Multiculturalism and Sharia

[Wry Catcher]

Wow, bigotry has gone mainstream. First greed was made into a virtue and now bigotry is what most 'Americans' support. What next? If history is a guide we'll soon see our nations version of Kristallnacht by patriotic 'Americans'.

 

[Contumacious]

LOL......we need to worry about the 9/11 killers' 'motivation'........?

they attacked and killed Americans.....that's all we fucking need to know....

the same goes for Israel....they have every right to retaliate against terrorists attempting to annilate them....

Hamburg Delenda Est

By John Galvin

September 20, 2001


by John Galvin

Let me explain to you the most fundamental principle of American foreign policy: Any country where the people have unpronounceable names can be bombed by the US with impunity. For you Rockwell readers who are a little slow on the uptake, "impunity" means they aren't allowed to bomb us back. "We called no tag-backs." It hardly qualifies as impunity when they blow up our biggest buildings, now does it? They aren't playing by the rules."

.

so while someone is stabbing your wife to death you are going to worry about 'motivation'.....?

We are not talking about my wife.

The 09/11 Commission was supposed to find out what motivated those individuals to attack us and kill 3000 Americans.

They found the reason and then suppressed it.

YOU CAN NOT FIND ANYWHERE IN THE REPORT THE FBI'S TESTIMONY DEMONSTRATING THAT THE US SUPPORT OF THE PALESTINIAN GENOCIDE IS WHAT PROVOKED THE ATTACK.

YOU CAN NOT FIND ANYWHERE IN THE REPORT THE EVIDENCE SHOWING THAT ISRAEL KNEW ABOUT THE HIJACKERS AND REFUSED TO SHARE THE INTELLIGENCE.

.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Wow, bigotry has gone mainstream. First greed was made into a virtue and now bigotry is what most "Americans' support. What next? If history is a guide we'll soon see our nations version of Kristallnacht by patriotic 'Americans'.

you mean like the kowtowing American police supported bigotry in Dearborn....?

 

[Foxfyre]

Hamburg Delenda Est

By John Galvin

September 20, 2001


by John Galvin

Let me explain to you the most fundamental principle of American foreign policy: Any country where the people have unpronounceable names can be bombed by the US with impunity. For you Rockwell readers who are a little slow on the uptake, "impunity" means they aren't allowed to bomb us back. "We called no tag-backs." It hardly qualifies as impunity when they blow up our biggest buildings, now does it? They aren't playing by the rules."

.

so while someone is stabbing your wife to death you are going to worry about 'motivation'.....?

We are not talking about my wife.

The 09/11 Commission was supposed to find out what motivated those individuals to attack us and kill 3000 Americans.

They found the reason and then suppressed it.

YOU CAN NOT FIND ANYWHERE IN THE REPORT THE FBI'S TESTIMONY DEMONSTRATING THAT THE US SUPPORT OF THE PALESTINIAN GENOCIDE IS WHAT PROVOKED THE ATTACK.

YOU CAN NOT FIND ANYWHERE IN THE REPORT THE EVIDENCE SHOWING THAT ISRAEL KNEW ABOUT THE HIJACKERS AND REFUSED TO SHARE THE INTELLIGENCE.

.

I agree that the 9/11 Commission reported no evidence that anybody in the Clinton or Bush Administrations knew about the hijackers. Or that Israel was implicated in any way.

There is, however, quite a bit of information on the motives of the hijackers and this does not look suppressed to me:

Just for a quick overview, I would refer you to Pages XV and XVI in the Preface of the official report here:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf

I could not persuade my computer to copy the pertinent paragraphs.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Wow, bigotry has gone mainstream. First greed was made into a virtue and now bigotry is what most 'Americans' support. What next? If history is a guide we'll soon see our nations version of Kristallnacht by patriotic 'Americans'.

We're heading towards something very weird. Imagine 18th century mindset as that's what they believe the constitution says with 21st century tech, and late 19th century business regs.

Not going to be pretty!

 

[Steven_R]

"The Left desires power at any cost: even at the cost of the death of this nation."

based on individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.next provide evidence that "the Left" desires power at any cost.

"They have successfully used identity politics in which they encourage each group to focus on slights, imagined victimization, and to remain an entity separate from the culture and the rest of the nation."

Has PC only read her own posts? "slights" and "imagined victimization"? Maybe she should walk in the shoes of others before judging their feelings as inconsequential.

I'd go on, but it doesn't pay to feed a narcissist.

"...define the Left...."

The Left: those who do not agree with the Founders, e.g., a nation based on individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.

You mean Founders like Alexander Hamilton? Oh, wait...

 

[ScienceRocks]

"The Left desires power at any cost: even at the cost of the death of this nation."

based on individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.next provide evidence that "the Left" desires power at any cost.

"They have successfully used identity politics in which they encourage each group to focus on slights, imagined victimization, and to remain an entity separate from the culture and the rest of the nation."

Has PC only read her own posts? "slights" and "imagined victimization"? Maybe she should walk in the shoes of others before judging their feelings as inconsequential.

I'd go on, but it doesn't pay to feed a narcissist.

"...define the Left...."

The Left: those who do not agree with the Founders, e.g., a nation based on individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.

You mean Founders like Alexander Hamilton? Oh, wait...

Or Adams
Or even Washington using the military as president on our own soil!
etc

 

[Howey]

What is 'the left?"

In a nutshell it include all who wholly or in part represent:

1. Those who deny and reject most of the principles upon which the Founders established the Constitution and a new nation, and justify that rejection because all modern concepts or values were not included. To them the Constitution is valid only when it supports what they want to support.

2. Those with a Marxist mentality--the belief that nobody should really own or control property but that it all belongs to all to be divided according to the needs of each.

3. Those who would force one group/demographic to give up their cherished values and principles in favor of 'more noble' concepts, with the Left of course dictating to the whole what those 'more noble' concepts will be.

4. Those who see motive as more important than conduct or consequences.

5. Those who look to government as the enabler, protector, and benefactor of all society and all that should be.

6. Those who see America as inferior to other nations that they think have better values, attitudes, and lifestyles.

Source?

 

[Steven_R]

"...define the Left...."

The Left: those who do not agree with the Founders, e.g., a nation based on individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.

You mean Founders like Alexander Hamilton? Oh, wait...

Or Adams
Or even Washington using the military as president on our own soil!
etc

Not that I mind people quoting or appealing to the FF, but let's not forget they were just as opinioned as to the proper role of a national government as we are today. Some, like Jefferson, thought the national government should be all but non-existent. Some, like Hamilton, thought the feds should be the end-all, be-all of government.

They weren't some monolithic mass of politicians that were all on the same page of group-think when it came to a variety of topics regarding government, regardless of which pundit is quote-mining. We would do well to remember that.

 

[1776]

You don't have a wife...a blow up doll doesn't count.

Hamburg Delenda Est

By John Galvin

September 20, 2001


by John Galvin

Let me explain to you the most fundamental principle of American foreign policy: Any country where the people have unpronounceable names can be bombed by the US with impunity. For you Rockwell readers who are a little slow on the uptake, "impunity" means they aren't allowed to bomb us back. "We called no tag-backs." It hardly qualifies as impunity when they blow up our biggest buildings, now does it? They aren't playing by the rules."

.

so while someone is stabbing your wife to death you are going to worry about 'motivation'.....?

We are not talking about my wife.

The 09/11 Commission was supposed to find out what motivated those individuals to attack us and kill 3000 Americans.

They found the reason and then suppressed it.

YOU CAN NOT FIND ANYWHERE IN THE REPORT THE FBI'S TESTIMONY DEMONSTRATING THAT THE US SUPPORT OF THE PALESTINIAN GENOCIDE IS WHAT PROVOKED THE ATTACK.

YOU CAN NOT FIND ANYWHERE IN THE REPORT THE EVIDENCE SHOWING THAT ISRAEL KNEW ABOUT THE HIJACKERS AND REFUSED TO SHARE THE INTELLIGENCE.

.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Wow, bigotry has gone mainstream. First greed was made into a virtue and now bigotry is what most 'Americans' support. What next? If history is a guide we'll soon see our nations version of Kristallnacht by patriotic 'Americans'.

We're heading towards something very weird. Imagine 18th century mindset as that's what they believe the constitution says with 21st century tech, and late 19th century business regs.

Not going to be pretty!

An amazing consistency!

With metronomic regularity you post on subjects about which you have zero knowledge....and, therefore, zero credibility.

And, sure enough! Another such post.

That must be why you are known as Matthew the Moron.





Although you are certainly ineducable, let's give you the benefit of the double-doubt:

Judge Robert Bork makes the point that Originalists can easily apply timeless constitutional commands to new technologies, such as wiretapping and television, and to changed circumstances, as suits for libel and slander.

All the judge needs is knowledge of the core value that the Framers intended to protect.

And, while we may not decide every case in the way the Framers would have, “entire ranges of problems will be placed off limits to judges, thus preserving democracy in those areas where the framers intended democratic government.”





If or when you learn to read, try this tome:

"Originalism: A Quarter-Century of Debate" by Steven G. Calabresi and Antonin Scalia


Oh....and, stop drooling on the keyboard.

 

[TemplarKormac]

1. The Left desires power at any cost: even at the cost of the death of this nation.

Tell me, why do you believe this crap? Does the world. a changing world, just scare you and keep you up at night?

Does the prospect of people being free to think for themselves keep you up at night?

 

[TemplarKormac]

"...define the Left...."

The Left: those who do not agree with the Founders, e.g., a nation based on individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.

The Left would say that they do agree still but they aren't Libertarians or Anarchists. They also live in a vastly more complicated world than the Founders did.

A world they helped to make more complicated. Go figure.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Don't bother.

If you stopped posting, you're the only one who'd know it.

If you find multiculturalism and diversity so maddening why don't you go back to Korea,

one of the most proudly racist nations in the history of humankind.

I think PC means well ...as long as everything is done HER WAY !!!

So, that's why Obama keeps issuing executive orders and delaying Obamacare? America isn't Burger King, he (and you) can't have it your way.

 

[SmedlyButler]

The dreck and dross of CP's usually insipid copied and pasted parables of extreme right wing fantasy are more often than not ignored by the rational poster. This OP seems to have attracted a serendipitous confluence of reason that perfectly mocks her simplistic mythotype of a lost "American Utopia" that few others recognize or would want to inhabit. I guess it's just another affirmation that even the most useless object can possess instructional value. The enfilade of logic almost inspires pity for the hapless prey. Almost.

That's one other characteristic of leftism I believe. The inability to see a concept or principle separate from a person they wish to defame, attack, criticize, or humiliate.

I think most conservatives may or may not appreciate the form in which the topic was introduced, but most conservatives are able to recognize an interesting topic and discuss it on its own merits. Lefties, not so much.

I guess I should make myself clearer. I don't often actually read her posts in detail any longer.
Most of them are just too silly to spend any time mulling. There worth is further eroded by her habitual use of discredited sources. (such as the certifiable lunatic who claimed in the 60's that fluoridation was a Russian plot at mind control) She used that witness in her attempt to demean one of the greatest of all American patriots, Harry Hopkins. Posting of falsehoods and re-posting them even after their lack of veracity has been proven over and over again gives the warning that anything she posts has to be approached very warily. I don't have the time to fact check her copied and pasted tomes even if it happened one appeared to have merit at first glance.

What I do sometimes is scan her post for meta-information such as subject, original content, (usually close to zero)links and sources,(if she feels the obligation to cite them, not often enough) etc. Sometimes the title line is enough to determine their worth.

But what I quite often do is read the replies to her OP's. They often tell the real story without me wasting my time in any research. And in her replies you sometimes get original content, though too frequently all you get is more copy and paste. (even her "witty" repartee is C&P'd from places like findinsults.com)

I have to share this with you, to me it was hilarious. This is one of her fans attempting to defend her propensity to "borrow" material;

")p.s. PC might be copy & pasting staff but she chooses correctly to illustrate her own thoughts.) " That's verbatim. I think you get my drift, PC is one of my favorite posters though I start with the a priori that the content is meaningless without the context of her "authorship".

Now all that being said I have picked up a nugget of information from this thread that, if true, adds a new level of hypocrisy to some of her posts (maybe this one in particular). When I have the opportunity I will read this post in detail with this new insight in mind. After all, we do love this shit, else why would we bother?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Another question would be why would Europe intentionally cause the imbalance witnessed in Europe between Muslims from restricted nations and non Muslim citzens of Europe?

Why did America intentionally open the flood gates to Muslims from restricted nations? This experiment was not going to have any different outcome than other nations taken over by Islam. Surely they knew this. In fact it could be because they knew this they decided to flood the west with Muslims from restricted nations in order to catapult their own agenda.

Wasn't it Kissinger who said people will sacrifice their freedoms for more security? Who better to offer it to them the communist UN?

I have no doubt about the nature of Islam and neither do the communists who are using it to their advantage. It's all leading up to something.

what better way to destroy the fabric of America.....than to pit group against group.....?

Obama is doing it in spades.....

...all part of the marxist 'revolution'....

Holy fuck! Conservatives don't do that????

 

[SmedlyButler]

Lip syncing.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Another question would be why would Europe intentionally cause the imbalance witnessed in Europe between Muslims from restricted nations and non Muslim citzens of Europe?

Why did America intentionally open the flood gates to Muslims from restricted nations? This experiment was not going to have any different outcome than other nations taken over by Islam. Surely they knew this. In fact it could be because they knew this they decided to flood the west with Muslims from restricted nations in order to catapult their own agenda.

Wasn't it Kissinger who said people will sacrifice their freedoms for more security? Who better to offer it to them the communist UN?

I have no doubt about the nature of Islam and neither do the communists who are using it to their advantage. It's all leading up to something.

what better way to destroy the fabric of America.....than to pit group against group.....?

Obama is doing it in spades.....

...all part of the marxist 'revolution'....

These liberals have been doing precisely that for decades.
Libs place people into groups then pit them against each other.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

1. The Left desires power at any cost: even at the cost of the death of this nation.

Tell me, why do you believe this crap? Does the world. a changing world, just scare you and keep you up at night?

Does the prospect of people being free to think for themselves keep you up at night?

If people did, they don't, I'd be quite pleased.

 

[Unkotare]

I guess I should make myself clearer. I don't often actually read her posts in detail any longer.

And yet you spend all this time posting about them. Hmmmm....