Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: list T H E M :Out the Marxist Bolsheviki Zioshills

Posted 6 years ago on Dec. 10, 2011, noon EST by BofL (434)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Thrasymaque, Glaucon, Necropaulis,Vothmr, Hymie, Redjazz43, badconduct, fandango, annemarie,RickMoss, Richardkentgates.. [their myriad sockpuppets] add yours here:

the site is riddled with rancid, ignominious, intellectual vandals-SOROS/Rothchild minions. The effect is meant to divide the public from the greater movement to restore our constitutional republic.

Sign yourselves up here.



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by WarmItUp (301) 6 years ago

or simply don't engage them, they obviously feed on you engaging them, resist

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Let's just draw the tares into a nice pile here. Good a place as any. The site is intentionally setup to prevent categorical useful associations that lead toward solutions. If you'd like to participate in understanding the problem, I invite you here http://occupywallst.org/forum/interesting-read-about-the-constitution-and-corpor/

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

It seems so funny to see my name "Hymie" listed among that nest of villains!

[-] 1 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

That's because you're here to screw around- throw it all up in the air and dance around in it. You're part of the problem. Unfocused, diffuse, useless.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

I think I've brought to discussion here rather serous matters. You say unfocused and diffuse, but I imagine you can't give an example of such.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

I'm not a Soros/Rothchild minion, I'm a Larouche minion. Remember? He was thrown in jail for protesting Wall Street.

[-] 1 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Go bang on a drum then. Wallstreet is a symptom of the problem. You behave as a symptom of the problem. A sneeze, a sniffle, a wheeze. A minion.

[-] 2 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

Well, I'd agree with you on that, Wall Street is a part of a financial empire.

I think perhaps you're confusing a minion with an onion, if it makes you sniffle.

[-] 0 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

I'm sure there are many good points in that article, but it didn't seem to address that the empire is actually the remnants of the British empire, The City of London being much more powerful than Wall Street in terms of the (fake) financial assets it manages.

[-] 1 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

You're clearly not sure of anything you write. You didn't read it, yet claim to be telling me something about it without knowledge of same.

Be useful --go sleep in the street somewhere...fill in a pothole maybe.

[-] 0 points by badconduct (550) 6 years ago

Witches !! Burn them!

[-] 0 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 6 years ago

What in the world are you talking about? Some of the initiators of OWS are strongly influenced by the anarchist intellectual tradition, a fact of which they make no secret. The vast majority of OWS supporters are probably liberals, also no secret. OWS has been no friend of the Obama administration, the Democratic Party, much less the Republican Party or electoral politics in general. So what, exactly, is the point?

[-] 2 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

When you learn who is causing the problem, you can start fixing it. Til then you're part of the problem.

Welcome to the list.

[-] 0 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 6 years ago

I still don't know what the fuck you are talking about. I looked at your original message, and my reply and then your reply to me which looks to me like a non sequitor.

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

If truly, Red, then please go and study some history. Start here. http://occupywallst.org/forum/interesting-read-about-the-constitution-and-corpor/

plenty of thoughtful discussion and informative links.

[-] 0 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 6 years ago

I am ABD in history. I also did my undergraduate work in history and was graduated magna cum laude. My graduate concentrations were American Labor History, American Social History, modern European social history and the history of science and technology. I think I know a little bit about history. I also spent most of my adult life in one Marxist sect after another, so I think I know a thing or three about Marxism also.

[-] 2 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

What about the possibility of a "workers capitalism"? This would be when the workers share in a more communal way in the profits of the company, but still in a free market system.

The example would be the well paid workers of the 50s and 60s who made enough money, with a high school education, to buy houses and cars, let the wife stay at home, and send the kids to college.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 6 years ago

I don't see what such abstract views as "workers capitalism" (whatever that is) have to do with building OWS now. I think that is our major problem and our major issue. How do we build our movement? That, to me, is the major, concrete, theoretical question to which we should be devoting all our intellect.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

Worker's capitalism is not abstract, it's a policy that existed for much of the history of the United States. Many American's lived their lives by worker's capitalism and it is what made America great, many would say.

Yes, the movement is of primary importance, but we have to be clear about what we are fighting for. It is important to build the movement, but I think the best way to do that is through an educational process in which we learn and teach each other.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 6 years ago

What we are fighting for is to build occupations and GAs everywhere. Once there are 10 or 20 million people occupying then we will be in a position to discuss our next move.

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Yes, of primary importance, comrades, gather the sheep together with promise of endless green pastures, don't show them the shears, avoid fences, if they see these things, call them something else for now. Afterall, it's leaderless. We certainly aren't the wolves in sheepskin clothing.

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Neat how you decide to occupy the Marxist Zionist page this way, Hymie. Nothing better to do -no post that fits you quite as well.

Hasbara is a concept "normal" people here aren't familiar with. It takes so many forms.

Zionism is the political manifestation of Talmud, most holy book of Jews (most Jews) it’s fair to say. Until we are willing to address the fact that this is a “religious” supremacist movement used from one end to the other by Rothschild et al at the top end of the $ pyramid to dominate and manipulate the rest of the world including those at the bottom end of the "Jewish" pyramid and the entire pyramid scheme is designed to rest directly on the backs of “Goyim” non Jews the world over, we are subdividing the problem only looking at pieces of it, apologizing for the SOURCE. Talmud, it’s adherents, Jewish and non Jewish (I know people who operate by Talmudic principle who have never heard of it) are antithetical to common law principles. If you can agree that the 7 laws of Noah or the Ten Commandments are basically sound in principle, you can also say that Talmud is an 18 volume collection of Rabbinical sophistry designed to circumvent the law for Jews and only Jews.

No such thing as "Jew"

Things have specific names that represent predictable qualities and quantities.  Things like "frisbees(tm)" get special recognition for being representative of a product that is a small plastic flying disc.  

Frisbees fly in any direction you throw them, with predictable results based on how you throw the disc, and let's say, weather conditions.

Frisbees are made from plastic (other things are plastic that aren't frisbees)  I could probably list dozens of types of plastic.  There are cloth frisbees (flying discs) there are disc golf discs (or "frisbees"-to most observers who don't play frisbee or frisbee golf / disc golf, there is no difference between frisbee golf and any other game of frisbee.  There is ultimate frisbee-some type of team frisbee with scoring.

How many colors are there of frisbees? How many sizes?  How many shapes?

They ALL sail through the air gracefully when you throw them properly.

Where does the Jew label come in?  There is NO predictable set of things a Jew is known to do. 

All the things they ARE capable of: Infinite list of every kind of positive thing they can do and every kind of negative thing, every kind of imaginary thing.  The fiction is self perpetuating...a lie that got started, and rolled out of control.  The harder they try to make it all true, the more lies must be told.

We have "Jew" as a racial distinction and disagreements as to qualifications within each of those subdivisions.  (Sephardic, Ashkenazi, Spinoza, yada yada...) 

We have "Jew" meaning adherent to a religious doctrine.  Within this subset we have orthodox, reform, and others.

Why "Jew" is SO diverse and unbounded by qualitative and quantitative meaning that this label can be of no use to us in reasoned discussion.  

By allowing any discussion to be framed around anything "Jew"ish, it's as though we accept and ratify, sight unseen, tomes of Talmudic Sophistry, every person place thing or act that has ever been attributed to "Jews" since the beginning of written records (including all the fakes).  

Why start from a lost position?

Time to move on to addressing the problems that are being associated with Jews and Israel and make clear distinctions so we can divide and separate the real crimes of commission from the false ideas of pseudo religion/false origin and most especially, the ingrained squeamishness that prevents most people from seeing the problem.  The term "Jew" serves to obscure these criminals.  It has only the life we give to it.  Jew is a fiction-a STRAW MAN.  

If frisbees started coming off the line that didn't fly-we wouldn't call them frisbees. 

Why do we afford Jews the same kind of leeway.  That label doesn't fit anything.  It's pure equivocation.  It falls flat-it does NOT fly.

I suppose It would be impossible for me to come to this conclusion without the entirety of my experience and education, and without the Jewish label attached to ao many people i have dealt with directly and indirectly.

I'm sure we could not have caught the tail of the problem without an overwhelming mountain of evidence. The continuous identity theft and self abusing sophistry is a paper trail like none other.   These diverse tribal gangs march to a familiar drumbeat that is inaudible to the rest of us "normal" people. 

However, by the time we "normal folk" waking as truth seekers, seem able to grasp at the name of this problem, history shows that we may again find the strawman * has a new name, and that we really only have hold of the tail. Forget the name. It's the thing they fear most-irrelevance. Truth.

We must identify their codes, their systematic criminal methods. Read the manuals full of hate speech they use to train generations of extremeist supremacist criminals.  

Talmud is one of these hatefull manuals (Protocols of The Learned Elders of Zion is like Talmud for Dummies or Cliffs Notes).  Kaballah caballah -another.

We lose the game before we even start when we write or speak "Jew" in a thought that is supposed to address concrete crimes they have commited or may be suffering (as a result).  

The word itsself is subtle poison - toxic in any amount, and lethal in many cases, where people mistook strawmen for humans.

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Credentials enough for the list then, Red. You responded to this post for a reason...you're a communist, you work FOR the 1% not against, and yet you remain "confused" as to how you got here. Your own hasbara is clouding your judgement. That IS rich.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 6 years ago

Credentials or not I still don't know what you are talking about. Make it intelligible to a normal person and perhaps there can be a coherent dialogue.

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Whether you'll admit it or not, you are working to benefit the Rothchild bank cartel, at the expense of the poor helpless 99%. Fill up a page-it doesn't change it.

[-] 0 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

What do anarchists advocate as far as economic development is concerned? We're in an economic crisis, right? What do we do to get out of it?

What kinds of organizations do anarchists advocate, for example, in business? Do they have examples of those kinds of organizations?

[-] 0 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 6 years ago

For me to comment is only one person's view, though I have studied this issue considerably in the past 50 years. I don't think that there is much difference between anarchism and Marxism on the economic front. The major difference between anarchism and Marxism is political, with the anarchists holding that a frontal attack on the state itself as primary.

In terms of economics, I think the whole notion of "economic development" is an oxymoron to both anarchists and Marxists. We have, after all, half the world that has been overdeveloped by capitalism and the other half that has been underdeveloped. In this, in terms of contemporary radical thought there is also some convergence with Green economic thought and the whole idea that the notion of development itself is antithetical to the continuation of human life on the planet. But there is more than enough for everyone.

For example, there are 4 million homeless people in America and 19 million empty homes, which is to say about 5 houses for every homeless person. The problem is one of distribution.

While it is largely symbolic right now I think the OWS strategy of occupying foreclosed houses is on the right track. There's all these homeless people and all these empty houses. So, give the empty houses to the homeless people. Do what Christ said, feed the hungry. House the homeless. Cloth the naked. Give rewarding necessary work to those without it.

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

It's clear that you are a Christian Anarchist, then. Do you have the stats on the number of empty prison/FEMA cells available for the occupiers and homeless, once you've achieved your goal of revolution? Lets say that your good bosses, SOROS and various Rothchild functionaries have their way-the cattle go berserking all over the place, foaming red at the mouths for this sweet Christian anarchist revolution you're touting. Stats? Can you tell us if Cass Sunstein and Phil Zelikow pay you by the word, or by the hour?

[-] 0 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

What is it about capitalism that you can't tolerate?

Have you heard the argument that the green movement is sponsored by the financial oligarchy as a way of keeping their "colonies" underdeveloped and dependent on them?

By development I only mean the improvement of life through a creative, scientific process. I agree that there is enough for everyone, and believe that all the universe and all it's secrets are available to us.

For me, the problem is one of development, because you need to have development for distribution to be possible. For example, the distribution of the future could be magnetic levitation trains that don't have wheels, but "fly" on a magnetic cushion over the track.

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

You're in no position to facilitate any of it. The power required for maglev trains is beyond the economy of this fanciful concept you've momentarily supplanted.

Are you afraid to discuss the Rothchild bank cartel?

[-] 0 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 6 years ago

I'm personally not interested in a theoretical discussion about the relative merits of capitalism vs. some other way of organizing society. What I am interested in is building OWS, as well as feeding the hungry, housing the homeless, clothing the naked, caring for the sick and providing meaningful rewarding jobs for everyone.

[-] 0 points by vothmr (82) from Harrisonburg, VA 6 years ago

so your trying to stifle others beliefs while at the same time claiming that the movement is being stiffed by police? very fair isn't it? if you want your air time then you have to give it to them. i do not support what they say but they have every right to say it

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 6 years ago

They pick and choose what rules to follow and when. The more of this stuff you read, they seem more like Communists.

[-] 2 points by TLydon007 (1278) 6 years ago

"They pick and choose what rules to follow and when. The more of this stuff you read, they seem more like Communists."

I think there's just a serious disconnect between what you're thinking and what you're typing. Not only is the grammar atrocious, but it seems you fail to explain how you got from A to B,

For instance:

"And if you think Zionism...is bad...(incoherent)...why do you exist?"

and now...

"The pick and choose what rules to follow...(incoherent)...seem more like Communists."

I think it's pretty obvious you need some Ritalin to calm you down while you type so that perhaps a partially coherent thought can come out.

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 6 years ago

I think you need the Ritalin(do they even make that anymore?? I thought they use Adderol now) as the parts you describe as incoherent are omissions. Maybe you didn't read the whole thing, eh. Too many words for an uncontrolled mind??

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 6 years ago

Alright. Keep doing what you're doing. I'm not the one that will look bad.

[-] -1 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

What belief are you claiming to protect? Bolshevism? Marxism? Zionism? Each flies in the face of the founding principles of this once great REPUBLIC. This OWS site was created by the elements destroying our republic-Soros/Rothchild banksters. You are with them or against them.

[-] 1 points by vothmr (82) from Harrisonburg, VA 6 years ago

im against their beliefs but if they were truly being oppressed because of their beliefs, i would be the first one to stand in line to push back. Im for their right to say whatever they want no matter how irritating and aggravating and detrimental it is. i will never tell someone they can't speak. thanks to the first amendment, you can say what you want. the only limits are inciting violence and causing others harm. disagree with them all you want but don't stop them from speaking. they are entitled to their bullshit as much as you are entitled to yours and i am entitled to mine

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Well then, BRAvo. I have not claimed they shouldn't speak-and, of course, I couldn't cause such a ban on their first amendment right to express thought.

My call is to OUT them for what they are. Intellectual vandals. Opposed to the freedom they claim to seek via undermining principles of our Republic.


review the historical context.

OUT these vandals by name and let them defend whatever they claim is just and good.

[-] 1 points by annemarie (17) 6 years ago

"INTELECTUAL VANDALS" ?'!?!?1 hahahahahahaha that i've never heard of....so ...being intelectual...is vandalism? Jajajaj you must be such a "i hate books but i go on outing people with an "i know it all" speach!"

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

You have arrived. Welcome- to the 'ism prism. Intellect vandalized -intellectual vandalism -usually sprayed over with yet other strawman-isms.. Study the original vandals. Maybe revisit that innovation of "the scapegoat," precursor to the false-flag attacks we see in todays modern terrorism. Truly the only intellectual creation you and your fiat fictional friends can claim(see Leviticus). Fill us in on the detail, would you professor?

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 6 years ago

You know, I don't really care how intellectual the two of you think you are, you both still appear as little more than vehemently passionate pissants. Bravo, though, on your "American-ism."

[-] -2 points by Infowar (295) 6 years ago

Thrasymaque actually is trying to quash discussion of 911 go to http://occupywallst.org/forum/two-planes-and-bombs-on-911/ an scroll down till you see childish pictures. He admits this freely ask him about it.

[-] 0 points by vothmr (82) from Harrisonburg, VA 6 years ago

hey, i think the 911 truthers are some of the dumbest people ever to be born and i would be happy if they just stopped and admitted they were wrong but i won't stop them. he can say whatever he wants but when he actually succeeds then he can be stopped. everyone can spout whatever brand of bullshit they want to hawk.

[-] -2 points by Infowar (295) 6 years ago

Here is a news flash commies, socialists, equal payers, zeitgeisters and venus projectors have no future in reality. They all base their future on big bro helping them, talking about diluted. But they have a right to speak like a jackass even if everyone hates them and wishes they would just go away already.

[-] 2 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

It is in the constitution that the government should promote the common good. To me, this does not mean giving a handout, but that the government should promote a prosperous economy.

When put into practice, this is called the American System of Economics. It was practices by FDR, JFK and Lincoln. It created good paying industrial jobs that allowed high school graduates to buy houses, cars, and put their children through college.

[-] -1 points by Infowar (295) 6 years ago

So you prefer Keynesian economics? Talking about a fail economic theory, printing money as needed may work if there were no other country's we dealt with. Inflation is bad that is what destroys the value of the dollar.

[-] 2 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

No, the American System of Economics is different than Keynesian economics. At Bretton Woods, Roosevelt argued against Keynes. Roosevelt advocated a fixed exchange rate credit system, while Keynes was for a monetary system

The idea of a credit system comes from Alexander Hamilton and his idea of a national bank, while monetarism is a product of the British empire.

Printing money can work if we have a fixed exchange rate with other countries, and we invest in the right kinds of projects, that is, those that pay themselves off through revenue generated.

[-] -1 points by Infowar (295) 6 years ago

Actually we don't have a national bank the federal reserve is a privately owned bank since 1913. Second we don't have any tariffs to protect American good's. Third with out these things is is basically Keynesian. Fourth to claim that that economic model made it possibly to own property is an opinion. Also freedom is a staple of our country and that includes economic freedom. The valueless currencies credit system you suggest is a joke and fails to compete with any country on the gold standard.

[-] 2 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

I know we don't have a national bank, we have had them at times in the past, and I believe we should have one again.

[-] -1 points by Infowar (295) 6 years ago

I agree, it is the economic philosophy i disagree with.

[-] 2 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

The purpose of a national bank, as I understand it, is to make money available for investment in infrastructure projects at low interest rates. It can do this because it does not have to make profit for private owners.

The purpose of such projects is to create productive jobs which improve the economy, resulting in increased revenue which pays the money back through taxes. Is this the economic philosophy you disagree with?

[-] 0 points by Infowar (295) 6 years ago

It does not really work like that though. let me point to some of your logical fallacy. Infrastructure while necessary is not an investment per-say and is what taxes are for. The idea of government making profitable job's is also another, government jobs always cost more money. The reason for this is you need to hire more people for the in between transactions. Also because of the fact that it is the government that would give you this job it would not stimulate the economy. Think of it this way would you try and make money by giving money away to people you think might spend it at your shop? Also what you are creating in this process is inflation meaning the dollar becomes worth less. The reason to have a gold backed dollar is because it prevents money manipulation that causes inflation.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

I think your analogy of giving money to someone to spend in my shop is inaccurate, because you are just talking about money given for the sake of consumption. The money that the government would invest in infrastructure should raise society and the economy to a higher level.

An example of this would be Roosevelt's Tennessee Valley Authority. The electrification of this area enhanced it's economy substantially above its previous level, it wasn't just giving people money so that they could consume.

The electrification allowed people to produce with greater efficiency, I believe this is the key. Its not just about enabling people to consume, but to produce in a more efficient way or in ways that didn't previously exist.

[-] 0 points by Infowar (295) 6 years ago

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx don't take the shortcut to thinking now even FDR loving economists have begun to admit it.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

Perhaps today's leading economists believe these things, but the economy that they have produced for us is a disaster, so I don't think they deserve any particular credibility. I think they get these ideas because they receive their funding from questionable financial institutions, whom they wish to please in order to continue receiving their funding.

Remember that FDR produced a powerful manufacturing economy that not only took us out of the great depression, but also enabled us to produce the war materials that allowed us to defeat the Nazis in WW2.

[-] 0 points by Infowar (295) 6 years ago

Please stop using Roosevelt as an example he caused the great depression to last 8 extra years. Also trying to insinuate that your system is the only one that could bring electricity to an area is bogus.

[-] 0 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

Such anti-Roosevelt attitudes originate from Wall Street and the City of London financial district, people usually read these ideas in "The Economist" magazine, the mouthpiece for these financial communities. They are the kinds of ideas that got us into our current economic slump to begin with.

Perhaps other systems could provide electrification, but the one that I am advocating did indeed do it, and that is certain.

[-] 0 points by Infowar (295) 6 years ago

fallacies in my opinion.

[-] 1 points by BlueRose (1437) 6 years ago

I can't respond to hymie for some reason, but The Economist Magazine is actually quite fair.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

They apply a tone of fairness, I would say. I read it some times and I can see that they give the impression of being fair. But they are perpetrating certain lies that could have an immensely malicious effect on the world.

They try to appear mild and objective. But remember that this magazine is published by Wall Street types of companies. They are the ones responsible for our current economic crisis that is causing millions of people to be unemployed, hungry and homeless.

Also, they justify the wars that are killing millions around the world, and are creating conflict among major nations, such as the US, Russia and China, just to profit from the conflict and weapon sales.

[-] -1 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Oh certainly-it's a Rothchild publication. Very fair for the fiat fiction federal fraud folk. Hymie is right about this one.

[-] -1 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

You're an Omissionist, Hymie. Rothchild Bank cartel via Rockefellers Standard Oil boycott of Japan and Roosevelts complicity, precipitated Pearl Harbor, thus dragging us into WWII. Welcome to the list.

[-] 2 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

Roosevelt's complicity is a debated issue. I happen to be of the persuasion that he wasn't complicit, this mostly because the people I trust tell me so. I'm just starting to learn about some of the deeper aspects of this issue, so I can't prove it to you.

To me Roosevelt appears to be essentially a good man and a great American. He betrayed his class of Wall Street financiers to help the average American to come out of the depression and live prosperous lives. In a sense, FDR was an original OWS protestor.

Roosevelt wanted to dismantle the colonial system of the English empire and use America's post-war manufacturing capacity to export to third world nations the machines and equipment that they needed to become independent, economically developed countries.

If we would have followed that path, all nations of the world could have prospered together and we would have been in a much different situation today.

[-] 0 points by Infowar (295) 6 years ago

Roosevelt also used internment camps on the Japanese. http://www.pbs.org/childofcamp/history/index.html This is in relation to Roosevelt being a traitor. The us government later apologized and admitted there was never a threat. Sound like this could be true today http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/us/beyond-guantanamo-bay-a-web-of-federal-prisons.html

[-] -2 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Nope. FDR was a traitor. You are avoiding the subject as usual. The subject of this thread is not FDR or electricity.. And I can't reply to your latest drivel post as the forum format doesn't allow it

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

From what I have heard, as far as Pearl Harbor is concerned, that FDR was actually the victim of a conspiracy, rather than the perpetrator of it.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 6 years ago

You haven't proven your point, you've just asserted it, so it isn't clear to me. How can I be avoiding the subject when you have said so little about it?

Do you think Roosevelt was basically an evil man? Perhaps you're just listening to propaganda from America's enemies who want to tarnish a great Americans image.

Actually, I've seen your line of reasoning in conspiracy thinking, and I'm a conspiracy theorist myself in a way, but I don't think you are taking into account all of FDR's life.

Do you think all of FDR's policies were those of a traitor, such as bringing electricity to a vast area of poverty in the United States?

[-] -1 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Actually, he gleefully claims to be a truther, though it's quite clear from his sophistry he is a ziobot shill

[-] -1 points by utahdebater (-72) 6 years ago

Our constitutional republic?

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Should I assume your reply was to RKGs nothing post, or is it news to you also-that the 50 United States are a Constitutional Republic? Have you read it-The Constitution? Or have you too been hypnotized by this democratic federation nonsense?

[-] -1 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Welcome to the list Richard. Adding nothing but phlegm per usual.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 6 years ago

oooooohhh. not the list. anything but the list. grow up dude.


[-] -1 points by fandango (241) 6 years ago

YOU are one of the "useful idiots".

[-] -2 points by necropaulis (491) 6 years ago

So in order for everyone to be happy as a people, anyone who questions, is then cast into the spotlight as vandals?? Sign me up then. I mean unlike people sitting in parks, yelling and screaming. Or those who completely destroy aforementioned parks, accost passersby, build unsafe structures on government property, nevermind those that believe breaking and entering is okay if your "protesting"(as in "I'm protesting the fact that it's getting cold as shit out here"). These are not the actions of vandals?? And some people like sock puppets. Ever seen Sifl and Ollie?? Also just because you throw a bunch of big words, doesn't make you look smart Bolsheviki and Marxism are the same thing. And if you think Zionsim- a Jewish political movement that, in its broadest sense, has supported the self-determination of the Jewish people in a sovereign Jewish national homeland- is bad, well, if your not determined to do anything, why are you here?? As in existing?? Do you not have a use??

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 6 years ago

"And if you think Zionsim- a Jewish political movement that, in its broadest sense, has supported the self-determination of the Jewish people in a sovereign Jewish national homeland- is bad, well, if your not determined to do anything, why are you here?? As in existing?? Do you not have a use??"

I read this part of your post 6 times and I couldn't make any sense of it..

If you don't support Zionism, you can't exist in the first place?? Even Netanyahu would agree that that statement makes absolutely no sense.

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 6 years ago

When I put the dashes in there, it was as definition. I was saying if you believe self determination is bad, then what's the point of even living?? If you aren't determined to get something done, you will end up being useless, therefore taking up space.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 6 years ago

"I was saying if you believe self determination is bad, then what's the point of even living??"

So since you likely don't support Palestine you shouldn't be alive?? How can you oppose their self-determination??

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 6 years ago

No, you're twisting my words. If you read the quote you copied, you will realize the self determination doesn't come from Palestine, USA, or the Antarctic. SELF determination is within you. If you(yourSELF) aren't determined to do anything, then those that are will roll right over you. That's how the rich get rich and the (needlessly) poor cry in the streets.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 6 years ago

I'm not twisting it at all. You are. You used "self-determination" in reference to Zionism. Now, all of a sudden, you're twisting it to mean individualism because you don't want to admit it applies to Palestinians as much as Zionists.

Obviously, you need ADHD medication because you even have trouble remembering what YOU said.

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 6 years ago

All I have to do is scroll up. I think we may have missed each other on the whole Zionsim/self determination thing. When I said, "Zionism in its broadest sense, has supported the self-determination of the Jewish people in a sovereign Jewish national homeland" I was more targeting the indiviualism you point out. I could have worded it better.I don't need meds. I don't take meds, a lot of them are very bad for you.

[-] 1 points by nikilister (109) 6 years ago

Is this the last Zionist attempt at self proclamation?

In that case lol at your declaration of independence.

Actually it is hilarious!

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 6 years ago


Self-determination has nothing to do with individualism.

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Thanks for making my point as making yourself visible. Not only is Marxism derived from Bolshevism, Zionism is derived from both. Go back to the communist soviet territories you came from. Inhabit the failure you hail from.

[-] 2 points by annemarie (17) 6 years ago

IT'S the other way arround: 1st came Marxism, then Bolchevism. Bolchevism is NOT Stalin. He killed and tortured Bolchevism. After betraying the party and the people. And it's a fact. Go to the books and learn who's who before marking every left people as Stalinist cause it's not a matter of opinion: it's a mistake. Simple as that. It's a fact he killed Trotsky and he's followers. And it makes no sense then to insult Trotskysts for what Stalin's done.

Marxism: Karl Marx - Friedrich Engels "El Manifiesto Comunista" 1848 K.Marx: "El Capital" vol.1: 1867,vol. 2: 1885 y vol.3: 1894.

Bochevism: Bolche party foundation: 1898 Bolche revolution: 1905 - 1917 Lennin: (1870–1924) Wasn't born when Das Kapital was first published, the party his can't be the main theory and marxism a part of it. Was born after Marx's death Trotsky: (1879-1940)

[-] 1 points by annemarie (17) 6 years ago

So if Marxism is derived from Bolchevism Bolchevist's must have travelled throught time and thell Marx the story of Russian revolution so he could write his books many years before the party foundation....

[-] 0 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Oh good, a professor of the fiat fiction fanclub. ...Remember Karl Marx? real name: Moses Mordechai Levy. The "jew" Lenin? Leon Trotsky (Bernstein) Stalin - real name Djugashvili (Djuga=jew shvili=son of)married to 3 jewesses - one the mother of Boris Yeltsins wife... Yes, read some history. The zionist made Sovjet from the 1917 Bolshevik revolution...they made Mao Tse Tung....They made IMF, UN. Welcome to the list, professor.

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 6 years ago

I'm from America, first off. Secondly, I've been quite visible and vocal. I am also not about any of those systems. Nor am I for yours. You want to shut down/ isolate people who don't think like you. What countries do that?? What system do they have in place?? Is it democracy?? I don't think so.... Maybe you should go back to your communist territories, comrade.

[-] -1 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

This is a Constitutional Republic-the Constitution guaranteed a republican form of government. Where we are today stands in contrast to the freedoms and safeguards against government intrusion guaranteed by that body of laws. And no, the republicans don't represent the republican concept outlined by our constitution. What we have today is a defacto government.

Those promoting democracy, the closest thing to socialism, same as Communism, are calling for the end of our republic.

Either you don't understand the historical context of this country, as most, or you are intentionally working to dismember it. Directly or indirectly.

Figure it out or get out. http://occupywallst.org/forum/interesting-read-about-the-constitution-and-corpor/

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 6 years ago

Just because it's called a Republic, doesn't mean we are guaranteed anything(ever hear of the People's Republic of China??)I understand the history of this country quite well. I am not dismembering anything, you are by starting this post. you want to divide the people who are with you from the people who aren't so you can have a place on the internet where everyone agrees. That's a little messed up.

[-] -2 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Not at all. I am here to sort the bulls from the bullshit. You do not deserve the label "American" if as you claim, are aware of our history, dare compare it to China, AND promote disagreement regarding established fact.

No one should listen to you because you either don't know where you are, where you've been, or are intentionally dumbing down the conversation for the others who don't know what they HAVE in the constitutional republic. You would throw the baby out with the bathwater. Shame on you!

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 6 years ago

I never said we were like China. I may have misinterpreted what you meant in the post above. I am an American and I deserve the title as much as you. Throwing around the word republic means nothing as we all know, this is no longer a republican(in the classic sense) country. As for this site, I am not bull nor shit, I am just the farmhand watching nature.

What is this established fact to which you refer?? You are trying to dismember the board?? China and America are both called republic, even though they are different?? Or that you are a little messed up?? i promote questioning the people on this board. If you have a site where everyone agrees, wouldn't that be boring??

I've been in this country, Mexico, China, Canada, and the Virgin Islands, I know which one I would prefer.

I don't throw babies, or bathwater. I take showers, and when my daughter takes a bath it goes down the drain. Maybe no one should listen to you either.

[-] -3 points by BofL (434) 6 years ago

Your lack of focus only perpetuates the divisiveness this board was set up to achieve.

Do you or don't you understand that Rothchild bank cartel is at the root of every valid isue these "revolutionaries" are clamoring about?
Tick, tick, tick, ......... Nothing more? I thought so.