Who Gave China To The Communists?

Flanders

ARCHCONSERVATIVE
Sep 23, 2010
7,628
748
205
Diamond-hard supporters of the Iran Deal cannot possibly number more than a few thousand when you compare them to the number who oppose the deal. And I’m only talking about Americans. Everything I’ve heard and read pretty much say the same things:

I realize calling president Obama “evil” sounds pretty pedestrian. But folks, evil succinctly describes Obama's pattern of pathological lying and placing his agenda above human life.

Even after all these years of Obama, I still find it stunning that the MSM not only allows Obama's lies to go unchallenged, they promote his lies, selling them to the American people.

For example: Obama claims 99% of the world including experts are praising his Iran Nuke deal. Nonsense! The truth is many are saying Obama's deal increases the chances of war, will spur a nuclear arms race, and rewards Iran, which has a horrific human rights record. And yet, the MSM joined Obama in his victory lap.

July 21, 2015
Obama's Horrific Nuke Deal and You
By Lloyd Marcus

Articles Obama s Horrific Nuke Deal and You

There is a plus side. Even if Rush Limbaugh’s huge audience are the only Americans examining the United Nations role in the Iran Deal betrayal it would be more than enough for millions more to question the UN’s unconstitutional authority. Add the Internet and some talking heads to the outcry and the United Nations is honestly being questioned for the first time in my life. Not even scandals like Oil-For-Food, or UN peacekeeping troops raping children, did not put a dent in the UN’s carefully crafted image as mankind’s last hope for survival. Not even the UN’s environmental doom & gloom compares to a loss of sovereignty.

The Official Loss of American Sovereignty: The UN Approves Iran Nuclear Deal Before the US Congress Does
July 20, 2015

The Official Loss of American Sovereignty The UN Approves Iran Nuclear Deal Before the US Congress Does - The Rush Limbaugh Show

I could fill pages and post dozens of video links opposing the Iran Deal. Instead of piling on, I want to paraphrase the never-answered question: “Who gave China to the Communists?”

The list is long, but in general FDR and Truman are blame-free. At the worst they were dupes for following the advice of State Department Communists. The question now is:


Who gave America to the United Nations?

You cannot miss media Communists saying the sewer rat does not listen to anybody —— he makes every decision. Even well-intentioned journalists promote the lie.

Placing the blame on the Chicago sewer rat alone would be a big mistake.

Media Communists learned from China. They now know that it is much wiser to blame one man than it is to drag down the State Department. At the very most, the traitor, John Kerry, will share the blame with the sewer rat —— until things cool off the same way it did after China went Communist.

The major difference between FDR/Truman in China is that Taqiyya the Liar is very much onboard with every policy decision that originates in the State Department.


2015-07-21.jpg

The presidency and the State Department are one entity. Indeed, the sewer rat put a UN traitor in charge of State; two if you count Clinton. More if you throw in his US Ambassadors to the United Nations. It is illogical to assume that the rest of his administration and advisers are loyal to America’s sovereignty.

If you research China you will find economists and bankers deeply involved in handing China to Mao. It is not hard to find economists and bankers up to their necks in handing America’s sovereignty to the United Nations.

Finally, it is sickening me to see the same old media strategy in play again. It started the minute the Security Council passed the resolution approving the Iran Deal. The strategy goes like this:

The president’s Iran Deal is in trouble in Congress. The required 34 votes to sustain his veto are not there. Republicans oppose the deal, and Democrats like Upchuck Schumer will never vote against Israel, and so it goes. At the last minute there will be so many congressional noses angling for a spot in the sewer rat’s round-brown the openings will sell for big bucks. The traitors even opened the champagne five seconds after America’s enemies raised their hands.


r

The United Nations Security Council votes to approve a resolution at the U.N. headquarters in New York July 20, 2015. The United Nations Security Council on Monday endorsed a deal to curb Iran's nuclear program in return for sanctions relief, but it will be able to re-impose...Reuters/Mike Segar

This douche bag’s desk plaque should say INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY:

la-fg-un-iran-resolution-vote-20150720

The douche bag hates America so much she did not bother to hide her joy at seeing the country she hates going down for the count:

images
 
If the conscience of the Senate as he was billed by the media —— Joe Lieberman —— was still a senator he would vote for whatever a Democrat president wants. Only idiots believed anything he said in that nasal whine of his when he was in office; so why should he be believed now? I think they dragged him out to buttress the strategy:
it is sickening me to see the same old media strategy in play again. It started the minute the Security Council passed the resolution approving the Iran Deal. The strategy goes like this:


Notice he hedged his bet:

Former Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I., Conn.), Al Gore’s 2000 running mate on the Democratic ticket, said that he believes there is enough opposition in Congress to the Iran nuclear deal to override a veto from President Obama.

“I think they’re there,” he said Tuesday on Fox Business. “They’re not there now, but they can be there. In other words, if you combine those who clearly have said already they are going to be against it with those who have remained undecided, it’s well over two-thirds in both chambers.”

Lieberman: Enough Opposition to Nuclear Deal in Congress to Override Obama Veto
BY: David Rutz
July 21, 2015 2:39 pm

Lieberman Enough Opposition to Nuclear Deal in Congress to Override Obama Veto Washington Free Beacon

Who will remember, or give a rat’s ass, what Lieberman said after the veto is sustained as I predict. The United Nations crowd has too many years invested in getting to this point. They will do, and pay, whatever it takes to sustain the veto.

Frankly, the nuclear aspect of the Iran Deal is smoke & mirrors. Iran is going to get the nuclear bomb, in addition to getting ICBMs, with or without the deal. America’s two most powerful enemies, China and Russia, will see to it.

Ratifying the UN’s resolution, the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) is the objective. Talking about the Iran Deal is about stopping Iran from going nuclear is for public consumption only. The fix is in.

Incidentally, I am always right about Supreme Court cases that interest me. I am always right about the United Nations. The Iran Deal is the one time I pray that I am wrong even if it ruins my perfect record.
 
If the conscience of the Senate as he was billed by the media —— Joe Lieberman —— was still a senator he would vote for whatever a Democrat president wants. Only idiots believed anything he said in that nasal whine of his when he was in office; so why should he be believed now? I think they dragged him out to buttress the strategy:
it is sickening me to see the same old media strategy in play again. It started the minute the Security Council passed the resolution approving the Iran Deal. The strategy goes like this:


Notice he hedged his bet:

Former Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I., Conn.), Al Gore’s 2000 running mate on the Democratic ticket, said that he believes there is enough opposition in Congress to the Iran nuclear deal to override a veto from President Obama.

“I think they’re there,” he said Tuesday on Fox Business. “They’re not there now, but they can be there. In other words, if you combine those who clearly have said already they are going to be against it with those who have remained undecided, it’s well over two-thirds in both chambers.”

Lieberman: Enough Opposition to Nuclear Deal in Congress to Override Obama Veto
BY: David Rutz
July 21, 2015 2:39 pm

Lieberman Enough Opposition to Nuclear Deal in Congress to Override Obama Veto Washington Free Beacon

Who will remember, or give a rat’s ass, what Lieberman said after the veto is sustained as I predict. The United Nations crowd has too many years invested in getting to this point. They will do, and pay, whatever it takes to sustain the veto.

Frankly, the nuclear aspect of the Iran Deal is smoke & mirrors. Iran is going to get the nuclear bomb, in addition to getting ICBMs, with or without the deal. America’s two most powerful enemies, China and Russia, will see to it.

Ratifying the UN’s resolution, the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) is the objective. Talking about the Iran Deal is about stopping Iran from going nuclear is for public consumption only. The fix is in.

Incidentally, I am always right about Supreme Court cases that interest me. I am always right about the United Nations. The Iran Deal is the one time I pray that I am wrong even if it ruins my perfect record.

I think you will be wrong..as time will tell...tor
 
The chinese chose the communists over the US backed military faction that was more concerned with industrialization than human rights or quality of living for citizens.

Yes the chinese government is corrupt and evil (like the US is) but Mao's original vision, and why he was so revered was just. He just became very disillusioned over time and spiraled out of control.

I know this isn't what this thread is about but you seem to be a very passionate US nationalist that believes the government has honest intentions and so I don't really want to discuss it
 
Mao Tse Dung fought Chaing Kai Shek for control of mainland China...

... Mao won and Chaing fled to Taiwan...

... and now ya knows - the rest o' the story.

PS. Uncle Ferd wantin' to know if ya gots a pic o' Samantha Powers in black leather - preferably w/ a whip an' handcuffs?
 
The chinese chose the communists over the US backed military faction that was more concerned with industrialization than human rights or quality of living for citizens.
To Shikica: Communism was forced on the majority of Chinese as it is everywhere it takes root.

Dirty little moralists, do-gooders, the priest personality, and parasites in general will always find something to justify totalitarian government. Communists told us Communism was good because Fascism was so bad. Communists always told us that Communism is good because laissez faire capitalism is bad. Your kind say that Communism is good because industrialization is bad.

Incidentally, environmental freakazoid Communists jumped on industrialization while they never point out that Communist China is the biggest polluter. I could be mistaken. Communists might be nothing more than Luddites in disguise.

Yes the chinese government is corrupt and evil (like the US is) but Mao's original vision, and why he was so revered was just.
To Shikica: Give it up. Knocking America’s form of government in order to justify a totalitarian form of government is a losing argument.
He just became very disillusioned over time and spiraled out of control.
To Shikica: If anything, Mao was disillusioned with imperfect Communism. Making excuses for Mao is a variation of the standard crap offered up every time Communism fails: Real Communism was never tried. The fact is that power applies to government as well as to men:

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad man.
John Emerich Edward Dalberg (1834–1902)​
I know this isn't what this thread is about but you seem to be a very passionate US nationalist that believes the government has honest intentions and so I don't really want to discuss it
To Shikica: There is nothing to discuss. You cannot defend “If it ain’t perfect it is no good.”

Whether or not you want to discuss it, individual liberties is the best form of government in manmade institutions that can never be perfect. So if you insist on responding to my messages, dispute individual liberties as though they will exist in your replacement. Or avoid the issue in your own thread.
 
The chinese chose the communists over the US backed military faction that was more concerned with industrialization than human rights or quality of living for citizens.
To Shikica: Communism was forced on the majority of Chinese as it is everywhere it takes root.

Dirty little moralists, do-gooders, the priest personality, and parasites in general will always find something to justify totalitarian government. Communists told us Communism was good because Fascism was so bad. Communists always told us that Communism is good because laissez faire capitalism is bad. Your kind say that Communism is good because industrialization is bad.

Incidentally, environmental freakazoid Communists jumped on industrialization while they never point out that Communist China is the biggest polluter. I could be mistaken. Communists might be nothing more than Luddites in disguise.

Yes the chinese government is corrupt and evil (like the US is) but Mao's original vision, and why he was so revered was just.
To Shikica: Give it up. Knocking America’s form of government in order to justify a totalitarian form of government is a losing argument.
He just became very disillusioned over time and spiraled out of control.
To Shikica: If anything, Mao was disillusioned with imperfect Communism. Making excuses for Mao is a variation of the standard crap offered up every time Communism fails: Real Communism was never tried. The fact is that power applies to government as well as to men:

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad man.
John Emerich Edward Dalberg (1834–1902)​
I know this isn't what this thread is about but you seem to be a very passionate US nationalist that believes the government has honest intentions and so I don't really want to discuss it
To Shikica: There is nothing to discuss. You cannot defend “If it ain’t perfect it is no good.”

Whether or not you want to discuss it, individual liberties is the best form of government in manmade institutions that can never be perfect. So if you insist on responding to my messages, dispute individual liberties as though they will exist in your replacement. Or avoid the issue in your own thread.
look you clearly don't know China's history but I suggest you read up on it.
 
The chinese chose the communists over the US backed military faction that was more concerned with industrialization than human rights or quality of living for citizens.
To Shikica: Communism was forced on the majority of Chinese as it is everywhere it takes root.

Dirty little moralists, do-gooders, the priest personality, and parasites in general will always find something to justify totalitarian government. Communists told us Communism was good because Fascism was so bad. Communists always told us that Communism is good because laissez faire capitalism is bad. Your kind say that Communism is good because industrialization is bad.

Incidentally, environmental freakazoid Communists jumped on industrialization while they never point out that Communist China is the biggest polluter. I could be mistaken. Communists might be nothing more than Luddites in disguise.

Yes the chinese government is corrupt and evil (like the US is) but Mao's original vision, and why he was so revered was just.
To Shikica: Give it up. Knocking America’s form of government in order to justify a totalitarian form of government is a losing argument.
He just became very disillusioned over time and spiraled out of control.
To Shikica: If anything, Mao was disillusioned with imperfect Communism. Making excuses for Mao is a variation of the standard crap offered up every time Communism fails: Real Communism was never tried. The fact is that power applies to government as well as to men:

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad man.
John Emerich Edward Dalberg (1834–1902)​
I know this isn't what this thread is about but you seem to be a very passionate US nationalist that believes the government has honest intentions and so I don't really want to discuss it
To Shikica: There is nothing to discuss. You cannot defend “If it ain’t perfect it is no good.”

Whether or not you want to discuss it, individual liberties is the best form of government in manmade institutions that can never be perfect. So if you insist on responding to my messages, dispute individual liberties as though they will exist in your replacement. Or avoid the issue in your own thread.
look you clearly don't know China's history but I suggest you read up on it.

Flanders doesn't let the facts get in the way of blaming people.
 
look you clearly don't know China's history but I suggest you read up on it.
To Shikica: Accusing your opposite of not agreeing with your views is a sneaky way of claiming you are an expert on the subject.

Just to set the record straight, unless you grew up in China, I know a helluva lot more about 19th and 20th century China’s politics than you know about Communism.

Flanders doesn't let the facts get in the way of blaming people.
To Syriusly: The last time you replied to one of my threads it took you more than one response to identify yourself as mindless. Is it possibly you got dumber since then!
 
"I realize calling president Obama “evil” sounds pretty pedestrian."

Actually it sounds ridiculous, inane, partisan, and delusional – yet another moronic lie from the right.
As someone who considers Reagan to be a terrorist of the highest degree - Obama is evil. The right today is not the right, and the left today is not the left. It's all one big circus to pacify the public and ensure that banks and israel will continue to be prioritized in domestic/foreign policy.
 
The saddest part is that the capitalist Americans have killed millions as well and enslaved even more. We don't even have dictators here, it's all cloaked in pretend democracy.



Have you ever lived under a communist regime?
And you?

By the calculations of one russian scientist Mendeleev at the beginning 20th century russia should have had population in about 600 million people by the end of the century. Now in the borders of Russian Empire live about 200 million. So, feel the difference, guys!

According to the China, maybe soviets wanted to push this country under their control and succeded?
 
Diamond-hard supporters of the Iran Deal cannot possibly number more than a few thousand when you compare them to the number who oppose the deal. And I’m only talking about Americans. Everything I’ve heard and read pretty much say the same things:

I realize calling president Obama “evil” sounds pretty pedestrian. But folks, evil succinctly describes Obama's pattern of pathological lying and placing his agenda above human life.

Even after all these years of Obama, I still find it stunning that the MSM not only allows Obama's lies to go unchallenged, they promote his lies, selling them to the American people.

For example: Obama claims 99% of the world including experts are praising his Iran Nuke deal. Nonsense! The truth is many are saying Obama's deal increases the chances of war, will spur a nuclear arms race, and rewards Iran, which has a horrific human rights record. And yet, the MSM joined Obama in his victory lap.

July 21, 2015
Obama's Horrific Nuke Deal and You
By Lloyd Marcus

Articles Obama s Horrific Nuke Deal and You

There is a plus side. Even if Rush Limbaugh’s huge audience are the only Americans examining the United Nations role in the Iran Deal betrayal it would be more than enough for millions more to question the UN’s unconstitutional authority. Add the Internet and some talking heads to the outcry and the United Nations is honestly being questioned for the first time in my life. Not even scandals like Oil-For-Food, or UN peacekeeping troops raping children, did not put a dent in the UN’s carefully crafted image as mankind’s last hope for survival. Not even the UN’s environmental doom & gloom compares to a loss of sovereignty.

The Official Loss of American Sovereignty: The UN Approves Iran Nuclear Deal Before the US Congress Does
July 20, 2015

The Official Loss of American Sovereignty The UN Approves Iran Nuclear Deal Before the US Congress Does - The Rush Limbaugh Show

I could fill pages and post dozens of video links opposing the Iran Deal. Instead of piling on, I want to paraphrase the never-answered question: “Who gave China to the Communists?”

The list is long, but in general FDR and Truman are blame-free. At the worst they were dupes for following the advice of State Department Communists. The question now is:


Who gave America to the United Nations?

You cannot miss media Communists saying the sewer rat does not listen to anybody —— he makes every decision. Even well-intentioned journalists promote the lie.

Placing the blame on the Chicago sewer rat alone would be a big mistake.

Media Communists learned from China. They now know that it is much wiser to blame one man than it is to drag down the State Department. At the very most, the traitor, John Kerry, will share the blame with the sewer rat —— until things cool off the same way it did after China went Communist.

The major difference between FDR/Truman in China is that Taqiyya the Liar is very much onboard with every policy decision that originates in the State Department.


2015-07-21.jpg

The presidency and the State Department are one entity. Indeed, the sewer rat put a UN traitor in charge of State; two if you count Clinton. More if you throw in his US Ambassadors to the United Nations. It is illogical to assume that the rest of his administration and advisers are loyal to America’s sovereignty.

If you research China you will find economists and bankers deeply involved in handing China to Mao. It is not hard to find economists and bankers up to their necks in handing America’s sovereignty to the United Nations.

Finally, it is sickening me to see the same old media strategy in play again. It started the minute the Security Council passed the resolution approving the Iran Deal. The strategy goes like this:

The president’s Iran Deal is in trouble in Congress. The required 34 votes to sustain his veto are not there. Republicans oppose the deal, and Democrats like Upchuck Schumer will never vote against Israel, and so it goes. At the last minute there will be so many congressional noses angling for a spot in the sewer rat’s round-brown the openings will sell for big bucks. The traitors even opened the champagne five seconds after America’s enemies raised their hands.


r

The United Nations Security Council votes to approve a resolution at the U.N. headquarters in New York July 20, 2015. The United Nations Security Council on Monday endorsed a deal to curb Iran's nuclear program in return for sanctions relief, but it will be able to re-impose...Reuters/Mike Segar

This douche bag’s desk plaque should say INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY:

la-fg-un-iran-resolution-vote-20150720

The douche bag hates America so much she did not bother to hide her joy at seeing the country she hates going down for the count:

images


Obama doesn't lie any more than other politicians. At least his lying is going to STOP WAR and unlike Bush to make war.

You say "most" people hate the Iran deal. Sure, if you only look at right wing US and Israeli papers then "most" of what you read will be against such a deal.

The reason they hate it is because it will probably scupper any chance the right have of going to war with Iran. They need the nuclear issue like they used the WMD issue with Iraq.

As for people "hating American", usually this just means they're not on board with right wing policies. The logic being you either like right wing policies or you're un-American. Doesn't wash.
 

Forum List

Back
Top