BS: reign of terror

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jan 17 - 10:42 AM

No - I mean the open incitement to assault women
Is this the behavior expected of a world leader?
Describing protesting such threats as incitement to civil war indicates you are happy with women being used and regarded in such a manner - as extreme terrorism as it gets
Why aren't you people prepared to even discuss the fact that this is was America has for a president and would rather suppress opposition to scum like this?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Jan 17 - 11:29 AM

We tried surpressing scum like Bill Clinton, but the Liberals let him off as "Liberal Boys will be boys." HRC made sure that the women were treated like dirt.


So, you think we should have DIFFERENT RULES for each political wing???


That appears to be the point you are making.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: DMcG
Date: 25 Jan 17 - 11:40 AM

No, the same rules for all. The rules involve the word "consensual".

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jan 17 - 11:51 AM

So - there we have it
You make it clear that you have no regard for A
American women as you appear to share Trump's view - that's what your silence conveys
The fat that Trum has appointed an antisemite into his team doesn't seem to bother you - not worthy of comment
Puts the Jewish people in their place ans far as you are concerned
His current moves against Muslim visitors make him an extreme Islamophobe - we already know where you stand on that one'
His targeting "alien" criminals makes him a racist.
His present dismantle of any form movement against climate change makes him a planetary vandal
I seem to remember you were one of those who ranted about the Berlin Wall yet are happy to see one erected in the U.S. - why wouldn't you be considering that fat that the Isreali regime havce constructed similar.
Clinton was guilty of having consentual sex - he did not promote sexual assault which could easily lead to rape, which seems to be what you are defending
Anybody who describes demonstrating against such things as 'providing Civil War' is a fascist by definition as far as I am concerned,
You've always left me with that impression; thanks for the confirmation.
Jim Carroll





I

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Jan 17 - 12:23 PM

Clinton was guilty of having consentual sex

As long as rape is consentual ( which you as a Liberal must think it is, since it was OK when Bill did it)

You have confirmed your anti-Semitic credentials too many time to even list.


So it is wrong to deport a criminal who is not a legal citizen?


Next time I go to Mexico, let me see how far I go without a visa and passport - Hell, I can't even go to Canada anymore without them!


But you support having them optional for US visitors?????????


ONE LAW FOR ALL.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jan 17 - 03:14 PM

"As long as rape is consentual"
Clinton was never convicted or even charged with rape
It seems that we must add "guilty without conviction" to the CBs of Trump supporters
Had he been he would never have been considered for presidency
Trump was elected in full knowledge of his advocation sexually assaulting women
I repeat, anybody who describes demonstrating against such a perve as a form of self-defence is tantamount to "Civil War", is a fascist, plain and simple.
You antisemitically avoid the fact that Trump has appointed an antsemite into a responsible position - puts all your accusation of "Jew Hater" into context.
Member of France's leading anti-semitic dynasty, Marine LePen, has described Trump's victory as "opening the door to victory for her party".
It's probably pure coincidence that she was recently photographed visiting Trump Tower
Political loyalties are alwys a bit of an embarrassment whern you have to choose, aren't they?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Jan 17 - 07:33 PM

D israction
O f
N ews
A ll
L ivelong
D ay

That's
Really
Undermining
Meaningful
Press

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Jan 17 - 08:27 PM

These people make me sick
For some years now I and others who share my views, have put up with cowardly abuse from B.B., who has greeted any criticism we have made of Israel with streams of vile abuse, including accusations of "Jew haters"
I spent my twenties working and socialising with Jewish people in Manchester - some of them Holocaust survivors and descendent's of the earlier European pogroms; great people who, despite their ordeal, remained dedicated to humanity and respect for freedom and human life.
I broke up with the girl I was going to marry because I got into an argument with her mother, who was a child in the Camps, when she described the regime that was running Israel then (in the sixties) as "a bunch of fascists" - in my naivety, I was appalled.
My fiancé's mother, when I asked her about her experiences, said, "never again, not to anybody".
That period of my life was by far the most formative as far as my politics were concerned.
Now what do we have?
America elects an extremist right wing president whose attitude to "aliens" and Muslims is identical to those who sent six million Jews to their deaths.
Trump appoints an extreme antisemite onto his staff - not worthy of comment from our "champion of the Jewish People".
Trump's victory gives one of the leading antisemites in France hope of winning the election there and possibly assisting European antisimites back into power again there.
Again, silence from Bruce - not worth even an acknowledgement.
People like Bruce have forgotten that it was extremists like Trump who filled the graves of Auschwitz and Birkenau and have thrown their lot in with them - to them, politics has become more important than humanity.
I trust we'll hear no more of your "JEW HATER " Bruce!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: bobad
Date: 25 Jan 17 - 09:18 PM

I trust we'll hear no more of your "JEW HATER " Bruce!!

This from someone who refuses to accept what the majority of the civilized world including Ireland and the UK, the UK police force and the political party he supports define as anti-Semitism and instead feels entitled to define it for himself so as to absolve himself from what most everyone recognizes as being anti-Semitic. You couldn't make this up folks.....smh.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Jan 17 - 09:35 PM

Perhaps you'd like to tell us what bits of the world you regard as "uncivilised" before we go any further. A sensible response is not expected but I'm always open to surprises. Shall I help? Perhaps an uncivilised world is one inhabited by people who dishonestly pretend to be two different people in order to cheat an internet forum and to be able to call people vile names, "Jew hater" for example. You must have come across people like that in your world, bobad. Actually, it's quite amazing that people like that have the shame to turn up at all. Rather like bad pennies, if you know what I mean. Which you do, don't you?

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Jeri
Date: 25 Jan 17 - 10:27 PM

"people who dishonestly pretend to be two different people in order to cheat an internet forum and to be able to call people vile names" - sometimes the paranoia is just downright entertaining. Not sure what "two different people" you're talking about, but it's not bobad, and it's not beardedbruce. Maybe you've been doing it and think everybody else must be as well? Oh well.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: DMcG
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 02:19 AM

What on earth is "consensual rape"? Coercion into having intercourse during rape is not consent. Rape is by definition when consent has not been given or when the people involved are unable to give legal consent (eg under age).

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: DMcG
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 02:35 AM

I realise the term is used informally in sone circumstances, by the way. I was referring to its legal meaning. And in Clinton's case your claim seems to be his behaviour was illegal.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Teribus
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 03:09 AM

WOW Steve Shaw - Jeri - 25 Jan 17 - 10:27 PM - That one certainly had to have struck home and killed off at least one of your boring baseless accusations and pet hobby-horses.

Well done Jeri!!

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Iains
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 04:04 AM

Jim. Who exactly shares your views. On at least three occasions recently you have called for the assassination of the President.
I am amazed the moderators allow you to continue to post. I most certainly do not share your views. They would seem to be an incitement to terrorism. What sort of person does that make you?

Date: 21 Jan 17 - 07:06 AM

Where are the Stauffenbergs of this world when you neeed them
Jim Carroll

21 Jan 17 - 07:36 PM
I have no brief for violence normally, but I seriously hope somebody has the balls to stop him one way or the other.
Jim Carroll

Date: 22 Jan 17 - 05:24 AM
There is little doubt - to me at least that, if he lives up to his promise, it would be a safer place without Trump
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 04:09 AM

"You couldn't make this up folks.....smh."
Been here before Bobad - until you can explain Israel's anti-semitic use of the accusation of antisemitism to ward of any criticism of their genocidal behaviour towards the Palestinians, no 'definition' which extends beyond attacks on the Jewish People is valid
I have never attacked the Jewish People antisemitically in my life and you pair have never shown that I have.
The final example given in the definition of antisemitism that you refer states quite clearly that it is antisemitic to hold Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel yet, whenever Israeli actions are condemned, you and yours describe them as attacks on the Jewish People - you do exactly what the definition describes as "antisemitic" - so does Israel
Israel, in the words of its Justice Minister, has described any criticism of Israeli policy as antisemitism and it condemns Jews who criticise their policy as "self-hating Jews".
I have no intention of debating Israel here with you - the only reason I raised the question of Antisemitism here was because I believe Trump's appointment of an extreme antisemite and his possible consorting with antisemites like LePen and his victory gaining the support of extremist right wing groups in Europe and giving them the possibility of winning forthcoming elections, puts the Jewish People at risk as much as it does the rest of us.
Trump's Presidency indicates a rise of right-wing extremism in the Western World - the same extremism that set the jackboots marching in Germany and plunged the world into war.
He is an extremist right wing thug and he is drawing on extremists for his support, including the Klan - and people such as Bruce, and I presume you.
Right wing extremism exterminated many million people in the twentieth century, including six million Jews - the targeting of entire cultures, races and religions by the extremist right, opens the possibility that it is happening all over again.
What Bill Clinton and Donald Trump did or didn't do with their dicks measures small (inference intended) next to that fact - how Donald Trump regards women, "aliens", Mexicans, Muslims....... most certainly doesn't.
Trump's election in America was based on racism and Xenophiobia, an was Brexit in Britain
Take your filthy accusations and either prove them or stick them.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 04:29 AM

"On at least three occasions recently you have called for the assassination of the President."
On one occasion only I made a joke about it - I explained that was what it was.
The other two had nothing to do with killing Trump - I do believe the world would be a safer place without the likes of Trum - as I support of the man, I don't expect you to agree.
I am basically a pacifist and believe assassinating leaders such as Trump is both wrong and pointless - politicians such as he need to be stopped politically and I believe the decent people of America and the rest of the world are perfectly capable of doing that democratically.
Millions of people have already taken to the streets exercising their democratic rights - a tiny handful have resorted to violence, which is, I believe, both stupid and self-defeating - it is lowering themselves to the level of the potentially violent individual they are demonstrating against.
Feel free to make political capital out of my joke if you have nothing else to offer.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 05:39 AM

Well, Billi 'n' Jeri, do you remember the dark times before the no-Guests rule came in? Well there was an anonymous Guest in those times, one of many, of course (shall we call them "thread parasites," Jeri?). But this one frequently told us that his anonymity served to encourage the rest of us to address the argument, not attack the poster. At the same time, from behind his protective wall, he called people here Jew-haters, among other things, which, as we all know, is a fine way of not attacking the poster! Well here's the rub, cackling-Teribus-who-is-a-stranger-to-the-truth and Jeri-the-sour-mod-who-wades-in-without-bothering-to-check-facts: at that time there was also bobad. But here's the thing: bobad was also that Guest! Yes he was! But he pretended he wasn't! He was a Guest only when he wanted to go into insulting bigot mode! Joe Offer investigated and confirmed it, posts from both coming from the same Internet address.   So no unsubstantiated allegations, etc., from me, and no paranoia either, just a reminder of the man's hypocrisy in case anyone feels like taking him seriously. And one more thing, Jeri. Of all the people who post here there has been no-one, NO-ONE, more consistent and open than I've been about posting under their real name only and with a single identity only. Your disgraceful slur has demonstrated once again that you are not the right kind of person to be a moderator. Go and hang your head in shame and show us that you can take it as well as dole it out.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 05:41 AM

Headlines in this morning's Times
May (Theresa, not Imelda) has said that "together, Britain and America can lead the world" so she has unilaterally decided to push Britain to the extreme right
I'm sure she democratically sought agreement from her cabinet first (NOT)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Mr Red
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 06:16 AM

Il Douche?

according to those that study these things, the only train yer man made run on time was the one taking him to the seat of government ahead of his rivals. One train!

Such is history made of myths. Today it gets made before the fact, we calls them post truths - post as in Farcebook, Twatter and all the other channels open to manipulation. We used to call it propaganda - what happened to our language? Let us use the proper words.

Give the people a conduit, and what do we get? Cute cats, and a cacophony of cancerous kak! There is yer terror!

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 09:13 AM

Steve with all due respect you do have the practice and ability to come up with some of the most vicious putdowns, snubs and name calling I have seen. Sometimes I hope you didn't hone those skills in the classroom. I am glad Donald Trump does not go as far as you when it comes to defaming scandalous accusations. The point is, the formulaic sting at the end of your posts is practically automatic, albeit true on occasion, they add no clarity. As a Monty Python character who always insults at the end of all positive comment, its hilarious. But folks probably don't hear it that way.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Jeri
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 09:41 AM

Stevie, I never would have thought no identity was a separate identity. In any case, it's over. You consistently get into arguments with people because of who they are, not because of what they say, which is a damned good reason for someone to want to be nobody in particular. A bit stalker-ish.

For the most part, I ignore the BS threads, except the personal bile tends to spread into interesting, non-political threads. Still, I think there are few people who even try to discuss things in BS these days, and they're mostly into hate, ridicule, demonization, and all that other good shit.

Out

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 11:46 AM

Fact is, Jeri, you got this one badly wrong when you waded in with your size twelves. And if you really think that I come here to attack people because of who they are then you don't read my posts properly. I don't expect people to agree with me all, some or any of the time but my more serious posts are generally characterised by closely-argued points and are longer than most other people's posts. And the irony is that you yourself have a little lineup of people who you automatically attack whenever you're around to post, usually with a scathing remark and no attempt at debate. You called perfectly decent people thread parasites yesterday, and that was just yesterday. And now you are defending bobad for hiding behind a wall to call people like me and Jim Jew haters. Go on, read your own post again and try not to get indigestion. And kindly don't cover up your failings by insinuating that I'm a stalker. That is just vile. I only open threads that are on topics I may be interested in, ever. You have my full posting record on that score but I suppose it's just easier to make scurrilous accusations.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: bobad
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 11:59 AM

A bit stalker-ish.

I would say more than "a bit" but there you have one good reason for a poster to post anonymously if that option is available.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 11:59 AM

It isn't supposed to be a sting, Donuel. I had good teachers who showed us how to round off paragraphs either to link nicely to the next one or to close with a catch instead of a fizzle. I suppose I make my paragraphs a bit too long. But I see one or two others here who post in tabloidese, with short, snappy sentences instead of paragraphs and, to boot, double-spacing between. That's a debating ploy I don't fall for as it represents style hiding lack of substance, and, with some people who I won't name for now, it's an affectation. As for the other alleged attributes of my posts you refer to, well I suppose you don't wade through enough threads to see who the real name-callers are. I like to be direct as I find it saves time. If you catch me out stating untruths, do let me know. Thank you for the attention. And was that a sting?

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 12:06 PM

Well, bobad, you've called both me and Jim Jew haters a number of times yet neither of us has ever seen the need to hide behind anonymity. Oh yes, you can sniff us out quickly enough in any thread where you think you can get that one in, can't you?   But you're no stalker. And neither am I. Me, I just react. More damage done, see, Jeri? Well done!

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 12:32 PM

Jeri and I have had a few rows, but she is one of the better moderators.....no favourites and she is spot on this time Steve, you are personally in attack mode or dismiss mode at all times and have rarely any intention of addressing the issues.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 12:36 PM

She must be so happy to have YOU onside! 😂

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: bobad
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 01:07 PM

Well, bobad, you've called both me and Jim Jew haters a number of times....

Aww, poor little bully boys. How about Islamophobe, homophobe, bigot, racist, xenophobe, Nazi, fascist, storm trooper etc. Recognize those, snowflake?

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 01:10 PM

I think Jeri and I disagree about a lot of things, but she does her job pretty well. A moderator should not let their political views influence the way he/she moderates the forum. Jeri moderates in that fashion, if she thinks you ...or I are being disingenuous she will let us know in short measure, her own political views are kept out of it.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 01:42 PM

Ake; go explore your feminine side
Steve sometimes a game is so embedded we don't know we are playing.

As a hypnotist I had occasion to be a diplomat between the ego and the subconscious. Keeping the ego apart from the subconscious could serve the purpose of overlooking conflict. Getting them together could also serve a purpose.

Waa Waa Waa , oops there goes my irrelevancy alarm.

I have a tendency to wander, but you stay on point. After a while letting it go is good. Not everyone has the technical and intellectual prowess to delve into certain subjects. Let it go.

We probably all know more than we need to know but I like learning more while I can. Like my Mom the cynic said, live and learn, die and forget it all.

I have the view that any thing written here is as temporary as a footprint in the wet sand except for the hurt if I step on something alive and sharp and we both get hurt.

Trump drives a tank in that sand and won't get hurt unless he goes bare foot.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 01:49 PM

Trump goes barefoot in the weee hours of the morn.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Jan 17 - 08:47 PM

"Aww, poor little bully boys. How about Islamophobe, homophobe, bigot, racist, xenophobe, Nazi, fascist, storm trooper etc. Recognize those, snowflake?"

Well, petal, no I don't on the whole. Are you really saying I've called you all those things? If you are, then why not give me some quotes of mine, maybe one for each word, to demonstrate. Context, as ever, is everything. Nouns, not adjectives, please. Shall I not bother holding my breath, you delicate, got-at little fellow? Now don't go tripping yourself up by giving me examples of what I allegedly called you when you were pretending to be Guest-not-bobad! What a giveaway that would be! 😂

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 03:33 AM

Posted this to the wrong thread in my haste last night - here goes again.
"You consistently get into arguments with people because of who they are, not because of what they say"
Bit unfair, I thought - a constant jibe here is "leftie", or "your team" - or lumping together people like "the usual gang" - rather than responding to points made.
We are all prone to personally insulting - it often happens in subjects that we take seriously, but makybe it's time we all put a btake on it.
Mind you, that's a bit difficult when one of the main culprits obsequiously praised the moderator for doing her job while leaving the impression that it's everybody else who is the problem and nuffin' to do with him.
Bizarrely, the same individual uses "liberalism" as an insult - no idea where to go from there!!
The worst behaved individual on this forum is incapable of posting without personally insulting and talking down to people - equally bizarrely, our "illiberal" and obsequious friend regards his behaviour as beyond reproach - amazing what you can get away with if you say the right things to the right people (right being the operative word)
Insulting and cowardly Trolls like Bobad seem to be beyond all reason and will be what they are while they are allowed to get away with it.
We all need to get a grip if this section is to survive - and that can only happen if we "see ourselves as others see us" - not a bad time of year to quote that!
See what I mean about our serial abuser (Mr T's posting landed before I posted my message, conveniently underlining my point)
As I said - we all need to get a grip - and some of us need to come to terms with our ignorant arrogance
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Iains
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 04:37 AM

Well Mr Shaw you obviously cannot tolerate any form of criticism. You would seem the first to squeal like a stuck pig when people reciprocate to your taunting. I wonder if you applied your manner of posting to your teaching career. If you did you were a disgrace to the profession. You deliberately enter some threads to insult and provoke argument and make no attempt to hide it.
   I can take your insulting comments telling me to have another drink, or your dismissive "nighty night" and even your constant attempts to query my odd postings and correct my spelling and punctuation, or most recently to argue semantics. Some people used to collect green shield stamps, you appear to be trying to record the maximum number of postings on mudcat, with the second objective of irritating the maximum number of posters. I wonder how many you have driven away from mudcat with your constant posturing.You really are quite sad.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror: take a small action
From: peregrina
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 04:43 AM

Instead of arguing here, please,
be the resistance.
Instead of talking insults, which is fun, but doesn't bring about change, please, speak up,
BE HEARD!

Phone your Senators and Congressional rep and tell them which Trump policies and nominees you'd like them to oppose. Just 3 Phone calls, just 4 minutes. This works--they have to count calls

If you are not in the US, or are not a US citizen, you can phone a Trump hotel and say that as long as the White House phone line is off and Trump has not divested, his businesses are an extension of the Oval Office. From the Teen Vogue article about this:

'So, to solve the problem, White House Inc. — created by Revolution Messaging, the same company that worked on Bernie Sanders' digital presidential campaign — connects you to Trump in a different way: by calling his businesses, the same ones the president isn't divesting from, despite the fact that it may be illegal and unconstitutional for him to hold on to them."

--the website they created is here: https://whitehouseinc.org

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 04:54 AM

Why specify any individual when many people area ti it - shows a little partisanship
Whatever indiscretions Steve mey have committed there are far, far worse behaved than he
Forming factions is only going to increase the problem in including on this thread
Address the problem, not the individual
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 05:12 AM

By the way Iaians
My first impression of you here was your referring to me as gullible and naíve - a little arrogant for a newbie - far from "good manners", as I understand them
Glass houses, stone-throwing and all that
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 05:38 AM

Take no notice, Jim. He's a lightweight. A rude one at that.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 06:16 AM

The GAG order of the EPA scientists and removal of web pages has been lifted. The outrage and demonstrations have had an effect.
This was an invasion that went to far to soon.

The State Dept hasn't fared as well. Career statesmen have been fired.
They got rid of most of the people who had nurtured back channels for decades.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 06:49 AM

And what about the disgusting gag order that cuts US funding to international NGOs if they offer advice to women about abortion or provide abortion services? One organisation that is going to refuse to be compromised in this way will lose $100 million in funding even though none of the US money it receives is spent on abortion. Trump is going to be responsible for an upsurge in dangerous, illegal abortions in developing countries. Still, it's only women so why would he care? And anyway, America first, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 08:38 AM

It seems that people all over the Western world have at long last realised that we cannot afford "liberalism".

Even had it been a good idea, which it certainly was not, the social cost would have been too great
As I have said many times, if you want to live in a "free" capitalist society you need the utmost efficiency in running the economy, you all apparently want such "freedom", which is perhaps understandable as you are all members of a very privileged sector of society......but you baulk at the efficiency portion, which in effect means waving farewell to all the fondly held myths attached the "liberal" ideology.

Time for hard choices children, is it to be a new system, or a long lie in the bed you have been pissing in for the last couple of decades?.......The backlash is now well underway, do not say that you were not warned.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 09:40 AM

Perhaps you could post that again, this time explaining what the hell you're on about.

On second thoughts, don't bother.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 10:28 AM

I'm sure even you can work it out Steve.....so I won't(bother)

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 10:30 AM

If you are really into riddles, may I respectfully guide you to Don's posts?

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 10:47 AM

1st let me translate Ake; (if he had the facility)
**************************************************


Media shut up, progressives shut up, all you wind mill tilters shut up.
May all the dead statues of liberty and organizations built to tear down great empires, kingdoms and soulless corporations - SHUT UP.


Now is the time for white nationalists to shout out so all will hear - Everyone is to shut up, obey, be loyal and listen once and for all to the HEROES OF HATRED AND THE RIGHT OF THE MIGHTY OF THE RIGHT.
Finally every little common man will have a hand destroying the bad and building on the ashes of the past that was only designed to tear us down. Wasting money on illegal aliens, Jews, Blacks, Rag Heads will be dealt with and will be wiped from the face of the Earth.
Women will be put in their place. The place for democrats will be a criminalized zone gerrymandered from the filth infested cities of squalor. Democrats have somehow worked side by side for ISIS and through Sharia law has chained and defiled America.

The shining white city on the hill will be ours again!

We will strangle the federal work force with our bare hands and drown the survivors in a bathtub until never again grow large enough to bully the states, be they confederate or private or wholly independent from government. Instead the one great voice of our great leader will be heard, so shut up and listen.


Do you understand Ake now Steve?



These are the dark days I warned against and the seeds of civil war are rapidly being planted for next year's crop of divisive weed.
A weed that divides life giving food until it is choked out.
Distraction fertilizer and provokicide is being used to confuse the immune system.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 10:56 AM

I must remind everyone that this phase is still part of the blowback from what wall street did to us and the world.
They stole 25 years worth of our lunch money and people are still hungry.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 11:06 AM

and then there is the Alternative view.
Sorry if it is a little more restrained in tone and slightly less personal than Don's original.....A

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: Donuel
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 11:25 AM

I forgot the evil of education. Achenation, you are the White Taliban.

Subject: RE: BS: reign of terror
From: frogprince
Date: 27 Jan 17 - 11:40 AM

Ake, I will ask rather than make an assumption; do you, personally, agree, at least for the most part, with the "alternative view" expressed in the article you linked?