Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
try to recall------in ancient times ---INFANTICIDE was the means of contraception. ------the greeks and romans did it regularly and without compunction-----it was entirely legal
Thankfully its not legal today, but we are talking sterilization. Also the Romans did not do it regularly. They were pro family.
try to recall------in ancient times ---INFANTICIDE was the means of contraception. ------the greeks and romans did it regularly and without compunction-----it was entirely legal
Thankfully its not legal today, but we are talking sterilization. Also the Romans did not do it regularly. They were pro family.
the statement "the romans did not do "it" regularly. They were profamily" makes no sense.
They did not MURDER the infant until after it was born and they had no sterilization procedure
for women. What does "pro-family" mean?-----the fact is that matricide and patricide was so
serious a problem that they had to legislate very serious penalties for the crime. Patricide was
the BIG problem while the murder of a living child by its father was considered legal
try to recall------in ancient times ---INFANTICIDE was the means of contraception. ------the greeks and romans did it regularly and without compunction-----it was entirely legal
Thankfully its not legal today, but we are talking sterilization. Also the Romans did not do it regularly. They were pro family.
the statement "the romans did not do "it" regularly. They were profamily" makes no sense.
They did not MURDER the infant until after it was born and they had no sterilization procedure
for women. What does "pro-family" mean?-----the fact is that matricide and patricide was so
serious a problem that they had to legislate very serious penalties for the crime. Patricide was
the BIG problem while the murder of a living child by its father was considered legal
Yes. Age 35 was considered the age of 'freedom' in some parts of the timeline; not sure about all of Roman history, but at the time of the late Republic and at least a couple of centuries after iirc it was age 35. Fro women it was marriage into another family.
Compared to being young, single, and un-married in those days, yes; widowhood was far better for women if they were middle and upper class, though, because of the wealth and wills were handled. Julius Ceasar's daughter became very wealthy from both sides of the family from her marriage and widowhood, financially independent and free to go and do whatever she pleased.try to recall------in ancient times ---INFANTICIDE was the means of contraception. ------the greeks and romans did it regularly and without compunction-----it was entirely legal
Thankfully its not legal today, but we are talking sterilization. Also the Romans did not do it regularly. They were pro family.
the statement "the romans did not do "it" regularly. They were profamily" makes no sense.
They did not MURDER the infant until after it was born and they had no sterilization procedure
for women. What does "pro-family" mean?-----the fact is that matricide and patricide was so
serious a problem that they had to legislate very serious penalties for the crime. Patricide was
the BIG problem while the murder of a living child by its father was considered legal
Yes. Age 35 was considered the age of 'freedom' in some parts of the timeline; not sure about all of Roman history, but at the time of the late Republic and at least a couple of centuries after iirc it was age 35. Fro women it was marriage into another family.
sheeeesh ----you call MARRIAGE INTO ANOTHER FAMILY "FREEDOM" for women? ----
feel free to ask
Compared to being young, single, and un-married in those days, yes; widowhood was far better for women if they were middle and upper class, though, because of the wealth and wills were handled. Julius Ceasar's daughter became very wealthy from both sides of the family from her marriage and widowhood, financially independent and free to go and do whatever she pleased.try to recall------in ancient times ---INFANTICIDE was the means of contraception. ------the greeks and romans did it regularly and without compunction-----it was entirely legal
Thankfully its not legal today, but we are talking sterilization. Also the Romans did not do it regularly. They were pro family.
the statement "the romans did not do "it" regularly. They were profamily" makes no sense.
They did not MURDER the infant until after it was born and they had no sterilization procedure
for women. What does "pro-family" mean?-----the fact is that matricide and patricide was so
serious a problem that they had to legislate very serious penalties for the crime. Patricide was
the BIG problem while the murder of a living child by its father was considered legal
Yes. Age 35 was considered the age of 'freedom' in some parts of the timeline; not sure about all of Roman history, but at the time of the late Republic and at least a couple of centuries after iirc it was age 35. Fro women it was marriage into another family.
sheeeesh ----you call MARRIAGE INTO ANOTHER FAMILY "FREEDOM" for women? ----
feel free to ask
Bullshit. Go find yourself a place to promote that denial where idiots will actually buy it. There is no conspiracy there, son. I personally fought against those guys and their efforts when they were emptying the civilian militias.
Did you wag your finger and make scary faces at them? lol 'Social Justice Warriors' are a bunch of emotionally retreaded racists and frauds, which is probably why it appeals to you.
Today, because of the nutty wall idea, there are no activists protecting the public against eminent domain abuses, National ID, and the POLICE STATE. That is because the build the wall guys have become, as Marx put it, useful idiots. They've lost on every issue they got involved with and this one will end no differently - no matter how close you think you're coming to a win. Push your phony denials elsewhere.
lol lol lol that site you rely on for your 'talking points' must be a doozy; do they also runs ads for buying meth from China?
^^^ fake news.If you respected the OP, you wouldn't bullshit in their thread. And why are you asking me to stop talking about something which you started?I am not responsible for your thin skin. When you post a video and make a bullshit claim about the very video you post; which is provable bullshit because the contents of video you posted do not contain the language you claim is in there, then you're an idiot.LOL
Imbecile... the video you linked proves you were full of shit when you falsely claimed the Clinton promoted building a wall since nowhere in that speech does he say anything about building a wall. If you don't want to be called an idiot on the forum then stop saying idiotic things.
If you don't like hearing the truth about you then put me on ignore.
You seem to delight in calling people idiot and imbecile. For me personally, IF I did that it would be an attempt to call someone out. It would mean that I had a personal beef with them.
Saying things you disagree with or things that may take more than a single link to prove does not make anyone you don't like an idiot or an imbecile. It makes you look childish and it detracts from a civil and educated conversation.
Now, if you meant to call me out, I've told you before - I am willing to accommodate you. Other than that, I shouldn't have to put you on ignore. I should only have to tell you that I'm not interested in your kind of exchanges. Then, as a mature adult, you honor that request and show respect for your fellow posters. If you cannot address me in grown up, adult style discourse, you should go play elsewhere. I'm not your fucking idiot and I'm not your imbecile. Nobody here is your bitch nor do they owe you anything. There is NO excuse for your childish and silly behavior. It's disrespectful, distracting, and something a person with a low IQ would dabble in. The name calling don't have squat to do with the topics and is more of a cry from some guy that is apparently hiding in his mother's basement, living off mommy and arguing with the world.
What you're saying on this board seems more like a cry for help. It's not anything that edifies or adds to the topic. You seem to want to have a personality contest when you don't have one. If you're going to post about a topic, do so. But, if you cannot be informative, respectful, or post something educational, you should stay out of the conversation.
That being said, the current effort to build a wall around the United States is being led by people who get all their talking points from groups and individuals that believe in eugenics. Those are the relevant facts. I've not said anything else that is relevant to this thread.
If you don't like that, tough shit. As I advised, if you don't want to be called an idiot then stop saying idiotic things. Claiming Clinton first promoted the idea of building a wall while posting a video where he actually said no such thing is idiotic.
Still wanting to be the center of attention? Still flailing around looking for relevancy? What you allude to is not idiocy; it is fact. This is a discussion board. When something is not fully explained, people ask for additional proof.
Clinton was spewing the same points that the people who pioneered the nutty wall were spewing. And I'm to going to hold a debate with you. You showed too much disrespect.
You really need to get out of your mother's basement and get a job. Join the 21st Century. It's not making you look big or important to spew your venomous hate and to try to make every thread a pissing match full of name calling. There is a mature and grown up way to have a conversation without saying things that you're obviously too chickenshit to say to people to their face (which is why you are here every day instead of the real world.)
Again, the thread is about eugenics. If you have something that bears on that, share it. Otherwise, you should exit this thread, show the OP some respect and take your petty B.S. to PM. Nobody wants to see this thread get hijacked because you have an inferiority complex.
You claimed Clinton proposed building a wall. You posted a video along with that claim.
The video you posted did not include Clinton saying anything about building a wall. You now say that "when something is not fully explained, people ask for additional proof," only when I did, your response was, "FUCK YOU." Which of course, is the response one gives when they are caught lying but lack the character to own up to it when caught.
Since you aren't smart enough to fuck off, I'll play your silly ass game just to bitch slap you.
Not only did Bill Clinton support a wall, he fully backed the 325 miles of border wall put up in 1993.
FACT CHECK: Bill Clinton built a 325-mile border fence in 1993, and Hillary fully supported it
Now, your dumb ass has been responded to. We did it on YOUR terms... with insulting and name calling. Now get your head out of your ass and see if you can come up with something relevant to the thread.... I mean besides starting the obvious argument that a wall and a fence are different... in this instance, yeah, right.
^^^ fake news.If you respected the OP, you wouldn't bullshit in their thread. And why are you asking me to stop talking about something which you started?I am not responsible for your thin skin. When you post a video and make a bullshit claim about the very video you post; which is provable bullshit because the contents of video you posted do not contain the language you claim is in there, then you're an idiot.You seem to delight in calling people idiot and imbecile. For me personally, IF I did that it would be an attempt to call someone out. It would mean that I had a personal beef with them.
Saying things you disagree with or things that may take more than a single link to prove does not make anyone you don't like an idiot or an imbecile. It makes you look childish and it detracts from a civil and educated conversation.
Now, if you meant to call me out, I've told you before - I am willing to accommodate you. Other than that, I shouldn't have to put you on ignore. I should only have to tell you that I'm not interested in your kind of exchanges. Then, as a mature adult, you honor that request and show respect for your fellow posters. If you cannot address me in grown up, adult style discourse, you should go play elsewhere. I'm not your fucking idiot and I'm not your imbecile. Nobody here is your bitch nor do they owe you anything. There is NO excuse for your childish and silly behavior. It's disrespectful, distracting, and something a person with a low IQ would dabble in. The name calling don't have squat to do with the topics and is more of a cry from some guy that is apparently hiding in his mother's basement, living off mommy and arguing with the world.
What you're saying on this board seems more like a cry for help. It's not anything that edifies or adds to the topic. You seem to want to have a personality contest when you don't have one. If you're going to post about a topic, do so. But, if you cannot be informative, respectful, or post something educational, you should stay out of the conversation.
That being said, the current effort to build a wall around the United States is being led by people who get all their talking points from groups and individuals that believe in eugenics. Those are the relevant facts. I've not said anything else that is relevant to this thread.
If you don't like that, tough shit. As I advised, if you don't want to be called an idiot then stop saying idiotic things. Claiming Clinton first promoted the idea of building a wall while posting a video where he actually said no such thing is idiotic.
Still wanting to be the center of attention? Still flailing around looking for relevancy? What you allude to is not idiocy; it is fact. This is a discussion board. When something is not fully explained, people ask for additional proof.
Clinton was spewing the same points that the people who pioneered the nutty wall were spewing. And I'm to going to hold a debate with you. You showed too much disrespect.
You really need to get out of your mother's basement and get a job. Join the 21st Century. It's not making you look big or important to spew your venomous hate and to try to make every thread a pissing match full of name calling. There is a mature and grown up way to have a conversation without saying things that you're obviously too chickenshit to say to people to their face (which is why you are here every day instead of the real world.)
Again, the thread is about eugenics. If you have something that bears on that, share it. Otherwise, you should exit this thread, show the OP some respect and take your petty B.S. to PM. Nobody wants to see this thread get hijacked because you have an inferiority complex.
You claimed Clinton proposed building a wall. You posted a video along with that claim.
The video you posted did not include Clinton saying anything about building a wall. You now say that "when something is not fully explained, people ask for additional proof," only when I did, your response was, "FUCK YOU." Which of course, is the response one gives when they are caught lying but lack the character to own up to it when caught.
Since you aren't smart enough to fuck off, I'll play your silly ass game just to bitch slap you.
Not only did Bill Clinton support a wall, he fully backed the 325 miles of border wall put up in 1993.
FACT CHECK: Bill Clinton built a 325-mile border fence in 1993, and Hillary fully supported it
Now, your dumb ass has been responded to. We did it on YOUR terms... with insulting and name calling. Now get your head out of your ass and see if you can come up with something relevant to the thread.... I mean besides starting the obvious argument that a wall and a fence are different... in this instance, yeah, right.
That was actually started under Bush in 1990...
In 1990, the San Diego sector’s chief patrol agent began an initiative to erect physical barriers, primarily to deter drug smuggling. With the assistance of JTF-6, the San Diego sector installed 10-foot welded steel fencing along approximately 14 miles of border where sector officials believed the majority of drugs and illegal aliens crossed within the sector. The new fence, completed in late 1993, is substantially stronger than previous chain link fencing. JTF-6 is also installing high-intensity lights and a second and third fence at strategic locations along the same 14 miles.
http://www.gao.gov/archive/1995/gg9530.pdf
But I'll give you credit for at least trying.
Which was pretty much all there was at the time. No one ever heard of a 325 mile long fence along the border until Clinton nemesis, Dick Morris, made the claim last year during the election. It was was so outlandish, almost no one even picked up his story. Even now, virtually every link on it goes back to newstarget.com, who did pick it up.^^^ fake news.If you respected the OP, you wouldn't bullshit in their thread. And why are you asking me to stop talking about something which you started?I am not responsible for your thin skin. When you post a video and make a bullshit claim about the very video you post; which is provable bullshit because the contents of video you posted do not contain the language you claim is in there, then you're an idiot.
If you don't like that, tough shit. As I advised, if you don't want to be called an idiot then stop saying idiotic things. Claiming Clinton first promoted the idea of building a wall while posting a video where he actually said no such thing is idiotic.
Still wanting to be the center of attention? Still flailing around looking for relevancy? What you allude to is not idiocy; it is fact. This is a discussion board. When something is not fully explained, people ask for additional proof.
Clinton was spewing the same points that the people who pioneered the nutty wall were spewing. And I'm to going to hold a debate with you. You showed too much disrespect.
You really need to get out of your mother's basement and get a job. Join the 21st Century. It's not making you look big or important to spew your venomous hate and to try to make every thread a pissing match full of name calling. There is a mature and grown up way to have a conversation without saying things that you're obviously too chickenshit to say to people to their face (which is why you are here every day instead of the real world.)
Again, the thread is about eugenics. If you have something that bears on that, share it. Otherwise, you should exit this thread, show the OP some respect and take your petty B.S. to PM. Nobody wants to see this thread get hijacked because you have an inferiority complex.
You claimed Clinton proposed building a wall. You posted a video along with that claim.
The video you posted did not include Clinton saying anything about building a wall. You now say that "when something is not fully explained, people ask for additional proof," only when I did, your response was, "FUCK YOU." Which of course, is the response one gives when they are caught lying but lack the character to own up to it when caught.
Since you aren't smart enough to fuck off, I'll play your silly ass game just to bitch slap you.
Not only did Bill Clinton support a wall, he fully backed the 325 miles of border wall put up in 1993.
FACT CHECK: Bill Clinton built a 325-mile border fence in 1993, and Hillary fully supported it
Now, your dumb ass has been responded to. We did it on YOUR terms... with insulting and name calling. Now get your head out of your ass and see if you can come up with something relevant to the thread.... I mean besides starting the obvious argument that a wall and a fence are different... in this instance, yeah, right.
That was actually started under Bush in 1990...
In 1990, the San Diego sector’s chief patrol agent began an initiative to erect physical barriers, primarily to deter drug smuggling. With the assistance of JTF-6, the San Diego sector installed 10-foot welded steel fencing along approximately 14 miles of border where sector officials believed the majority of drugs and illegal aliens crossed within the sector. The new fence, completed in late 1993, is substantially stronger than previous chain link fencing. JTF-6 is also installing high-intensity lights and a second and third fence at strategic locations along the same 14 miles.
http://www.gao.gov/archive/1995/gg9530.pdf
But I'll give you credit for at least trying.
The 1990 parts of the wall were merely the result of Duke and Tanton's previous efforts. I can't write you a damn book in one post.
Beginning in 1909 and continuing for 70 years, California led the country in the number of sterilization procedures performed on men and women, often without their full knowledge and consent. Approximately 20,000 sterilizations took place in state institutions, comprising one-third of the total number performed in the 32 states where such action was legal. (from The UC Santa Barbara Current)
—
“There is today one state,” wrote Hitler, “in which at least weak beginnings toward a better conception [of citizenship] are noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the United States.” (from The L.A. Times)
(snip)
Eugenics was a commonly accepted means of protecting society from the offspring (and therefore equally suspect) of those individuals deemed inferior or dangerous – the poor, the disabled, the mentally ill, criminals, and people of color.
Unwanted Sterilization and Eugenics Programs in the United States | No Más Bebés | Independent Lens | PBS
_______________________________________________________________________
I guess most didn't know the constitution in the early 1900's either. We all know history repeats itself, when we are running out of water and food and soil, the first to go will be the poor, mentally and physically disabled .
Which was pretty much all there was at the time. No one ever heard of a 325 mile long fence along the border until Clinton nemesis, Dick Morris, made the claim last year during the election. It was was so outlandish, almost no one even picked up his story. Even now, virtually every link on it goes back to newstarget.com, who did pick it up.^^^ fake news.If you respected the OP, you wouldn't bullshit in their thread. And why are you asking me to stop talking about something which you started?Still wanting to be the center of attention? Still flailing around looking for relevancy? What you allude to is not idiocy; it is fact. This is a discussion board. When something is not fully explained, people ask for additional proof.
Clinton was spewing the same points that the people who pioneered the nutty wall were spewing. And I'm to going to hold a debate with you. You showed too much disrespect.
You really need to get out of your mother's basement and get a job. Join the 21st Century. It's not making you look big or important to spew your venomous hate and to try to make every thread a pissing match full of name calling. There is a mature and grown up way to have a conversation without saying things that you're obviously too chickenshit to say to people to their face (which is why you are here every day instead of the real world.)
Again, the thread is about eugenics. If you have something that bears on that, share it. Otherwise, you should exit this thread, show the OP some respect and take your petty B.S. to PM. Nobody wants to see this thread get hijacked because you have an inferiority complex.
You claimed Clinton proposed building a wall. You posted a video along with that claim.
The video you posted did not include Clinton saying anything about building a wall. You now say that "when something is not fully explained, people ask for additional proof," only when I did, your response was, "FUCK YOU." Which of course, is the response one gives when they are caught lying but lack the character to own up to it when caught.
Since you aren't smart enough to fuck off, I'll play your silly ass game just to bitch slap you.
Not only did Bill Clinton support a wall, he fully backed the 325 miles of border wall put up in 1993.
FACT CHECK: Bill Clinton built a 325-mile border fence in 1993, and Hillary fully supported it
Now, your dumb ass has been responded to. We did it on YOUR terms... with insulting and name calling. Now get your head out of your ass and see if you can come up with something relevant to the thread.... I mean besides starting the obvious argument that a wall and a fence are different... in this instance, yeah, right.
That was actually started under Bush in 1990...
In 1990, the San Diego sector’s chief patrol agent began an initiative to erect physical barriers, primarily to deter drug smuggling. With the assistance of JTF-6, the San Diego sector installed 10-foot welded steel fencing along approximately 14 miles of border where sector officials believed the majority of drugs and illegal aliens crossed within the sector. The new fence, completed in late 1993, is substantially stronger than previous chain link fencing. JTF-6 is also installing high-intensity lights and a second and third fence at strategic locations along the same 14 miles.
http://www.gao.gov/archive/1995/gg9530.pdf
But I'll give you credit for at least trying.
The 1990 parts of the wall were merely the result of Duke and Tanton's previous efforts. I can't write you a damn book in one post.
Face it, dupe, you've been duped by fake news.
You moron, I don't care what your personal experience is, I have the Internet behind me. There is no mention of a 325 mile border wall prior to Dick Morris making that claim a year ago.Which was pretty much all there was at the time. No one ever heard of a 325 mile long fence along the border until Clinton nemesis, Dick Morris, made the claim last year during the election. It was was so outlandish, almost no one even picked up his story. Even now, virtually every link on it goes back to newstarget.com, who did pick it up.^^^ fake news.If you respected the OP, you wouldn't bullshit in their thread. And why are you asking me to stop talking about something which you started?
You claimed Clinton proposed building a wall. You posted a video along with that claim.
The video you posted did not include Clinton saying anything about building a wall. You now say that "when something is not fully explained, people ask for additional proof," only when I did, your response was, "FUCK YOU." Which of course, is the response one gives when they are caught lying but lack the character to own up to it when caught.
Since you aren't smart enough to fuck off, I'll play your silly ass game just to bitch slap you.
Not only did Bill Clinton support a wall, he fully backed the 325 miles of border wall put up in 1993.
FACT CHECK: Bill Clinton built a 325-mile border fence in 1993, and Hillary fully supported it
Now, your dumb ass has been responded to. We did it on YOUR terms... with insulting and name calling. Now get your head out of your ass and see if you can come up with something relevant to the thread.... I mean besides starting the obvious argument that a wall and a fence are different... in this instance, yeah, right.
That was actually started under Bush in 1990...
In 1990, the San Diego sector’s chief patrol agent began an initiative to erect physical barriers, primarily to deter drug smuggling. With the assistance of JTF-6, the San Diego sector installed 10-foot welded steel fencing along approximately 14 miles of border where sector officials believed the majority of drugs and illegal aliens crossed within the sector. The new fence, completed in late 1993, is substantially stronger than previous chain link fencing. JTF-6 is also installing high-intensity lights and a second and third fence at strategic locations along the same 14 miles.
http://www.gao.gov/archive/1995/gg9530.pdf
But I'll give you credit for at least trying.
The 1990 parts of the wall were merely the result of Duke and Tanton's previous efforts. I can't write you a damn book in one post.
Face it, dupe, you've been duped by fake news.
Faun,
You are a fucking dumb ass. I write about things on this topic of which I was there when it happened. Having been a part of the discussions and the research, I don't feel any special need to justify my life before a single critic that don't have the brains God gave a billy goat.
You are deluded into thinking you have a monopoly on this shit and you don't. You weren't there and have not worked in the field.
If you were to ask David Duke, Don Black, John Lewis, Ralph David Abernathy, Hosea Williams, Willis Carto, or anyone else from that era if they knew me, you'd find out that yep they all know exactly who I am.
Be that as it may, your chickenshit attacks have been asked and answered.
The issue here is eugenics. My point is that the people today who are involved in the anti-immigrant agenda are being led by people who are supportive of eugenics. Anybody who wants to look into it will find that, in 1990, the United States started with about 90 miles of fence, beginning in San Diego and that this nutty wall / fence idea has grown from there. That part is no longer relevant to this thread.
What IS relevant is that without the supposed "facts" being proffered by John Tanton non-profits, the build the wall guys could not cobble together any kind of argument in favor of their agenda. And John Tanton, according to irrefutable sources (not to mention my own personal knowledge), is pro-eugenics. IF you believe that is good, that is your right to believe it, if you are against eugenics and it would make a difference in your support of a fence / wall you have the facts.
The thing is, I'm not having to follow anyone around like a dog in heat and call them names in order to make a point. You know that "Faun." So you can delete my response to you can continue to call me names, but both of us know that you are, most likely, a moderator here with dual accounts. Too many FACTS are getting deleted in order to prop up your trolling efforts and ignore what I'm saying relative to this thread.
Oddly, I still find ground to agree with Tanton and Duke on. We definitely have an immigration problem. There is also an effort to force America to fully adopt multiculturalism with NO regard for those who support racial and cultural integrity. At a personal level, I disagree with the SOLUTIONS that the build the wall guys bring to the table. Those wanting to control both sides of the discussion have a problem with that.
The OP expressed a concern over eugenics. I posted the facts. You want to have a personal pissing match with me thinking it makes you look good. It's not working. Posters can feel free to check any of my work and if they find it incomplete, they can ask me for additional proof. Other than that, you aren't worthy of a response.
Beginning in 1909 and continuing for 70 years, California led the country in the number of sterilization procedures performed on men and women, often without their full knowledge and consent. Approximately 20,000 sterilizations took place in state institutions, comprising one-third of the total number performed in the 32 states where such action was legal. (from The UC Santa Barbara Current)
—
“There is today one state,” wrote Hitler, “in which at least weak beginnings toward a better conception [of citizenship] are noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the United States.” (from The L.A. Times)
(snip)
Eugenics was a commonly accepted means of protecting society from the offspring (and therefore equally suspect) of those individuals deemed inferior or dangerous – the poor, the disabled, the mentally ill, criminals, and people of color.
Unwanted Sterilization and Eugenics Programs in the United States | No Más Bebés | Independent Lens | PBS
________________________________________________________
I guess most didn't know the constitution in the early 1900's either. We all know history repeats itself, when we are running out of water and food and soil, the first to go will be the poor, mentally and physically disabled .
Beginning in 1909 and continuing for 70 years, California led the country in the number of sterilization procedures performed on men and women, often without their full knowledge and consent. Approximately 20,000 sterilizations took place in state institutions, comprising one-third of the total number performed in the 32 states where such action was legal. (from The UC Santa Barbara Current)
—
“There is today one state,” wrote Hitler, “in which at least weak beginnings toward a better conception [of citizenship] are noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the United States.” (from The L.A. Times)
(snip)
Eugenics was a commonly accepted means of protecting society from the offspring (and therefore equally suspect) of those individuals deemed inferior or dangerous – the poor, the disabled, the mentally ill, criminals, and people of color.
Unwanted Sterilization and Eugenics Programs in the United States | No Más Bebés | Independent Lens | PBS
_______________________________________________________________________
I guess most didn't know the constitution in the early 1900's either. We all know history repeats itself, when we are running out of water and food and soil, the first to go will be the poor, mentally and physically disabled .
Just now getting interested in American history?
You moron, I don't care what your personal experience is, I have the Internet behind me. There is no mention of a 325 mile border wall prior to Dick Morris making that claim a year ago.Which was pretty much all there was at the time. No one ever heard of a 325 mile long fence along the border until Clinton nemesis, Dick Morris, made the claim last year during the election. It was was so outlandish, almost no one even picked up his story. Even now, virtually every link on it goes back to newstarget.com, who did pick it up.^^^ fake news.Since you aren't smart enough to fuck off, I'll play your silly ass game just to bitch slap you.
Not only did Bill Clinton support a wall, he fully backed the 325 miles of border wall put up in 1993.
FACT CHECK: Bill Clinton built a 325-mile border fence in 1993, and Hillary fully supported it
Now, your dumb ass has been responded to. We did it on YOUR terms... with insulting and name calling. Now get your head out of your ass and see if you can come up with something relevant to the thread.... I mean besides starting the obvious argument that a wall and a fence are different... in this instance, yeah, right.
That was actually started under Bush in 1990...
In 1990, the San Diego sector’s chief patrol agent began an initiative to erect physical barriers, primarily to deter drug smuggling. With the assistance of JTF-6, the San Diego sector installed 10-foot welded steel fencing along approximately 14 miles of border where sector officials believed the majority of drugs and illegal aliens crossed within the sector. The new fence, completed in late 1993, is substantially stronger than previous chain link fencing. JTF-6 is also installing high-intensity lights and a second and third fence at strategic locations along the same 14 miles.
http://www.gao.gov/archive/1995/gg9530.pdf
But I'll give you credit for at least trying.
The 1990 parts of the wall were merely the result of Duke and Tanton's previous efforts. I can't write you a damn book in one post.
Face it, dupe, you've been duped by fake news.
Faun,
You are a fucking dumb ass. I write about things on this topic of which I was there when it happened. Having been a part of the discussions and the research, I don't feel any special need to justify my life before a single critic that don't have the brains God gave a billy goat.
You are deluded into thinking you have a monopoly on this shit and you don't. You weren't there and have not worked in the field.
If you were to ask David Duke, Don Black, John Lewis, Ralph David Abernathy, Hosea Williams, Willis Carto, or anyone else from that era if they knew me, you'd find out that yep they all know exactly who I am.
Be that as it may, your chickenshit attacks have been asked and answered.
The issue here is eugenics. My point is that the people today who are involved in the anti-immigrant agenda are being led by people who are supportive of eugenics. Anybody who wants to look into it will find that, in 1990, the United States started with about 90 miles of fence, beginning in San Diego and that this nutty wall / fence idea has grown from there. That part is no longer relevant to this thread.
What IS relevant is that without the supposed "facts" being proffered by John Tanton non-profits, the build the wall guys could not cobble together any kind of argument in favor of their agenda. And John Tanton, according to irrefutable sources (not to mention my own personal knowledge), is pro-eugenics. IF you believe that is good, that is your right to believe it, if you are against eugenics and it would make a difference in your support of a fence / wall you have the facts.
The thing is, I'm not having to follow anyone around like a dog in heat and call them names in order to make a point. You know that "Faun." So you can delete my response to you can continue to call me names, but both of us know that you are, most likely, a moderator here with dual accounts. Too many FACTS are getting deleted in order to prop up your trolling efforts and ignore what I'm saying relative to this thread.
Oddly, I still find ground to agree with Tanton and Duke on. We definitely have an immigration problem. There is also an effort to force America to fully adopt multiculturalism with NO regard for those who support racial and cultural integrity. At a personal level, I disagree with the SOLUTIONS that the build the wall guys bring to the table. Those wanting to control both sides of the discussion have a problem with that.
The OP expressed a concern over eugenics. I posted the facts. You want to have a personal pissing match with me thinking it makes you look good. It's not working. Posters can feel free to check any of my work and if they find it incomplete, they can ask me for additional proof. Other than that, you aren't worthy of a response.
Who said the Internet doesn't lie?You moron, I don't care what your personal experience is, I have the Internet behind me. There is no mention of a 325 mile border wall prior to Dick Morris making that claim a year ago.Which was pretty much all there was at the time. No one ever heard of a 325 mile long fence along the border until Clinton nemesis, Dick Morris, made the claim last year during the election. It was was so outlandish, almost no one even picked up his story. Even now, virtually every link on it goes back to newstarget.com, who did pick it up.^^^ fake news.
That was actually started under Bush in 1990...
In 1990, the San Diego sector’s chief patrol agent began an initiative to erect physical barriers, primarily to deter drug smuggling. With the assistance of JTF-6, the San Diego sector installed 10-foot welded steel fencing along approximately 14 miles of border where sector officials believed the majority of drugs and illegal aliens crossed within the sector. The new fence, completed in late 1993, is substantially stronger than previous chain link fencing. JTF-6 is also installing high-intensity lights and a second and third fence at strategic locations along the same 14 miles.
http://www.gao.gov/archive/1995/gg9530.pdf
But I'll give you credit for at least trying.
The 1990 parts of the wall were merely the result of Duke and Tanton's previous efforts. I can't write you a damn book in one post.
Face it, dupe, you've been duped by fake news.
Faun,
You are a fucking dumb ass. I write about things on this topic of which I was there when it happened. Having been a part of the discussions and the research, I don't feel any special need to justify my life before a single critic that don't have the brains God gave a billy goat.
You are deluded into thinking you have a monopoly on this shit and you don't. You weren't there and have not worked in the field.
If you were to ask David Duke, Don Black, John Lewis, Ralph David Abernathy, Hosea Williams, Willis Carto, or anyone else from that era if they knew me, you'd find out that yep they all know exactly who I am.
Be that as it may, your chickenshit attacks have been asked and answered.
The issue here is eugenics. My point is that the people today who are involved in the anti-immigrant agenda are being led by people who are supportive of eugenics. Anybody who wants to look into it will find that, in 1990, the United States started with about 90 miles of fence, beginning in San Diego and that this nutty wall / fence idea has grown from there. That part is no longer relevant to this thread.
What IS relevant is that without the supposed "facts" being proffered by John Tanton non-profits, the build the wall guys could not cobble together any kind of argument in favor of their agenda. And John Tanton, according to irrefutable sources (not to mention my own personal knowledge), is pro-eugenics. IF you believe that is good, that is your right to believe it, if you are against eugenics and it would make a difference in your support of a fence / wall you have the facts.
The thing is, I'm not having to follow anyone around like a dog in heat and call them names in order to make a point. You know that "Faun." So you can delete my response to you can continue to call me names, but both of us know that you are, most likely, a moderator here with dual accounts. Too many FACTS are getting deleted in order to prop up your trolling efforts and ignore what I'm saying relative to this thread.
Oddly, I still find ground to agree with Tanton and Duke on. We definitely have an immigration problem. There is also an effort to force America to fully adopt multiculturalism with NO regard for those who support racial and cultural integrity. At a personal level, I disagree with the SOLUTIONS that the build the wall guys bring to the table. Those wanting to control both sides of the discussion have a problem with that.
The OP expressed a concern over eugenics. I posted the facts. You want to have a personal pissing match with me thinking it makes you look good. It's not working. Posters can feel free to check any of my work and if they find it incomplete, they can ask me for additional proof. Other than that, you aren't worthy of a response.
And the Internet never lies. Who were you calling a moron again?
Bullshit. Go find yourself a place to promote that denial where idiots will actually buy it. There is no conspiracy there, son. I personally fought against those guys and their efforts when they were emptying the civilian militias.
Did you wag your finger and make scary faces at them? lol 'Social Justice Warriors' are a bunch of emotionally retreaded racists and frauds, which is probably why it appeals to you.
Today, because of the nutty wall idea, there are no activists protecting the public against eminent domain abuses, National ID, and the POLICE STATE. That is because the build the wall guys have become, as Marx put it, useful idiots. They've lost on every issue they got involved with and this one will end no differently - no matter how close you think you're coming to a win. Push your phony denials elsewhere.
lol lol lol that site you rely on for your 'talking points' must be a doozy; do they also runs ads for buying meth from China?
You most assuredly don't know what you're talking about; your post is just cobbled together accusations based upon who knows what.
The only thing I got out of what you said is that you do meth and haven't mastered the art of clicking on links within a post. Did I miss anything else?
An outgrowth of that periods Eugenic movement that survive to this day is Planned Parenthood founded by a liberal scumball named Margaret Sanger who referred to Blacks as "Human Weeds"Beginning in 1909 and continuing for 70 years, California led the country in the number of sterilization procedures performed on men and women, often without their full knowledge and consent. Approximately 20,000 sterilizations took place in state institutions, comprising one-third of the total number performed in the 32 states where such action was legal. (from The UC Santa Barbara Current)
—
“There is today one state,” wrote Hitler, “in which at least weak beginnings toward a better conception [of citizenship] are noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the United States.” (from The L.A. Times)
(snip)
Eugenics was a commonly accepted means of protecting society from the offspring (and therefore equally suspect) of those individuals deemed inferior or dangerous – the poor, the disabled, the mentally ill, criminals, and people of color.
Unwanted Sterilization and Eugenics Programs in the United States | No Más Bebés | Independent Lens | PBS
_______________________________________________________________________
I guess most didn't know the constitution in the early 1900's either. We all know history repeats itself, when we are running out of water and food and soil, the first to go will be the poor, mentally and physically disabled .
Yes it's about whatever you want it to be - don't wanna be rubbing the libtard noses in their own poop now do we ?Progressives whined because Trump pulled funding from abbatoirs functioning in African countries where genocide is taking place. Apparently you help the black race by assisting those who are trying to obliterate it. Who knew!Just like today how the left murder black babies to keep their population in check.Beginning in 1909 and continuing for 70 years, California led the country in the number of sterilization procedures performed on men and women, often without their full knowledge and consent. Approximately 20,000 sterilizations took place in state institutions, comprising one-third of the total number performed in the 32 states where such action was legal. (from The UC Santa Barbara Current)
—
“There is today one state,” wrote Hitler, “in which at least weak beginnings toward a better conception [of citizenship] are noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the United States.” (from The L.A. Times)
(snip)
Eugenics was a commonly accepted means of protecting society from the offspring (and therefore equally suspect) of those individuals deemed inferior or dangerous – the poor, the disabled, the mentally ill, criminals, and people of color.
Unwanted Sterilization and Eugenics Programs in the United States | No Más Bebés | Independent Lens | PBS
_______________________________________________________________________
I guess most didn't know the constitution in the early 1900's either. We all know history repeats itself, when we are running out of water and food and soil, the first to go will be the poor, mentally and physically disabled .
This thread is not about abortions, its about Americans, Protestants , Puritans and capitalists do forced sterilization. That kind of solves the abortion issue.
Bullshit. Go find yourself a place to promote that denial where idiots will actually buy it. There is no conspiracy there, son. I personally fought against those guys and their efforts when they were emptying the civilian militias.
Did you wag your finger and make scary faces at them? lol 'Social Justice Warriors' are a bunch of emotionally retreaded racists and frauds, which is probably why it appeals to you.
Today, because of the nutty wall idea, there are no activists protecting the public against eminent domain abuses, National ID, and the POLICE STATE. That is because the build the wall guys have become, as Marx put it, useful idiots. They've lost on every issue they got involved with and this one will end no differently - no matter how close you think you're coming to a win. Push your phony denials elsewhere.
lol lol lol that site you rely on for your 'talking points' must be a doozy; do they also runs ads for buying meth from China?
You most assuredly don't know what you're talking about; your post is just cobbled together accusations based upon who knows what.
The only thing I got out of what you said is that you do meth and haven't mastered the art of clicking on links within a post. Did I miss anything else?
Oh pipe down; you've been spanked and spanked and thrown back on the porch several times already. What next, you going to threaten to hold your breath and turn blue if we don't let you 'Post Last!!!'?
