On Sun, 05 Feb 2006, "Jack Bauer's Spunky Sidekick, Ian J. Ball" <ijball***SPAM-No***@mac.com.invalid> wrote:
In article <16169-43E5DD31-304@storefull-3278.bay.webtv.net>,
holefamily1@webtv.net (Face Transplant Recipient Mr. Hole) wrote:
If you want to watch crazy muslims attacking the Danish Consulate in
Beirut at 5:40 in the morning you can only find it there, both MSNBC and
FOX were running old crappy repeats on their supposedly 24 hour news
networks.
It's only CNN if their reporters were cheering on the bloodthirsty mob.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Good point. And it draws sharp contrast to the peaceful
protests by Republicans against Liberal television shows
and Liberal news media that routinely mocks Christianity.
Hallelujah! The United States Supreme Court is *OURS*!
Daniel Joseph Min
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x2B1CCFE7
*Download Min's Banned (Freeware) Books:
http://www.2hot2cool.com/11/danieljosephmin/
*Min's Google-Archived Home Page On The WWW:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=XJBDEJF138262.9022453704@anonymous.poster
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQA/AwUBQ+ZqE5ljD7YrHM/nEQKDgwCgo6L0+swZIJh2//q9F3kyv2npNkgAoMK3
tXu5R7sdVXWy2P4vnbT64xea
=52tw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
05 Feb 2006 10:25:20 PM |
|
|
*All* TV news is run by wealthy, GOPcentric corporations, you
ignorant, L00ny sucker.
Daniel Joseph Min wrote:
On Sun, 05 Feb 2006, "Jack Bauer's Spunky Sidekick, Ian J. Ball" <ijball***SPAM-No***@mac.com.invalid> wrote:
In article <16169-43E5DD31-304@storefull-3278.bay.webtv.net>,
holefamily1@webtv.net (Face Transplant Recipient Mr. Hole) wrote:
If you want to watch crazy muslims attacking the Danish Consulate in
Beirut at 5:40 in the morning you can only find it there, both MSNBC and
FOX were running old crappy repeats on their supposedly 24 hour news
networks.
It's only CNN if their reporters were cheering on the bloodthirsty mob.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Good point. And it draws sharp contrast to the peaceful
protests by Republicans against Liberal television shows
and Liberal news media that routinely mocks Christianity.
Hallelujah! The United States Supreme Court is *OURS*!
Daniel Joseph Min
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x2B1CCFE7
*Download Min's Banned (Freeware) Books:
http://www.2hot2cool.com/11/danieljosephmin/
*Min's Google-Archived Home Page On The WWW:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=XJBDEJF138262.9022453704@anonymous.poster
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQA/AwUBQ+ZqE5ljD7YrHM/nEQKDgwCgo6L0+swZIJh2//q9F3kyv2npNkgAoMK3
tXu5R7sdVXWy2P4vnbT64xea
=52tw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
06 Feb 2006 07:09:46 PM |
|
|
<atlasrecrd@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1139199920.248440.206580@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
*All* TV news is run by wealthy, GOPcentric corporations, you
ignorant, L00ny sucker.
Deaf, dumb and blind or what? Crack?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Traveler" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
06 Feb 2006 05:49:40 PM |
|
|
*All* TV news is run by wealthy, GOPcentric corporations, you
ignorant, L00ny sucker.
Corporations - yes, GOPcentric ones? Not hardly. The political left
held a monopoly on the broadcasting of national news for almost 50
years. Only the propagation of cable/satellite broadcasts finally
broke this monopoly. Interesting that there was a lot of screaming
about a conservative political bias in the news, but almost nothing
about a politically biases media fixture which had finally run its
course.
Bernard Goldberg's 'Bias' has been in publication for something like
four or five years. And is worth the read. Lots of screaming from the
left about the content, but nothing by way of a rebuttal.
If you prefer to have your news and news magazine programs slanted to
the political left you can always - at a minimum - watch PBS and listen
to NRP.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher Helms" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
06 Feb 2006 09:03:36 PM |
|
|
Corporations - yes, GOPcentric ones?
So General Electric, Westinghouse, Clear Channel, Sinclair
Broadcasting, Rupert Murdochs Newscorp and Time/Warner are a run by a
bunch of sandal wearing, tree hugging leftist hippies? It just doesn't
work. You can't claim Rupert Murdoch and Jack Welch and the people who
run these corporations are mortal enemies of conservatives. It doesn't
even pass the giggle test. The people running Clear Channel have more
connections to the Bush administration than Jack Abramoff.
Not hardly. The political left
held a monopoly on the broadcasting of national news for almost 50
years. Only the propagation of cable/satellite broadcasts finally
broke this monopoly.
No. The consolidation of virtually the entire media into a very few
entities by a handful of Republican-friendly corporations is what broke
the "monopoly" you are speaking of. If there ever was a "liberal
media," it was never as powerful as righties like to fantasize it was.
And to fringe lunatics like Ann Coulter and Brent Bozell, even the
middle seems like the far left.
I'm sorry to tell you this, but the "Liberal Media" is nothing more
than a convenient whipping boy conservatives created to blame for their
failures. They blame Vietnam, Watergate, Iran/Contra and any other
scandal that has ever harmed any Republican on the liberal media. Of
course, no explanation is ever offered as to why anybody ever even
heard of Monica Lewinski if the media were really constantly conspiring
against conservatives.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
09 Feb 2006 08:08:50 PM |
|
|
I'm sorry to tell you this, but the "Liberal Media" is nothing more
than a convenient whipping boy conservatives created to blame for their
failures.
By what careful reasoning have you reached this conclusion? No points
off for spelling, but please remember to be specific yet concise.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
11 Feb 2006 02:34:08 PM |
|
|
The Jews Are Our Misfortune
By Dr. William Pierce
If you've been listening to many of my broadcasts you will know that
the issue I talk about most often is that of media control. In nearly
every broadcast I have pointed out that the people who control the
mass media of news and entertainment are able to manipulate the
opinions and attitudes of about 95 per cent of the population. I have
pointed out
that the media bosses do this manipulation deliberately and in
collusion with one another, taking advantage of the compelling need
most people have to conform their ideas and their behavior to a
perceived norm.
The media bosses use their control over the mass media of
entertainment -- and to a lesser extent over the news media -- to
create an artificial norm that is presented to the public through
television, motion pictures, advertising, and other media, and this
artificial norm is the one perceived as real by most of the public.
Through their control of public opinion the media bosses also control
the democratic political process and governmental policy in a way that
is advantageous to them and disadvantageous to the White public. And
these media bosses are overwhelmingly Jews.
That has been the message I have presented over and over again in many
of these broadcasts. I have talked about different facets of Jewish
media control and have presented different specifics, different
details, in various broadcasts. I've discussed a number of different
Hollywood films or television shows as specific examples of the way in
which the Jews use their media control to brainwash the public, to
promote
fashions and styles and behavior that are harmful to our people but
that advance the long-term schemes of the Jews to further dominate and
exploit our society.
(Some of this may be outdated today, but it still explains why things
are the way they are)
I've talked about specific Jews who control various segments of the
mass media, and I've pointed out specific instances of the destructive
way in which they use their control. I've talked about the Jewish
media boss Sumner Redstone and his control of MTV and CBS and the
Hollywood film studio Paramount Pictures. I've talked about the Jewish
media boss Michael Eisner and his control of the Disney Company and
ABC. I've talked about the Jewish media boss Gerald Levin and his
control of Time Warner and CNN. I've talked about the Jewish media
boss Edgar Bronfman and his control of the largest segment of the
popular music industry and Universal Studios in Hollywood. And I've
talked about dozens of other Jewish media bosses and the media they
control and the specific ways in
which they use those media. In particular, during the past few months
I've talked about several recent Hollywood films which deliberately
target teenaged White girls and brainwash them with the notion that it
is fashionable for them to have sex with Black males.
And of course, I've talked about the Jewish control of the news media
as well as the entertainment media. In a way similar to their use of
the entertainment media to set popular fashions, the Jewish media
bosses distort and censor the news in order to give the public a
distorted picture of what is happening in the world. I've given
several very
specific examples of this Jewish management of the news in recent
months.
I've talked about the total blackout at the national level of the news
of the atrocious rape and massacre of Whites in Wichita, Kansas, by
Blacks last December, and I've talked about the almost total
suppression of the news of the Black racial attacks on Whites in
Seattle in the Mardi Gras riot at the end of February this year. I
also talked about
the downplaying of the racial aspects of the Black rioting in
Cincinnati in April of this year, about the failure of the news media
outside the immediate Cincinnati area to mention the deliberate
targeting of Whites, especially White women, by the Black rioters. And
I described the gross distortions in the news coverage of the racial
politics in York,
Pennsylvania, that led to the current White mayor of York being
charged in May with the killing of a Black during a Black race riot in
York 32 years ago.
I have pointed out repeatedly how all of this suppression of the news
and distortion of the news is aimed at creating and maintaining a
false picture in the public mind of racial conflict in the United
States. In this false picture Whites always are the aggressors, Blacks
or other non-Whites are the innocent victims, and the root of all
racial conflict
is White racism.
In a number of my broadcasts I've discussed at length why the Jews do
what they do: why they use their media control in such a deceptive and
destructive way, what their motives are. I've also talked about how
they collaborate. I've pointed out that their propaganda policies are
not formulated independently, but that they have a coherent party line
that
they all follow. I've given a number of specific examples of this.
Well, all of these things that I've talked about have not gone
unnoticed by the Jewish media bosses themselves. When people expose
their activities or their scheming they pay attention. In particular,
they have been paying attention to these American Dissident Voices
broadcasts and to the work of my organization, the National Alliance.
They read what's on our Web sites at natvan.com and natall.com and
resistance.com, and they talk about it among themselves. This shows up
pretty clearly in the uniform way in which their media respond to us.
Whether it's the Associated Press or Time magazine or the Washington
Post or a television news commentator anywhere in the United States,
they always use the same
phrasing in talking about us. They always use the word "hate" in
referring to us. They always say that the National Alliance is the
"most dangerous organized hate group" in America, despite the fact
that all we do is disseminate to the public the truth about what
they're doing. That's what they regard as "dangerous" and as "hate."
If you want to see a current indicator of the fact that they do think
about us, go to the Web site promoting Steven Spielberg's new
movie,A.I. There you'll see a parody of a part of the National
Alliance's Web site in the form of a page headed "Who Is the
Anti-Robot Militia?" It's obviously copied, almost word for word, from
the page "Who Is the National Alliance?" on our Web site. It's
difficult for me to understand what they hoped to accomplish with this
parody. Perhaps they believe that it will make people take us less
seriously.
Somewhat less quirky but much more directly deceptive are their
standard smokescreen responses. It used to be that whenever I would
raise the issue of Jewish monopoly control of the mass media of news
and entertainment during an interview or on a call-in program, I would
hear the response from a Jew or an apologist for the Jews: "What about
Ted
Turner? He's not a Jew," as if that negated everything I had said. Of
course, that response was used before Ted Turner's CNN was taken over
by the very Jewish Time Warner. And now that Ted Turner has been eased
out of all decision-making positions in the cable news network he
built and has been replaced by Jews, one doesn't hear the Ted Turner
response any longer.
The standard responses today, the ones I hear as often as I used to
hear the Ted Turner response, are the "it's the shareholders" and the
"it's the big bankers." Whenever I start naming names -- whenever I
begin talking about the control over the media wielded by Michael
Eisner or Sumner Redstone, for example, a Jew will pop up with the
response:
"Those guys don't control the media. It's the shareholders who control
the media. Eisner and Redstone are just employees. The shareholders
tell them what to do." A variation on this theme is, "Eisner and
Redstone don't own the media. It's the big banks that own all of the
media, and most of the big bankers are Gentiles."
Well, of course, that's not really true, and they know it's not true.
The big Jewish media bosses are mostly quite autonomous. Sumner
Redstone, for example, owns outright two-thirds of the shares in his
media empire. His personal fortune is more than 12 billion dollars,
according to Forbes magazine this month. I'm quite sure he doesn't
check
with any shareholders before he dreams up some new piece of
race-mixing filth for MTV.
As for Gentile bankers telling the Jewish media bosses what kind of
propaganda they must produce for the public, that's total nonsense. I
haven't yet done a study of the investment banking industry to
determine what percentage of Jews and what percentage of Gentiles are
involved in it, but one thing that's certain is that the Gentile
bankers would faint dead away at the thought of telling Jewish media
bosses such as Michael Eisner or the Sulzberger family or the
Newhouses or Sumner Redstone to cut back on the race-mixing
propaganda. Gentile bankers as a class are rich, deracinated capons,
whose only interest is money.
Every Jewish propaganda medium -- CBS or MTV or Time magazine or the
New York Times -- is staffed from top to bottom with Jews, and they
all know what they're doing. They work as a tribe, as a swarm of
termites gnawing at the foundations of our existence. There is total
agreement among the media Jews as to the general thrust of their
propaganda. They may disagree on many of the details -- they may even
compete against each other for a bigger slice of the media pie -- but
all agree on the general goals of degrading and subverting Gentile
civilization, of corrupting Gentile institutions, of mongrelizing our
race. Again, the Jews work as a tribe, and that is the source of their
strength and their success.
Gentile bankers, on the other hand, work only for themselves. They
would not dream of combining and using their financial strength to
protect our people from the Jews. They are terrified of the Jews, of
the media. The more money they have, the more selfish and the more
cowardly they are. The huge difference, the decisive difference,
between the Jews and our people is that they work as a tribe, and we
work as individuals. They
work together, rich Jews and poor Jews, for their common tribal
interests, against us, and until now we have failed to organize
effectively to defend ourselves against them.
Anyway, my point is that their defense against my exposure of their
activities and their power over our government is orchestrated - that
is, they've all gotten together and decided what their defense will be
-- and it's a deliberate lie. As I continue to expose the destructive
activities of the Jewish media bosses, you will continue to hear them
and their apologists respond that they really don't have any power,
that it's the Gentile shareholders and the Gentile bankers who control
the media. A lot of dimwits will believe that lie. A lot of couch
potatoes, a lot of soccer moms, a lot of baseball fans, a lot of
lemmings, will
believe that it's not the Jew Sumner Redstone who deliberately uses
MTV to corrupt White teenagers; instead it's some cabal of Gentile
shareholders and Gentile bankers who tell him what to do, and Redstone
is only an employee who follows their orders.
I think it's time for us to orchestrate our exposure of the Jewish
media. I think it's about time for the public, lemmings and all, to
begin hearing a uniform charge against them, a uniform statement of
our opposition to them. How about this: The Jews are our misfortune.
That's simple, and it's true, and it's easy to remember. Repeat after
me: The
Jews are our misfortune. Let's use that statement. Let's let everyone
hear it. Let's impress it on everyone's consciousness: The Jews are
our misfortune.
Of course, when I say the Jews are our misfortune, I'm not talking
only about the Jewish media bosses. I'm not talking only about the
Jews at the top, such as Sumner Redstone and the Sulzbergers and
Michael Eisner and the others who formulate and direct the propaganda
line against Gentile society; I'm talking about the whole tribe, and I
believe that message comes across in the statement, the Jews are our
misfortune. Let me tell you what the standard lemming response will be
to that statement, the response that they have been taught and will
parrot back.
First, from the religious lemmings it will be something like this:
"Oh, no, the Jews aren't our misfortune, we owe everything to the
Jews. Don't you know that Jesus was a Jew and God was his father? That
makes God a Jew. We must do what the Jews tell us. They are God's
people." I'm sure that argument is embarrassing to some of the more
sophisticated
apologists for the Jews, but many Christian Fundamentalists use it,
and I've heard it often.
From the secular lemmings it will be more like: "Don't you know that
Freud and Einstein and Salk were Jews? We wouldn't have a space
program if it weren't for Einstein. We wouldn't have a cure for polio
if it weren't for Salk. The Jews are our fortune, not our misfortune."
Well, of course, our space program has practically nothing to do with
Einstein or his Jewishness. Gentile thinkers envisioned it and
pioneered both its theoretical basis and its practical development.
The German theoretician, Hermann Oberth, and the Russian, Konstantin
Tsiolkovsky, were two of the Gentiles who independently demonstrated
mathematically the feasibility of space travel in the early years of
the last century. The American rocket pioneer Robert Goddard and the
German Wernher von Braun designed actual rockets and built the
vehicles which were the precursors of today's space ships. Jews didn't
become involved until it became glamorous and profitable. And the
development of a polio vaccine hardly would have missed a beat if
Jonas Salk had gone into the garment business instead of medicine. He
was one of a team, and he got the credit for the work of others as
well as for his own work.
The reasons we hear these silly and groundless claims in the first
place about how much we owe the Jews -- the reasons are Jewish media
control and Jewish tribalism, Jewish support for their own. Freud was
given the enormous buildup he received for his theorizing about anal
personalities and penis envy and the like because he was a Jew, not
because of any genuine merit in his theorizing. Other Jewish writers
recognized him as one of their own and propelled him to a position of
undeserved authority, and his theories ultimately did an enormous
amount of damage to the development of our understanding of psychology
and mental disease. Einstein was a competent mathematical physicist,
but a great deal of the publicity he received was based on the fact
that he was a Jew rather than on the merits of his work. As in the
case of Salk, Jewish publicists gave Einstein credit for the work of
others as well as for his own work.
What we must do is look at the balance sheet. Is the damage done to
our race by Karl Marx and all of his Jewish followers in the communist
movement -- the selective murder of more than 30 million of the best
of our people in Europe during the past century -- offset by whatever
contributions Einstein and Salk and other Jews have made -- even if
they did everything their Jewish boosters claim for them? Certainly,
there have been many other Jews who were competent and creative
engineers and scientists besides Einstein and Salk. Not every clever
Jew became a lawyer or a scriptwriter or a pawn shop owner or a
middleman. Some became chemists or mathematicians or physicists. But
can all of them together make up for the mass murders Lazar Kaganovich
perpetrated
aginst the Ukrainians, for the rapes and murders of German civilians
instigated by Ilya Ehrenburg, for the Eastern European girls still
being forced into sexual slavery on a huge scale today by Israeli
slave dealers?
I think not. And I have not yet put on the balance sheet what the
Jewish masters of America's mass media have done and are doing to us.
What can possibly compensate White Americans for the deliberate,
malevolent corruption of our young people by just one Jewish gangster
like Sumner Redstone and his MTV? The race-mixing, culture-destroying,
hip-hop filth churned out by Sumner Redstone's MTV seven days a week
is the single most destructive influence in American life today. And
of course, Redstone doesn't produce this filth all by himself. He has
thousands of Jews working for him at every level, not only in MTV but
also in CBS and in Paramount Pictures and in all of his other media
properties.
And although MTV, targeting White teenagers as it does, may seem the
most blatantly and maliciously destructive of the Jewish media, it is
hardly much worse than some of the filth being poured into the minds
of the American public by Michael Eisner's Disney empire: especially
by its Miramax films division under the Weinstein brothers. The fact
that much of the entertainment produced by Eisner's Disney Company is
relatively nnocuous does not compensate for the fact that some of it
is pure poison. The poison is being introduced gradually, more and
more each year, and it is having its effect. When the Disney Company
was entirely a Gentile company a few years ago, its output of
ntertainment may sometimes have been excessively bland, but none of it
was poison designed to corrupt White Americans.
And what can possibly compensate on our balance sheet for what the
Jewish news media are doing in their deliberate, calculated distortion
of the picture of the world seen by the American public. It is a
picture which has been designed to confuse White Americans, to
undermine their self-confidence, to induce feelings of racial guilt in
them. Just one example: the systematic suppression of the news of
Black crimes against White people and the exaggeration of the news of
every White crime against non-Whites is not a fluke. It is done
routinely by all of the Jewish news media: by the New York Times, by
the Washington Post, by Time magazine and Newsweek magazine, by CNN
and ABC News and CBS News and NBC News and all the rest. And
interracial crime is just one issue. The relations between the sexes;
immigration; the foreign relations of the United States with the rest
of the world, especially in the Middle East; and a hundred other
important issues are similarly distorted in their portrayal by the
media. This deliberate distortion of the public's view of the world
has done irreparable damage to the American system of government and
to American society. And again: the distortion has been deliberate,
planned, systematic, and intended to do harm to us. No number of funny
Jewish comedians, or successful Jewish entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley
or on Wall Street, or clever Jewish medical researchers can compensate
for this harm.
When we look at the balance sheet the conclusion is clear beyond any
doubt: the Jews are our misfortune. It's way past time for us to
accept this conclusion, to overcome our fears of being labeled
"anti-Semitic" for accepting this conclusion, to brush aside these
fears which have been instilled in us by the propaganda of the mass
media, and then to begin working to improve our fortunes.
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.RealNews247.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
11 Feb 2006 03:59:50 PM |
|
|
Oh...my...God. Why is it when I ask a simple question I so often
provoke a lengthy diatribe?
I don't support a single thing you or "Dr. Pierce" believe in. If I had
the energy to engage you, I would. Not that I think I could dissuade
you from your hateful path with mere words anyway.
However, I'd like to take this opportunity to any latter day hippies to
point how these comments illustrate that "war is(n't) over." There are
always going to be "Dr. Pierce's" among us, setting us upon each other
so that they can reap the benefits. The West fought an entire World War
against the "Dr. Pierce's" of the mid-20th Century and set 'em back for
a time. But here they are again. Or still.
I'm going to take a shower and wash "Dr. Pierce" off me. I hope he
doesn't stink up the bathroom.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
12 Feb 2006 07:28:54 PM |
|
|
On 11 Feb 2006 13:59:50 -0800, "marc0ni@earthlink.net"
<marc0ni@earthlink.net> wrote:
Oh...my...God. Why is it when I ask a simple question I so often
provoke a lengthy diatribe?
I don't support a single thing you or "Dr. Pierce" believe in. If I had
the energy to engage you, I would. Not that I think I could dissuade
you from your hateful path with mere words anyway.
Why They Hate Us
by Joseph Sobran
Western man towers over the rest of the world in ways so
large as to be almost inexpressible. It's Western
exploration, science, and conquest that have revealed the
world to itself. Other races feel like subjects of Western
power long after colonialism, imperialism, and slavery have
disappeared. The charge of racism puzzles whites who feel
not hostility, but only baffled good will, because they
don't grasp what it really means: humiliation. The white
man presents an image of superiority even when he isn't
conscious of it. And superiority excites envy. Destroying
white civilization is the inmost desire of the league of
designated victims we call 'minorities.'
From Sobran's Newsletter, April 1997
However, I'd like to take this opportunity to any latter day hippies to
point how these comments illustrate that "war is(n't) over." There are
always going to be "Dr. Pierce's" among us, setting us upon each other
so that they can reap the benefits. The West fought an entire World War
against the "Dr. Pierce's" of the mid-20th Century and set 'em back for
a time. But here they are again. Or still.
I'm going to take a shower and wash "Dr. Pierce" off me. I hope he
doesn't stink up the bathroom.
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.RealNews247.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alric Knebel" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOPcontributors. |
13 Feb 2006 03:55:23 PM |
|
|
Topaz wrote:
The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.
All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
are demolished in "My Awakening" by David Duke. Here is an example:
[rest of racist ideology deleted.]
Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
That said, I remember once in another thread you said one of the dumbest
things I'd ever heard. You said that THOMAS KINKADE represented the
only real art. In a single stroke of ignorance, you dismissed all other
artists, and you went after "modern art" in particular. That you can't
comprehend modern art shows you're of a lower intelligence, as there are
many people who have the intelligence to comprehend it.
Now to this. If an average intelligence LOWER than the average
intelligence of the white race mars the acceptability of that race, it
follows that YOU -- having proven to be of lower-than-average
intelligence by your previous statement on art -- have a marred
acceptability. It follows then that YOU are someone with whom someone
else of AVERAGE intelligence -- someone, say, who can appreciate an
artist other than Thomas Kinkade -- should not mingle.
True?
True.
But you've made RACE the defining category, thereby borrowing YOUR value
from the betters of your own race. Luckily for you, our averages are
high enough to carry you.
--
Alric Knebel
--
_________________
Alric Knebel
http://www.ironeyefortress.com/C-SPAN_loon.html
http://www.ironeyefortress.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
15 Feb 2006 08:11:21 PM |
|
|
Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
It wouldn't be a good idea to have a nation just of intelligent
people. What if two parents had a less intelligent child? Would we
deport the child?
We should have a nation for White people. Besides being intelligent
Whites are also very good looking. The Chinese have China, there are
Black countries for the Blacks. We should have a nation for Whites.
That said, I remember once in another thread you said one of the dumbest
things I'd ever heard. You said that THOMAS KINKADE represented the
only real art.
Except I didn't say anything about it being the only real art. It
is an example of real art while modern art is simply garbage.
In a single stroke of ignorance, you dismissed all other
artists,
Except that that never happened.
and you went after "modern art" in particular. That you can't
comprehend modern art shows you're of a lower intelligence, as there are
many people who have the intelligence to comprehend it.
Remember the story about the king with no clothes?
Now to this. If an average intelligence LOWER than the average
intelligence of the white race mars the acceptability of that race, it
follows that YOU -- having proven to be of lower-than-average
intelligence by your previous statement on art -- have a marred
acceptability. It follows then that YOU are someone with whom someone
else of AVERAGE intelligence -- someone, say, who can appreciate an
artist other than Thomas Kinkade -- should not mingle.
True?
True.
But you've made RACE the defining category, thereby borrowing YOUR value
from the betters of your own race. Luckily for you, our averages are
high enough to carry you.
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.RealNews247.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Russell" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
15 Feb 2006 10:15:19 PM |
|
|
"Topaz" <mars1933@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1pn7v1h3o6vc7q9rjlaal7sbpcer6sspb6@4ax.com...
....
What if two parents had a less intelligent child? Would we
deport the child?
....
No, we would make him president.
--
Mike Russell
www.mike.russell-home.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Magda" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
16 Feb 2006 04:42:23 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 20:11:21 -0600, in alt.gossip.celebrities, Topaz
<mars1933@hotmail.com> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :
... >Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
... >intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
... >what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
... > intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
... > Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
...
... It wouldn't be a good idea to have a nation just of intelligent
... people. What if two parents had a less intelligent child? Would we
... deport the child?
...
... We should have a nation for White people. Besides being intelligent
... Whites are also very good looking. The Chinese have China, there are
... Black countries for the Blacks. We should have a nation for Whites.
This is not what I learned to read for...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Alric Knebel" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOPcontributors. |
16 Feb 2006 04:56:14 AM |
|
|
Topaz wrote:
The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.
All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
are demolished in "My Awakening" by David Duke. Here is an example:
[rest of racist ideology deleted.]
Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
That said, I remember once in another thread you said one of the dumbest
things I'd ever heard. You said that THOMAS KINKADE represented the
only real art. In a single stroke of ignorance, you dismissed all other
artists, and you went after "modern art" in particular. That you can't
comprehend modern art shows you're of a lower intelligence, as there are
many people who have the intelligence to comprehend it.
Now to this. If an average intelligence LOWER than the average
intelligence of the white race mars the acceptability of that race, it
follows that YOU -- having proven to be of lower-than-average
intelligence by your previous statement on art -- have a marred
acceptability. It follows then that YOU are someone with whom someone
else of AVERAGE intelligence -- someone, say, who can appreciate an
artist other than Thomas Kinkade -- should not mingle.
True?
True.
But you've made RACE the defining category, thereby borrowing YOUR value
from the betters of your own race. Luckily for you, our averages are
high enough to carry you.
--
Alric Knebel
--
_________________
Alric Knebel
http://www.ironeyefortress.com/C-SPAN_loon.html
http://www.ironeyefortress.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Alric Knebel" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOPcontributors. |
11 Feb 2006 04:34:37 PM |
|
|
Topaz wrote:
[tedious copied-and-pasted tripe deleted]
__________________________________
In another thread titled "The Religious Cancer of Racism," I took Topaz
to task for his racist obsessions. I think I finally analyzed his
motives. Read it, to see if I nailed it.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: The Religious Cancer of Racism
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 21:59:37 -0600
From: Alric Knebel <alric@[cableone.net]>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.religion
Topaz wrote:
The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.
All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
are demolished in "My Awakening" by David Duke. Here is an example:
[rest of racist ideology deleted.]
Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
I remember once in another newsgroup you said one of the dumbest things
I'd ever heard. You said that THOMAS KINKADE represented the only real
art. In a single stroke of ignorance, you dismissed all other artists,
and you went after "modern art" in particular. That you can't
comprehend modern art shows you're of a lower intelligence. Clearly
people who can comprehend it, as I do, will disagree.
Now to this. If an average intelligence LOWER than the average
intelligence of the white race mars the acceptability of that race, it
follows that YOU -- having proven to be of lower-than-average
intelligence by your previous statement on art -- have a marred
acceptability. It follows then that YOU are someone with whom someone
else of AVERAGE intelligence -- someone, say, who can appreciate an
artist other than Thomas Kinkade -- should not mingle.
True?
True.
But you've made RACE the defining category, thereby borrowing YOUR value
from the betters of your own race. Luckily for you, our averages are
high enough to carry you.
--
Alric Knebel
_____________________________________
.
|
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
12 Feb 2006 07:37:52 PM |
|
|
In another thread titled "The Religious Cancer of Racism," I took Topaz
to task for his racist obsessions. Please read it, because I nailed
him.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: The Religious Cancer of Racism
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 21:59:37 -0600
From: Alric Knebel <alric@[cableone.net]>
Topaz wrote:
The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.
All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
are demolished in "My Awakening" by David Duke. Here is an example:
[rest of racist ideology deleted.]
Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
It wouldn't be a good idea to have a nation just of intelligent
people. What if two parents had a less intelligent child? Would we
deport the child?
We should have a nation for White people. Besides being intelligent
Whites are also very good looking. The Chinese have China, there are
Black countries for the Blacks. We should have a nation for Whites.
That said, I remember once in another thread you said one of the dumbest
things I'd ever heard. You said that THOMAS KINKADE represented the
only real art.
Except I didn't say anything about it being the only real art. It
is an example of real art while modern art is simply garbage.
In a single stroke of ignorance, you dismissed all other
artists,
Except that that never happened.
and you went after "modern art" in particular. That you can't
comprehend modern art shows you're of a lower intelligence, as there are
many people who have the intelligence to comprehend it.
Remember the story about the king with no clothes?
Now to this. If an average intelligence LOWER than the average
intelligence of the white race mars the acceptability of that race, it
follows that YOU -- having proven to be of lower-than-average
intelligence by your previous statement on art -- have a marred
acceptability. It follows then that YOU are someone with whom someone
else of AVERAGE intelligence -- someone, say, who can appreciate an
artist other than Thomas Kinkade -- should not mingle.
True?
True.
But you've made RACE the defining category, thereby borrowing YOUR value
from the betters of your own race. Luckily for you, our averages are
high enough to carry you.
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.RealNews247.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alric Knebel" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOPcontributors. |
13 Feb 2006 03:54:58 PM |
|
|
Topaz wrote:
The former White nations and Japan are the first world. The Black
nations and India are the third world. In the middle, or the second
world are the Arabs and China. It is just as racialists would predict.
It is because the White race is on average much more intelligent than
the Black race. The people in Japan are much lighter in color than the
people in India.
All IQ tests have proven that Whites are on average much more
intelligent than Blacks. White people invented just about everything
important. Most leftists admit that Whites on average score higher on
the tests. They have their excuses for it, but all of their excuses
are demolished in "My Awakening" by David Duke. Here is an example:
[rest of racist ideology deleted.]
Follow this. If race is important because of inequalities in
intelligence inherent per race, the implication is that INTELLIGENCE is
what establishes a person's value in the white supremacist's scheme. If
intelligence is so important, then why is race in the equation at all?
Why make RACE the trait of value when it's INTELLIGENCE that matters?
That said, I remember once in another thread you said one of the dumbest
things I'd ever heard. You said that THOMAS KINKADE represented the
only real art. In a single stroke of ignorance, you dismissed all other
artists, and you went after "modern art" in particular. That you can't
comprehend modern art shows you're of a lower intelligence, as there are
many people who have the intelligence to comprehend it.
Now to this. If an average intelligence LOWER than the average
intelligence of the white race mars the acceptability of that race, it
follows that YOU -- having proven to be of lower-than-average
intelligence by your previous statement on art -- have a marred
acceptability. It follows then that YOU are someone with whom someone
else of AVERAGE intelligence -- someone, say, who can appreciate an
artist other than Thomas Kinkade -- should not mingle.
True?
True.
But you've made RACE the defining category, thereby borrowing YOUR value
from the betters of your own race. Luckily for you, our averages are
high enough to carry you.
--
Alric Knebel
Alric Knebel
http://www.ironeyefortress.com/C-SPAN_loon.html
http://www.ironeyefortress.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sport Pilot" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
07 Feb 2006 12:32:13 PM |
|
|
Traveler wrote:
*All* TV news is run by wealthy, GOPcentric corporations, you
ignorant, L00ny sucker.
Corporations - yes, GOPcentric ones? Not hardly. The political left
held a monopoly on the broadcasting of national news for almost 50
years. Only the propagation of cable/satellite broadcasts finally
broke this monopoly. Interesting that there was a lot of screaming
about a conservative political bias in the news, but almost nothing
about a politically biases media fixture which had finally run its
course.
Bernard Goldberg's 'Bias' has been in publication for something like
four or five years. And is worth the read. Lots of screaming from the
left about the content, but nothing by way of a rebuttal.
If you prefer to have your news and news magazine programs slanted to
the political left you can always - at a minimum - watch PBS and listen
to NRP.
GE, Disney, WB, Viacon, etc. All liberal.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
06 Feb 2006 07:54:29 PM |
|
|
So when Dan Rather tried to fob off those faked memos about George W's
National Guard service to a disbelieving nation, he was merely
following orders from his Republican masters?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brett A. Pasternack" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOPcontributors. |
07 Feb 2006 01:22:09 AM |
|
|
wrote:
So when Dan Rather tried to fob off those faked memos about George W's
National Guard service to a disbelieving nation, he was merely
following orders from his Republican masters?
No. He was just trying to get a scoop. Which was probably set up by
Republicans to make him look bad.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
07 Feb 2006 08:27:36 AM |
|
|
No. He was just trying to get a scoop. Which was probably set up by
Republicans to make him look bad.
Are you being serious or ironic?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brett A. Pasternack" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOPcontributors. |
07 Feb 2006 11:22:20 PM |
|
|
wrote:
No. He was just trying to get a scoop. Which was probably set up by
Republicans to make him look bad.
Are you being serious or ironic?
Quite serious. It's the explanation that makes the most sense--the
Republicans/conservatives benefit both from the discrediting of Rather
and from the public perception that the scandal over Bush's military
record is a fabricated one. And I found it very suspicious how quickly
the information about the documents arrived at all the bloggers and such.
Let me note for the record that I said "Republicans" did it, not "the
Republicans." I'm not suggesting that Bush or any party leaders were
involved in this, just that whoever was involved was sympathetic to that
side.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
07 Feb 2006 11:40:07 PM |
|
|
Brett A. Pasternack wrote:
marc0ni@earthlink.net wrote:
No. He was just trying to get a scoop. Which was probably set up by
Republicans to make him look bad.
Are you being serious or ironic?
Quite serious. It's the explanation that makes the most sense--the
Republicans/conservatives benefit both from the discrediting of Rather
Wait! What benefit would the Republicans/conservatives receive from the
discrediting of Rather? According to liberal popular opinion, all media
are owned by big corporations that support Republicans/conservatives,
so what would be the benefit in discrediting one of their own top
network anchors?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brett A. Pasternack" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOPcontributors. |
09 Feb 2006 12:46:57 AM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
Brett A. Pasternack wrote:
marc0ni@earthlink.net wrote:
No. He was just trying to get a scoop. Which was probably set up by
Republicans to make him look bad.
Are you being serious or ironic?
Quite serious. It's the explanation that makes the most sense--the
Republicans/conservatives benefit both from the discrediting of Rather
Wait! What benefit would the Republicans/conservatives receive from the
discrediting of Rather? According to liberal popular opinion, all media
are owned by big corporations that support Republicans/conservatives,
so what would be the benefit in discrediting one of their own top
network anchors?
Conservatives have it in for Dan Rather. Whether the reasons for their
antipathy towards him are valid or not is irrelevant. And Rather is, as
far as I can tell, a liberal as far as his own opinions go.
I don't think you would actually find any liberals who would say that
*all* media are owned by big corporations that support
Republicans/conservatives, although certainly we would say that most
major media outlets are owned by big corporations, and that most of
those corporations are conservative (or are owned/controlled by
conservatives). And I think that's a pretty accurate assessment, don't you?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steven Douglas" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
09 Feb 2006 01:07:24 AM |
|
|
Brett A. Pasternack wrote:
Steven Douglas wrote:
Brett A. Pasternack wrote:
marc0ni@earthlink.net wrote:
No. He was just trying to get a scoop. Which was probably set up by
Republicans to make him look bad.
Are you being serious or ironic?
Quite serious. It's the explanation that makes the most sense--the
Republicans/conservatives benefit both from the discrediting of Rather
Wait! What benefit would the Republicans/conservatives receive from the
discrediting of Rather? According to liberal popular opinion, all media
are owned by big corporations that support Republicans/conservatives,
so what would be the benefit in discrediting one of their own top
network anchors?
Conservatives have it in for Dan Rather. Whether the reasons for their
antipathy towards him are valid or not is irrelevant. And Rather is, as
far as I can tell, a liberal as far as his own opinions go.
Yes, he has made that more clear than I think he even realizes.
I don't think you would actually find any liberals who would say that
*all* media are owned by big corporations that support
Republicans/conservatives, although certainly we would say that most
major media outlets are owned by big corporations, and that most of
those corporations are conservative (or are owned/controlled by
conservatives). And I think that's a pretty accurate assessment, don't you?
Possibly. I don't know the political opinions of the New York Times
Corporation, but I do know the opinions of the editorial board of the
newspaper. Two of the top executives of Viacom, which owns CBS, gave
money to the Kerry campaign in 2004. Ted Turner, a noted liberal,
founded and owned CNN for many years. But that's all beside the point
-- what matters are the opinions of the reporters and editors of the
news organizations, and whether those opinions sometimes inadvertently
sneak into the news pages and broadcasts. In the case of the CBS/60
Minutes fake documents, I believe that is what happened. Listening to
producer Mary Mapes being interviewed after the fact confirmed it for
me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brett A. Pasternack" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOPcontributors. |
09 Feb 2006 11:20:08 PM |
|
|
Steven Douglas wrote:
Brett A. Pasternack wrote:
I don't think you would actually find any liberals who would say that
*all* media are owned by big corporations that support
Republicans/conservatives, although certainly we would say that most
major media outlets are owned by big corporations, and that most of
those corporations are conservative (or are owned/controlled by
conservatives). And I think that's a pretty accurate assessment, don't you?
Possibly. I don't know the political opinions of the New York Times
Corporation, but I do know the opinions of the editorial board of the
newspaper. Two of the top executives of Viacom, which owns CBS, gave
money to the Kerry campaign in 2004. Ted Turner, a noted liberal,
founded and owned CNN for many years. But that's all beside the point
-- what matters are the opinions of the reporters and editors of the
news organizations, and whether those opinions sometimes inadvertently
sneak into the news pages and broadcasts. In the case of the CBS/60
Minutes fake documents, I believe that is what happened. Listening to
producer Mary Mapes being interviewed after the fact confirmed it for
me.
I think that's an oversimplification. I mean, it may be true in that
case, but not in general.
If anything, the ongoing campaign to demonize the "liberal media" has
caused reporters to bend over backward to make sure they do things in a
way more favorable to the conservative side--which, of course, is
exactly what it was designed to do. (Hence the phrase "work the refs".)
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: This is Why there is no "Liberal Media". All news is run by GOP contributors. |
10 Feb 2006 12:00:27 AM |
|
|
I think that's an oversimplification. I mean, it may be true in that
case, but not in general.
Moreover, while the labels "conservative" and "liberal" used to have
specific political meanings, these days those same terms are more a
statement of ideological style than of ideological substance. If anyone
could provide a list of what "liberals" believe, I'd be very interested
in reading it.
If anything, the ongoing campaign to demonize the "liberal media" has
caused reporters to bend over backward to make sure they do things in a
way more favorable to the conservative side--which, of course, is
exactly what it was designed to do. (Hence the phrase "work the refs".)
"Campaign"? What, you think there's some sort of organized program to
marginalize the "liberal media"? (Again, whatever it is "liberal" means
these days). I don't see it. What I do see is that there has always
been a portion of the news-consuming audience which never felt it was
being served by Big Media. And now that these people no longer have to
passively swallow everything Big Media is trying force down their
throats (because of talk radio, Fox, and the Internet), Big Media has
to become more inclusive of diverse opinions than it ever has had to be
before.
Maybe Big Media doesn't like diversity so much after all.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel Joseph Min" |
|
| Title: Fw: What Liberals Believe... |
10 Feb 2006 10:57:33 AM |
|
|
"marc0ni@earthlink.net" wrote:
could provide a list of what "liberals" believe, I'd be very interested
in reading it.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Basically, the God-hating anti-American anarchistic Liberals believe:
1) The United States is the most evil empire in all world history;
worse than the NAZIs, worse than any evil regime you can name.
The USA is the Satan of the Universe, and everyone who supports
the USA, her government, her military, her patriotic citizenry,
are the most evil, wicked & nasty scumbags in all world history.
2) Christians are the most evil religious scumbags throughout world
history; and the Judeo-Xian scriptures, the canon of the bible,
even some of the more credible apocryphal writings, are nothing
but garbage frae end-to-end. Everyone who believes the words and
teachings of the bible are brain-dead room-temperature IQ morons.
Liberals HATE the Ten Commandments and they HATE the Golden Rule.
3) The Islamic Jihad is the saviour of the world. Openly advocating
and supporting, aiding, abetting and doing everything possible to
help Al-Qaeda & Co. to murder relatively innocent men, women and
children in crowded public places is the best and most honorable
thing that any human being in the world can possibly do. The USA,
Israel, and every other ally of the USA--even unfriendly "fence
riders" like Canada, France, Germany, Russia, China, et al, must
be targeted with weapons of mass destruction as soon as possible.
But of all nations, Liberals HATE the United States most of all,
and that's why Liberals are helping Al Qaeda to attack us A.S.A.P.,
and that's why Liberals so strongly oppose the NSA wiretaps, etc...
4) Atheism is the only belief-system, the only valid devout religion,
which can be promoted and taught in America's public schools and
all public buildings and places in all 50 States across the USA;
and because ONLY Atheism has been the de facto official religion
allowed and promoted in public schools and all public places for
nearly half a century and counting, Liberals must do their best
to oppose the now-conservative United States Supreme Court which
will soon overrule all or nearly all of the formerly Communistic-
Atheistic Liberal Supreme Court rulings ever handed down since
circa 1947; albeit the Liberals must at least unconsciously know
that they're about to lose their dark and draconian stranglehold
over all of America's public classrooms, courtrooms, libraries,
etc., so they're fighting a losing battle, and we Republicans
know it. Nonetheless, Liberals vainly oppose the unassailable...
5) Liberals believe in supporting the A.C.L.U., because, like the
popular news commentator Bill O'Reilly has repeatedly pointed out
to his ever-burgeoning audience of conscientious observers, the
A.C.L.U. is the most dangerous and most egregiously anti-Christian
organization in America bar none. The A.C.L.U. openly defends and
supports violent criminals, and the A.C.L.U. aggressively condones
the teaching of Atheism in America's public schools, etc. And the
A.C.L.U. supports murdering children--,even unborn children,--and
that's one of the many reasons why the Liberals LOVE the A.C.L.U.
6) Left-wing Liberals only believe in hatred and unforgiveness, and
they especially hate Jesus Christ our LORD and Saviour, and they
hate everyone who believes in Jesus Christ; and Liberals most of
all *HATE* everyone who openly rejoices that Jesus Christ is the
first-begotten Son of the Living God. In other words, the Liberals
HATE the Rock of Ages, the cornerstone which the builders rejected,
more than they hate anything or anyone else... and that's saying a
LOT!--Seeing how Liberals are so filled with rabidly-insane HATRED.
7) The Liberals believe in losing the most important federal elections
in all history. Liberals HATE winning elections, and they especially
HATE mainstream, moderate-to-conservative, family-values-oriented,
law-abiding, tax-paying, religiously-tolerant, patriotic Americans
almost as much as they HATE God and they HATE the ekklesia of Jesus.
THAT is what Liberals believe. And THAT is why the Liberals are damned
to Perdition's unquenchable flames into the ages of the ages. Amen. :-D
Enjoy Life! (fillet a liberal for lunch)
Daniel Joseph Min
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x2B1CCFE7
*Download Min's Banned (Freeware) Books:
http://www.2hot2cool.com/11/danieljosephmin/
*Min's Google-Archived Home Page On The WWW:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=XJBDEJF138262.9022453704@anonymous.poster
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQA/AwUBQ+y4JJljD7YrHM/nEQLOXwCgoUBEdJ8W5qe0U/41d1z+8bBN+2cAn1an
pBjc2ZBDDoOQWqSVH5FFTT1U
=WueB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chinese Year of Felicity Huffman" |
|
| Title: Re: Fw: What Liberals Believe... |
10 Feb 2006 11:09:52 AM |
|
|
Basically, the God-hating anti-American anarchistic Liberals believe:
that was BRILLIANT and so true!
I would also add that in addition to loving Pally murderers, they HATE
Israel.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel Joseph Min" |
|
| Title: Re: Fw: What Liberals Believe... |
10 Feb 2006 03:00:55 PM |
|
|
On 10 Feb 2006, "Chinese Year of Felicity Huffman" <gmarx@angelfire.com> wrote:
Basically, the God-hating anti-American anarchistic Liberals believe:
that was BRILLIANT and so true!
I would also add that in addition to loving Pally murderers, they HATE
Israel.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
It's interesting to note that, while the vast majority of
intolerant anti-religious "secular jewish" Liberals voted
on the losing-end of the last two Presidential elections;
by GLARING contrast, the overwhelming majority of Israeli
Jews registered to vote in the United States voted across-
the-board REPUBLICAN--i.e. smartly on the WINNING side of
the very same elections.
But you'll notice how the Liberal Losercrats always avoid
discussing how our dear Israeli friends devoutly share our
patriotism and love for freedom, democracy and prosperity
for all law-abiding citizens of our respective countries.
Likewise, the vast majority of religious American Jews and
Judeo-Xians voted *REPUBLICAN* across-the-board, and that's
going to happen again in the coming mid-term elections, and
of course in the next Presidential election 4 November 2008.
And just as importantly, I'm really--VERY enthusiastically--
looking forward to watching our United States Supreme Court
shoot the obsolete, Monopolistic, Atheistic, Liberal agenda
down in flames beginning with Roe v Wade, and beginning by
introducing the theory of 'Intelligent Design' alongside
the existing orthodox theory of 'Evolution' in all public
classrooms in all 50 States from sea to shining sea. And
that is only the beginning... the Liberals are *TOAST*...
The Liberals always hate us no matter what we do; so now,
we're going to give the Liberals a *REASON* to hate us(!). :-D
Enjoy Life! (fillet a liberal for lunch)
Daniel Joseph Min
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x2B1CCFE7
*Download Min's Banned (Freeware) Books:
http://www.2hot2cool.com/11/danieljosephmin/
*Min's Google-Archived Home Page On The WWW:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=XJBDEJF138262.9022453704@anonymous.poster
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQA/AwUBQ+zyd5ljD7YrHM/nEQIN7wCfWbIV1IkLbaeatvowErulN3VXoi0AoPR2
40iyX2E6LjyFAFISmPBU2mUr
=kTjO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Betz" |
|
| Title: Re: Fw: What Liberals Believe... |
10 Feb 2006 11:54:04 AM |
|
|
Quoth Daniel Joseph Min <anon@comments.header> in
news:JFQ25SMW38758.4982986111@twistycreek.com:
Basically, the God-hating anti-American anarchistic Liberals
believe:
Nothing of the sort.
Your transparent attempts to demonize through filthy lies those with
whose politics you disagree is most un-Christian of you.
What would Jesus do in your place?
--
| "There's no telling what new harm Bush might |
| do if he ever gets back up off the mat. |
| You have to keep your knee on his windpipe |
| until the danger is past." -- Garry Trudeau |
| IMPEACH <http://gug.in/ywkyg> IMPEACH |
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
