Holocaust survivers mock AOC

Holocaust survivors respond to AOC's 'concentration camp' comments in new video

She also has an invite to Auschwitz to learn how the Jews medical care compares to the children in border camps...
Concentration camp: a place where large numbers of people (such as prisoners of war, political prisoners, refugees, or the members of an ethnic or religious minority) are detained or confined under armed guard.

Your inability to distinguish from real refugees and illegals is not really anyone's problem but yours, Dud.
Actually they are all refugees from shithole countries. The usa should not be forced to take them

Actually, most of them are NOT refugees. They probably come from shithole countries, but that doesn't make them refugees. Please look up "refugees", because I do not encourage sloppy, fuzzy use of words. It makes communication impossible.

ref·u·gee
[ˌrefyo͝oˈjē]
NOUN
refugees (plural noun)

  1. a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster.
"My country has a shitty economy and a shitty government and I think I can make more money in America" doesn't qualify.

"The supply-side narcotics control efforts spearheaded by the Reagan administration continue to define the U.S.-led international drug war today. The prohibitionist ethos has contributed to the further destabilization of Latin American societies, siphoning resources away from the types of reforms that are needed to enhance democracy and prosperity in the region. Central America, as the main vector of cocaine that is smuggled from the Andes to North America, is among the most violent areas in the world today, with some of the highest homicide rates. These escalating crime levels negatively impact economic growth and democratic development, while eroding respect for the rule of law."

The Enduring Legacy of Reagan’s Drug War in Latin America
 
Concentration camp: a place where large numbers of people (such as prisoners of war, political prisoners, refugees, or the members of an ethnic or religious minority) are detained or confined under armed guard.

Your inability to distinguish from real refugees and illegals is not really anyone's problem but yours, Dud.
Actually they are all refugees from shithole countries. The usa should not be forced to take them

Actually, most of them are NOT refugees. They probably come from shithole countries, but that doesn't make them refugees. Please look up "refugees", because I do not encourage sloppy, fuzzy use of words. It makes communication impossible.

ref·u·gee
[ˌrefyo͝oˈjē]
NOUN
refugees (plural noun)

  1. a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster.
"My country has a shitty economy and a shitty government and I think I can make more money in America" doesn't qualify.
They are all victims of the ignorant poverty from where they came.

Which still doesn't make them "refugees". Again, sloppy, imprecise language serves no purpose except to make communication impossible.
Depends upon how refugee is defined. Do you think these are rich plantation owners or people fleeing gang and cartel violence and governments that do not give a shit
 
Your inability to distinguish from real refugees and illegals is not really anyone's problem but yours, Dud.
Actually they are all refugees from shithole countries. The usa should not be forced to take them

Actually, most of them are NOT refugees. They probably come from shithole countries, but that doesn't make them refugees. Please look up "refugees", because I do not encourage sloppy, fuzzy use of words. It makes communication impossible.

ref·u·gee
[ˌrefyo͝oˈjē]
NOUN
refugees (plural noun)

  1. a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster.
"My country has a shitty economy and a shitty government and I think I can make more money in America" doesn't qualify.
They are all victims of the ignorant poverty from where they came.

Which still doesn't make them "refugees". Again, sloppy, imprecise language serves no purpose except to make communication impossible.
Depends upon how refugee is defined. Do you think these are rich plantation owners or people fleeing gang and cartel violence and governments that do not give a shit

I just defined "refugee" for you. I respectfully suggest that, in future, you not use words until you know what they mean. "Depends on how it's defined" is another way of saying, "I'm going to use words wrong to get an emotional reaction, because I don't care about honest communication, just getting my own way." This makes you part of the problem.
 
Actually they are all refugees from shithole countries. The usa should not be forced to take them

Actually, most of them are NOT refugees. They probably come from shithole countries, but that doesn't make them refugees. Please look up "refugees", because I do not encourage sloppy, fuzzy use of words. It makes communication impossible.

ref·u·gee
[ˌrefyo͝oˈjē]
NOUN
refugees (plural noun)

  1. a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster.
"My country has a shitty economy and a shitty government and I think I can make more money in America" doesn't qualify.
They are all victims of the ignorant poverty from where they came.

Which still doesn't make them "refugees". Again, sloppy, imprecise language serves no purpose except to make communication impossible.
Depends upon how refugee is defined. Do you think these are rich plantation owners or people fleeing gang and cartel violence and governments that do not give a shit

I just defined "refugee" for you. I respectfully suggest that, in future, you not use words until you know what they mean. "Depends on how it's defined" is another way of saying, "I'm going to use words wrong to get an emotional reaction, because I don't care about honest communication, just getting my own way." This makes you part of the problem.
They are all refugees from governments that do not care about their people. Not all refugees will meet the qualifications for asylum, but they are refugees none the less.

Lol as if I need a twit with an internet dick tionary
 
Actually, most of them are NOT refugees. They probably come from shithole countries, but that doesn't make them refugees. Please look up "refugees", because I do not encourage sloppy, fuzzy use of words. It makes communication impossible.

ref·u·gee
[ˌrefyo͝oˈjē]
NOUN
refugees (plural noun)

  1. a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster.
"My country has a shitty economy and a shitty government and I think I can make more money in America" doesn't qualify.
They are all victims of the ignorant poverty from where they came.

Which still doesn't make them "refugees". Again, sloppy, imprecise language serves no purpose except to make communication impossible.
Depends upon how refugee is defined. Do you think these are rich plantation owners or people fleeing gang and cartel violence and governments that do not give a shit

I just defined "refugee" for you. I respectfully suggest that, in future, you not use words until you know what they mean. "Depends on how it's defined" is another way of saying, "I'm going to use words wrong to get an emotional reaction, because I don't care about honest communication, just getting my own way." This makes you part of the problem.
They are all refugees from governments that do not care about their people. Not all refugees will meet the qualifications for asylum, but they are refugees none the less.

Lol as if I need a twit with an internet dick tionary

No, they are all residents of a less-advanced country who want to live in a more-advanced country. That does not make them refugees, no matter HOW desperately you want to redefine "refugee" to mean "anyone I want to make emotional appeals for because their lives are less spiffy than I think they should be."

Words mean things, even to semi-literate leftist buffoons who think "feelz" are more important than higher thought processes.

"Refugee" has a specific meaning; you don't get to change that to mean whatever appeals to your agenda at the moment, Noah Webster. Shut off the glands and plug in your brain.
 
Is that forced?
Nope...but should be EN-forced. Seems like Congress doesn't want to enforce these laws. But instead, they either want tp "go around" the laws, or make them up as they go along. As if, they are only enforcing laws according to "certain" folks. But not to all.
 
They are all victims of the ignorant poverty from where they came.

Which still doesn't make them "refugees". Again, sloppy, imprecise language serves no purpose except to make communication impossible.
Depends upon how refugee is defined. Do you think these are rich plantation owners or people fleeing gang and cartel violence and governments that do not give a shit

I just defined "refugee" for you. I respectfully suggest that, in future, you not use words until you know what they mean. "Depends on how it's defined" is another way of saying, "I'm going to use words wrong to get an emotional reaction, because I don't care about honest communication, just getting my own way." This makes you part of the problem.
They are all refugees from governments that do not care about their people. Not all refugees will meet the qualifications for asylum, but they are refugees none the less.

Lol as if I need a twit with an internet dick tionary

No, they are all residents of a less-advanced country who want to live in a more-advanced country. That does not make them refugees, no matter HOW desperately you want to redefine "refugee" to mean "anyone I want to make emotional appeals for because their lives are less spiffy than I think they should be."

Words mean things, even to semi-literate leftist buffoons who think "feelz" are more important than higher thought processes.

"Refugee" has a specific meaning; you don't get to change that to mean whatever appeals to your agenda at the moment, Noah Webster. Shut off the glands and plug in your brain.
The really funny thing here is that you are so dumb that you believe that you are smart enough to tell others what they should believe.

They are all refugees from third world opression
 
Which still doesn't make them "refugees". Again, sloppy, imprecise language serves no purpose except to make communication impossible.
Depends upon how refugee is defined. Do you think these are rich plantation owners or people fleeing gang and cartel violence and governments that do not give a shit

I just defined "refugee" for you. I respectfully suggest that, in future, you not use words until you know what they mean. "Depends on how it's defined" is another way of saying, "I'm going to use words wrong to get an emotional reaction, because I don't care about honest communication, just getting my own way." This makes you part of the problem.
They are all refugees from governments that do not care about their people. Not all refugees will meet the qualifications for asylum, but they are refugees none the less.

Lol as if I need a twit with an internet dick tionary

No, they are all residents of a less-advanced country who want to live in a more-advanced country. That does not make them refugees, no matter HOW desperately you want to redefine "refugee" to mean "anyone I want to make emotional appeals for because their lives are less spiffy than I think they should be."

Words mean things, even to semi-literate leftist buffoons who think "feelz" are more important than higher thought processes.

"Refugee" has a specific meaning; you don't get to change that to mean whatever appeals to your agenda at the moment, Noah Webster. Shut off the glands and plug in your brain.
The really funny thing here is that you are so dumb that you believe that you are smart enough to tell others what they should believe.

They are all refugees from third world opression

The really funny thing here is that you are so dumb you think your moral outrage equals intelligence.

I'm not talking about what you believe, Gland Thinker. I'M talking about what's real and true; YOU are talking about what you "feelz" should be true, and for some odd reason, you think that means it IS true, and that I'm somehow obligated to treat it with respect as though it involves actual thought.

Here's a newsflash, barbarian: Those hormones rushing through your veins that you think make it unnecessary to think or reason or communicate like a civilized human instead of a sub-human primate? They may matter to you, but they don't to me.

You are everything that's wrong with this society: you're ignorant, you're arrogant in your ignorance, you think emotion takes the place of thought, and you think you can win a debate by doing little better than making meaningless noise and insisting that you're morally superior.

They aren't refugees, and you have not only failed in your childish attempt to defend them, you have done the opposite and made a STRONGER case against them. Congratulations. In future, I would suggest that talking should not be a thing you do, since thinking is already a thing you aren't doing.

Begone, primitive.
 
Depends upon how refugee is defined. Do you think these are rich plantation owners or people fleeing gang and cartel violence and governments that do not give a shit

I just defined "refugee" for you. I respectfully suggest that, in future, you not use words until you know what they mean. "Depends on how it's defined" is another way of saying, "I'm going to use words wrong to get an emotional reaction, because I don't care about honest communication, just getting my own way." This makes you part of the problem.
They are all refugees from governments that do not care about their people. Not all refugees will meet the qualifications for asylum, but they are refugees none the less.

Lol as if I need a twit with an internet dick tionary

No, they are all residents of a less-advanced country who want to live in a more-advanced country. That does not make them refugees, no matter HOW desperately you want to redefine "refugee" to mean "anyone I want to make emotional appeals for because their lives are less spiffy than I think they should be."

Words mean things, even to semi-literate leftist buffoons who think "feelz" are more important than higher thought processes.

"Refugee" has a specific meaning; you don't get to change that to mean whatever appeals to your agenda at the moment, Noah Webster. Shut off the glands and plug in your brain.
The really funny thing here is that you are so dumb that you believe that you are smart enough to tell others what they should believe.

They are all refugees from third world opression

The really funny thing here is that you are so dumb you think your moral outrage equals intelligence.

I'm not talking about what you believe, Gland Thinker. I'M talking about what's real and true; YOU are talking about what you "feelz" should be true, and for some odd reason, you think that means it IS true, and that I'm somehow obligated to treat it with respect as though it involves actual thought.

Here's a newsflash, barbarian: Those hormones rushing through your veins that you think make it unnecessary to think or reason or communicate like a civilized human instead of a sub-human primate? They may matter to you, but they don't to me.

You are everything that's wrong with this society: you're ignorant, you're arrogant in your ignorance, you think emotion takes the place of thought, and you think you can win a debate by doing little better than making meaningless noise and insisting that you're morally superior.

They aren't refugees, and you have not only failed in your childish attempt to defend them, you have done the opposite and made a STRONGER case against them. Congratulations. In future, I would suggest that talking should not be a thing you do, since thinking is already a thing you aren't doing.

Begone, primitive.
What you are is seriously triggered
 
More than 1.1 million died at Auschwitz...are you saying that they all worked till they died?
The majority died late in the war from disease and starvation. Allied bombing made it near impossible to get food and medicine to the camps.
They starved them when they first opened the camps in 1940.
I read about their meager diet.
It helps to read up on the subject before entering the debate, so you can call bullshit. Whenever some lib tries floating a lie I can slap it down.
Yes, I agree on the value of reading up on a subject. I've read a lot about the camps. It was that reading that led to the conclusion that there were no death camps. It was very hard to accept that, as it contradicted what I'd been taught since childhood and what's in generally accepted history texts. The weight of the evidence that so much of what we've been told is fabricated propaganda was overwhelming.

More than 1.1 million died at Auschwitz...are you saying that they all worked till they died?
The majority died late in the war from disease and starvation. Allied bombing made it near impossible to get food and medicine to the camps.
Were the camps residents well fed before b17s began raids
The prisoners were cared for properly. One might say exceptionally well when one learns of the facilities available to them. They were prisoners and they were forced to work (though they were paid in scrip). Conditions deteriorated once Churchill initiated civilian bombing raids. Towards the end, typhus, et al were rampant and many, many thousands of prisoners died.
 
More than 1.1 million died at Auschwitz...are you saying that they all worked till they died?
The majority died late in the war from disease and starvation. Allied bombing made it near impossible to get food and medicine to the camps.
They starved them when they first opened the camps in 1940.
I read about their meager diet.
It helps to read up on the subject before entering the debate, so you can call bullshit. Whenever some lib tries floating a lie I can slap it down.
Yes, I agree on the value of reading up on a subject. I've read a lot about the camps. It was that reading that led to the conclusion that there were no death camps. It was very hard to accept that, as it contradicted what I'd been taught since childhood and what's in generally accepted history texts. The weight of the evidence that so much of what we've been told is fabricated propaganda was overwhelming.

More than 1.1 million died at Auschwitz...are you saying that they all worked till they died?
The majority died late in the war from disease and starvation. Allied bombing made it near impossible to get food and medicine to the camps.
Were the camps residents well fed before b17s began raids
The prisoners were cared for properly. One might say exceptionally well when one learns of the facilities available to them. They were prisoners and they were forced to work (though they were paid in scrip). Conditions deteriorated once Churchill initiated civilian bombing raids. Towards the end, typhus, et al were rampant and many, many thousands of prisoners died.

One quick question, if you don't mind.

What, precisely, were you reading to come to this conclusion?
 
More than 1.1 million died at Auschwitz...are you saying that they all worked till they died?
The majority died late in the war from disease and starvation. Allied bombing made it near impossible to get food and medicine to the camps.
They starved them when they first opened the camps in 1940.
I read about their meager diet.
It helps to read up on the subject before entering the debate, so you can call bullshit. Whenever some lib tries floating a lie I can slap it down.
Yes, I agree on the value of reading up on a subject. I've read a lot about the camps. It was that reading that led to the conclusion that there were no death camps. It was very hard to accept that, as it contradicted what I'd been taught since childhood and what's in generally accepted history texts. The weight of the evidence that so much of what we've been told is fabricated propaganda was overwhelming.

More than 1.1 million died at Auschwitz...are you saying that they all worked till they died?
The majority died late in the war from disease and starvation. Allied bombing made it near impossible to get food and medicine to the camps.
Were the camps residents well fed before b17s began raids
The prisoners were cared for properly. One might say exceptionally well when one learns of the facilities available to them. They were prisoners and they were forced to work (though they were paid in scrip). Conditions deteriorated once Churchill initiated civilian bombing raids. Towards the end, typhus, et al were rampant and many, many thousands of prisoners died.
Auschwitz was not one of those cases.
People were sent there to die.
They were treated accordingly.

Still, the left seems to think if the illegals aren't given a room at the Ritz......or don't get their Happy Meal for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, well we're talking concentration camps run by Nazis. "If you screw up not only vill I shoot you but ze man or woman next to you. If I catch you sleeping during working hours a sniper vill blow your Jew head off!"


Yup, this is what Trump is doing to these beautiful future Democrats as we speak.



THE STUPID THINGS THEY THINK TO SAY EVERY DAY!!!


It's why I want to slap them every time they open their pie holes.
 
Last edited:
President running concentration camps along the border.........

D93Fzi7XkAAS_DB.jpg
 
Auschwitz was a work camp. Invitees worked until dead......


More than 1.1 million died at Auschwitz...are you saying that they all worked till they died? What sort of work...less than half a million slaves who worked till they died built the great pyramid with no modern technology at their disposal..what did all these people at Auschwitz work on?
No I am saying that knowing the stats like you seem to need, changes nothing.

Did you see the Sun rise over the singing birds this morning?

We are having this discussion because aoc is retarded, the future waits, will you squander it on the past?

Don't think you got my point..Auschwitz was not a "work camp" it was a death camp...they were in the extermination business....nothing more.
 
More than 1.1 million died at Auschwitz...are you saying that they all worked till they died?
The majority died late in the war from disease and starvation. Allied bombing made it near impossible to get food and medicine to the camps.
They starved them when they first opened the camps in 1940.
I read about their meager diet.
It helps to read up on the subject before entering the debate, so you can call bullshit. Whenever some lib tries floating a lie I can slap it down.
Yes, I agree on the value of reading up on a subject. I've read a lot about the camps. It was that reading that led to the conclusion that there were no death camps. It was very hard to accept that, as it contradicted what I'd been taught since childhood and what's in generally accepted history texts. The weight of the evidence that so much of what we've been told is fabricated propaganda was overwhelming.

More than 1.1 million died at Auschwitz...are you saying that they all worked till they died?
The majority died late in the war from disease and starvation. Allied bombing made it near impossible to get food and medicine to the camps.
Were the camps residents well fed before b17s began raids
The prisoners were cared for properly. One might say exceptionally well when one learns of the facilities available to them. They were prisoners and they were forced to work (though they were paid in scrip). Conditions deteriorated once Churchill initiated civilian bombing raids. Towards the end, typhus, et al were rampant and many, many thousands of prisoners died.

One quick question, if you don't mind.

What, precisely, were you reading to come to this conclusion?
Might have been a kkk manifesto
 
What is the lie
Read the link.
Auschwitz was a work camp. Invitees worked until dead......


More than 1.1 million died at Auschwitz...are you saying that they all worked till they died? What sort of work...less than half a million slaves who worked till they died built the great pyramid with no modern technology at their disposal..what did all these people at Auschwitz work on?
No I am saying that knowing the stats like you seem to need, changes nothing.

Did you see the Sun rise over the singing birds this morning?

We are having this discussion because aoc is retarded, the future waits, will you squander it on the past?

Don't think you got my point..Auschwitz was not a "work camp" it was a death camp...they were in the extermination business....nothing more.
My point is that knowing the specs of different camps is morbidely useless. What I know or do not know changes nothing. And again the retard aoc is the only reason this is being discussed.

Did you hear the birds this morning
 
Read the link.
Auschwitz was a work camp. Invitees worked until dead......


More than 1.1 million died at Auschwitz...are you saying that they all worked till they died? What sort of work...less than half a million slaves who worked till they died built the great pyramid with no modern technology at their disposal..what did all these people at Auschwitz work on?
No I am saying that knowing the stats like you seem to need, changes nothing.

Did you see the Sun rise over the singing birds this morning?

We are having this discussion because aoc is retarded, the future waits, will you squander it on the past?

Don't think you got my point..Auschwitz was not a "work camp" it was a death camp...they were in the extermination business....nothing more.
My point is that knowing the specs of different camps is morbidely useless. What I know or do not know changes nothing. And again the retard aoc is the only reason this is being discussed.

Did you hear the birds this morning

I am still not getting your point....yes AOC is a complete idiot...what point are you trying to make re the birds? And if one doesn't know what went on in the camps, then one simply doesn't have a clue...if you don't know the stats regarding the camps, then it is clear that you were never interested enough to even bother....since you never had enough interest to even find out what happened, why did you even bother responding to this thread?
 
Auschwitz was a work camp. Invitees worked until dead......


More than 1.1 million died at Auschwitz...are you saying that they all worked till they died? What sort of work...less than half a million slaves who worked till they died built the great pyramid with no modern technology at their disposal..what did all these people at Auschwitz work on?
No I am saying that knowing the stats like you seem to need, changes nothing.

Did you see the Sun rise over the singing birds this morning?

We are having this discussion because aoc is retarded, the future waits, will you squander it on the past?

Don't think you got my point..Auschwitz was not a "work camp" it was a death camp...they were in the extermination business....nothing more.
My point is that knowing the specs of different camps is morbidely useless. What I know or do not know changes nothing. And again the retard aoc is the only reason this is being discussed.

Did you hear the birds this morning

I am still not getting your point....yes AOC is a complete idiot...what point are you trying to make re the birds? And if one doesn't know what went on in the camps, then one simply doesn't have a clue...if you don't know the stats regarding the camps, then it is clear that you were never interested enough to even bother....since you never had enough interest to even find out what happened, why did you even bother responding to this thread?
You are stuck in the past, that is why you can not hear the birds herald the sunrise

 
Last edited:

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top