stab a family of 4 to death, they are down with that. But don't you dare pick up a gun![/B]

This is the evidence that you're a retard as I never said I am ok with someone murdering people with a car. That's your lunacy driving your demented thoughts; nothing I said.

Hey stupid, you admitted that banning guns doesn't stop violent crime and you admitted that the UK has more violent crime than us (because they don't have guns to protect themselves). Yet all you focus on is banning guns and the fact that the UK has less gun deaths because their guns are banned. Those are YOU words, stupid.

Which means you don't care about violent crime (since you acknowledge that banning guns doesn't stop it, but you still want to ban guns). Here are is your exact quote:


Quote: Originally Posted by Faun
Firearm bans aren't predicted to reduce all violence -- they're predicted to reduce murder by firearms. Violent people will still be violent even without a gun.

Don't be an asshole and get pissed at me because I pointed out your own words to everyone.....

 

[Faun]

Firearm bans aren't predicted to reduce all violence -- they're predicted to reduce murder by firearms. Violent people will still be violent even without a gun.

The idiot liberal mantra: let people DIE! Let women be raped! Let assaults end with death or permanent injury. Let the atrocities commence! Just make sure we ban guns because I know nothing about them and thus they scare me!

I like how you highlight your lunacy in big fonts. It accentuates your idiocy.

Firearm bans aren't predicted to reduce all violence -- they're predicted to reduce murder by firearms. Violent people will still be violent even without a gun.

Duuuh! We're liberals stupid - we don't care if people are horribly beaten to death, stabbed to death, strangled to death, set on fire, or blown up. We only care if a gun is used. We are obsessed with guns. We fear guns. We think about guns 24x7. It's not about human life, it's about guns.

Fucking retard, that's why I compared the number of all murders per capita between the U.S. and the U.K.. To show you that there are far fewer people murdered in the U.K. than in the U.S. Employing your logic, you must love that more people are killed in the U.S. than in the U.K.. It's stupid logic, but it's your logic.

 

[Faun]

So you're flat out admitting that you don't give a fuck if people die, you only care that they die by guns...

No, but then I'm not one bit surprised an imbecile like you translated my words into your words.


And you gathered that idiocy from me pointing out that there were 9,369 murders by firearm in the U.S. compared to 14 in the U.K.? That's what leads you to believe I "don't give a fuck about human life?" You're a fucking retard.

If you want to take an automobile and plow through a street cafe, they are ok with that. If you want to take a bomb and blow up a movie theatre - they are cool with that. If you want to stab a family of 4 to death, they are down with that. But don't you dare pick up a gun![/B]

This is the evidence that you're a retard as I never said I am ok with someone murdering people with a car. That's your lunacy driving your demented thoughts; nothing I said.

Hey stupid, you admitted that banning guns doesn't stop violent crime and you admitted that the UK has more violent crime than us (because they don't have guns to protect themselves). Yet all you focus on is banning guns and the fact that the UK has less gun deaths because their guns are banned. Those are YOU words, stupid.

Which means you don't care about violent crime (since you acknowledge that banning guns doesn't stop it, but you still want to ban guns). Here are is your exact quote:


Quote: Originally Posted by Faun
Firearm bans aren't predicted to reduce all violence -- they're predicted to reduce murder by firearms. Violent people will still be violent even without a gun.

Now you're arguing correlation without causation. Prove the part I highlighted in red.....

Don't be an asshole and get pissed at me because I pointed out your own words to everyone.....[/B]

Imbecile, why would I be angry at you? You're a complete idiot; I pity you. Let's not forget, you were the one to moronically claim that Hitler was elected and that VBush made a comment in 2006 because he needed to get re-elected. Single digit IQ like yours merits pity, not anger.

 

[Grandma]

Has anyone yet been able to find a single quote from a democrat saying that the left plans on passing a bill that will ban all private gun ownership?



No.


This is a non-issue.
Typical radical right wingnut scare tactic.


Fail.

Try getting a carry permit in NYC. Progressives aim to fight the Second Amendment one baby step at a time. Who do you think you are kidding?

Keeping just anyone from running through the country's largest city with a loaded gun does not equate with the federal government coming into your house and confiscating all weapons.

I ask again, give me the name of a single government official who plans on outlawing ALL guns.

 

[P@triot]

Fucking retard, that's why I compared the number of all murders per capita between the U.S. and the U.K.. To show you that there are far fewer people murdered in the U.K. than in the U.S. Employing your logic, you must love that more people are killed in the U.S. than in the U.K.. It's stupid logic, but it's your logic.

Anything to ignore the facts, uh?

Both the UK (guns completely banned) and Australia (guns completely banned) have the highest violent crime rate in the world. Higher than the U.S. Period.

So you're ok with women being raped? You're ok with people being severely assaulted? You're ok murder?

The bottom line, obviously guns are keeping us MUCH safer as we have lower violent crime than both the nations which have completely banned them.

You lose fool (as usual).

 

[P@triot]

Has anyone yet been able to find a single quote from a democrat saying that the left plans on passing a bill that will ban all private gun ownership?



No.


This is a non-issue.
Typical radical right wingnut scare tactic.


Fail.

Try getting a carry permit in NYC. Progressives aim to fight the Second Amendment one baby step at a time. Who do you think you are kidding?

Keeping just anyone from running through the country's largest city with a loaded gun does not equate with the federal government coming into your house and confiscating all weapons.

I ask again, give me the name of a single government official who plans on outlawing ALL guns.

Barack Obama
Nancy Pelosi
Harry Reid
Dianne Feinstein
Michael Bloomberg

The list goes on. Don't you look like the uneducated fool?

 

[P@triot]

No, but then I'm not one bit surprised an imbecile like you translated my words into your words.


And you gathered that idiocy from me pointing out that there were 9,369 murders by firearm in the U.S. compared to 14 in the U.K.? That's what leads you to believe I "don't give a fuck about human life?" You're a fucking retard.


This is the evidence that you're a retard as I never said I am ok with someone murdering people with a car. That's your lunacy driving your demented thoughts; nothing I said.

Hey stupid, you admitted that banning guns doesn't stop violent crime and you admitted that the UK has more violent crime than us (because they don't have guns to protect themselves). Yet all you focus on is banning guns and the fact that the UK has less gun deaths because their guns are banned. Those are YOU words, stupid.

Which means you don't care about violent crime (since you acknowledge that banning guns doesn't stop it, but you still want to ban guns). Here are is your exact quote:


Quote: Originally Posted by Faun
Firearm bans aren't predicted to reduce all violence -- they're predicted to reduce murder by firearms. Violent people will still be violent even without a gun.
Now you're arguing correlation without causation. Prove the part I highlighted in red.....

Uh - I just did stupid. The UK and Australia have the highest violent crime in the world. And they have banned guns. This isn't rocket science you fuck'n moron

 

[Grandma]

Try getting a carry permit in NYC. Progressives aim to fight the Second Amendment one baby step at a time. Who do you think you are kidding?

Keeping just anyone from running through the country's largest city with a loaded gun does not equate with the federal government coming into your house and confiscating all weapons.

I ask again, give me the name of a single government official who plans on outlawing ALL guns.

Barack Obama
Nancy Pelosi
Harry Reid
Dianne Feinstein
Michael Bloomberg

The list goes on. Don't you look like the uneducated fool?

You are lying. None of them are trying to outlaw all guns and ban gun ownership.

Now, I'll try again, is there anyone out there that can name a single government official who plans on outlawing ALL guns.