Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Meathead

Supreme Court Hands Democrats A Win On Racial Gerrymandering In Virginia

Recommended Posts

you're right I don't, and I apologize for the harshness of it. It wasn't cool, and I wouldn't like it if someone did that to me.

 

Anyway, we're still Bills fans right?

 

 

Here's an addendum to the last message. I'm posting it mostly for the title: TESTIFY!!!

 

 

 

This may not be your type of message and I dont agree with all of the lead singer's politics, but these guys get it and they rock. The video does a decent job of illustrating that the differences in the establishment parties are a superficial WWF act to fool the masses(and for a time it did work on me as well).

 

I remember these guy put on a free show during the Democratic National Convention, and then led a march with Iraq Veterans Against War to protest the warmongering of the party. Both the concert and the march were EPIC, until we finally got to the convention and they tried to herd us into a "free speech zone" cage, and we basically said' "**** you, I wont do what you told me!!!!"(a quote from their epic song, "Killing In The Name Of!". I will say that being I was near the front, and being it was a hot summer day, I did separate from the herd from awhile while a bar we walked by started callling my name. It was simply hitting the pause button on the boombox of my ability to.....testify!!!

 

One of the most important quotes to our condition is at about the 3 minute mark, IIRC:

Who controls the past now controls the future

Who controls the present now controls the past

Who controls the past now controls the future

Who controls the present now? (seriously people, answer that question..WHO?!?, and TESTIFY you SOBs!!!!!! Come at me!!)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well if you actually had a functioning brain, you'd understand that distaste for president crime spree does not require me to be anything other than sane. Go find one post of mine supporting leftism.

 

If one were as obsessed with you as you are with me, they could find plenty, but one has to be keen enough to look beyond the obvious. I'll illustrate it simply, for anyone capable of critical thinking. I made 1 thread about the migrants from Congo amassing on the border, and then being dispersed around the US. Unlike you littering the Hardcore Bills with dozens of threads exposing your TDS before Admin BANNED it due to the complaints of many, I made sure to keep it tidy and in one place.

 

You then copied and pasted the articles I copied and pasted into that thread, and tricked a couple of feeble minded members to think it took me a lot of time. The vast majority of it took a very short amount of time. You tried to discredit me and a very serious issue, due to whatever your personal obsession with me was.

 

This illegal influx of people is NOT Constitutional. This is not the first time you mocked people for supportiing the sovereignty of our border. I'm relatively certain that Sackman remembers you coming after him about the caravans. I sure do. I cant believe someone who tries to belittle such an important issue would degrade Rule Of Law Constitutionalists by all of a sudden claiming to be one of them now that we are finally gaining support for people of varied beliefs on here.

 

You're likely to claim your mocking of me is due to some sort of personal hatred/obsession/enfatuation/jealousy, but that wouldn't explain why you did so by using such an important issue to do so, nor the fact that you did not say a single word on the issue.

 

You all of a sudden make these claims of not speaking against the Constitution, but youve also remained silent in almost all discussion supporting it, other than bringing it up at very narrow and specific times when it suits your 1 purpose: TDS(mocking President Trump). You'd much prefer to mock people who support the Constitution more than the majority of folks on here do, while almost never supporting it in duscussion, so that should be evidence enough for any thinking person to see through your act.

 

For the most part, the only way you've supported the Constitution other than when it coincides with your TDS(which started when the man campaigned on a lot of pro-Constitutional issues that members of both establishment parties were against), is unwittingly inspiring me to post more about the enemies of it. For that last part, I am grateful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well if you actually had a functioning brain, you'd understand that distaste for president crime spree does not require me to be anything other than sane. Go find one post of mine supporting leftism.

 

You seem like someone who took a one day work shop on how to demean supporters of the Constitution wiithout being quickly dismissed as a flaming leftist/subversive/anti-American, or whatever term you prefer.

 

I thought about it for a bit, and realized that with all of the posts of yours I've been unfortunate enough to witness, none quickly come to mind of you supporting anything. It's much easier to tear something down than it is to make or support something, so that is what you do. And the people you've obsessed over trying to tear down, are ones that are generally more Consitutional than others. The crap you spew generally is regurgitated from left learning sources in the MSM, so that as well.

 

Come to think of it, for quite awhile your Bills posts have leaned towards tearing things down, such as Josh Allen, the staff, and the team in general. Then you tear down fans just because they aren't as bitter as you. You don't enjoy it when we are happy, and try to pull as down to your low energy/vibrational/mood state. When it comes to the Bills, you're a very poor man's version of Lit. If I wanted to rip off his shtick, I'd do a better job.

 

"tldr" version, in case if your mind is in it's usual state of having the attention span of a fruit fly:

 

1)support leftism? I dont recall you supporting anything. Well, other than

2)tearing down people, who generally are more pro-Constitution and anti-leftist than average. Certainly more than anything youve ever said.

3)the crap you regurgitate and spew seems to often come from left-leaning MSM sources, some cheering the victories of the left wing of US government

4)When you get bored of your TDS(Trump Derangement Syndrome), you get JADS and attack Josh Allen, The Bills, and any Bills fan who isn't as miserable as you

5)You have a very unhealthy obsession with myself and others, which tends to be a trait of those on the left.

6)You recently admitted you were lazy, something else associated with the left.

7)Like many ***s besides you, you play the role of victim. You attacked me for the longest time, and in conversations you werent even a part of and had nothing to add, you posted your giant nature photo to try to dehumanize myself and discredit logical information, even though you were incapable and/or too lazy to counter it logically. One night when I'd finally had enough, I decided to give you a taste of your own medine. In less than 24 hours, you reduced yourself to pretending to be the victim in the matter. This too is a common tactic used by the left(I dont even subscribe to that left/right paradigm and instead generally prefer the term subversives).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, you have a gut feeling, gotcha. Look , I’m NOT saying people that say these things about secret cabals are wrong, but I need more than Alex “ batshit crazy “ Jones type of evidence. There’s no investigative skills from anyone in this entire world that can expose these puppetmasters that rule us? Look, here’s an example. For 30+ years, I “ studied” the Kennedy assassination. Read every conspiracy book out there, from Mark Lanes Rush to Judgement, to every fucking one ever after. Bought the 26 bound volumes of the Warren report. Subscribed to a fredonia professors newsletter, The Third Decade. CONVINCED that the govt was behind it. You know who I think did it? Oswald. Alone? Quite possibly. Right now I’m reading Reclaiming History by Vincent Bugliosi, which I might finish before I die ( the footnotes alone could kill you). This very long point I’m making is this, there’s a lot of bullshit out there about everything under the sun. SJ thinks EVERYTHING is a false flag operation. Obviously, conspiracies do exist, always did, i.e. Julius Caesar. But when one makes bold statements about THOSE WHO CONTROL US, I would think they could throw out some names besides Rothschild and Soros. Sorry if this sounds like I’m attacking you, I’ve asked this question of others on other sites and it’s the same runaround

 

lol, gut feeling was just a word I used, it obviously goes much deeper than that (for me anyway). Probably started out as a gut feeling, but progressed and became interesting to me. I'm sure it's interesting to you as well, otherwise you would never be reading all that information that you have (now, or in the past). And I don't think you're attacking me, more like challenging me. And there's nothing wrong with being challenged. But do you honestly believe that anybody on a message board is going to have names for you? If I started throwing out names, you'd think I was even crazier than you first imagined (Again, in your own way). And just for the record, I have never thrown out the names of Rothchild, Rockefeller or Soros. Those names are there to distract, and nothing more (IMO). Right now all we have is information that will hopefully get us closer to the rabbit hole. But do we really want to go down said rabbit hole? You tell me.

 

And yes, I do think it takes balls to openly discuss this stuff. Aside from more sites, articles, books or video's I'm sorry I don't have names for you. But did you think it would be this easy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I am greatly amused/confused that you single me out, of all the people on here, as someone who does not have balls. If I have any real enemies on here, I don't think even they would currently use that derision against me. That's even less believable than trying to call me gay, which now is actually starting to amuse me as well. If I ever became such, I would embrace it without shame.

 

If you had any real balls, you'd post a current pic of yourself. That's what I wanna see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lol, gut feeling was just a word I used, it obviously goes much deeper than that (for me anyway). Probably started out as a gut feeling, but progressed and became interesting to me. I'm sure it's interesting to you as well, otherwise you would never be reading all that information that you have (now, or in the past). And I don't think you're attacking me, more like challenging me. And there's nothing wrong with being challenged. But do you honestly believe that anybody on a message board is going to have names for you? If I started throwing out names, you'd think I was even crazier than you first imagined (Again, in your own way). And just for the record, I have never thrown out the names of Rothchild, Rockefeller or Soros. Those names are there to distract, and nothing more (IMO). Right now all we have is information that will hopefully get us closer to the rabbit hole. But do we really want to go said rabbit hole? You tell me.

 

And yes, I do think it takes balls to openly discuss this stuff. Aside from more sites, articles, books or video's I'm also sorry I don't have names for you. But did you think it would be this easy?

 

Thanks for saying that. Balls is right. The folks in power have purposefully made it that way, for their own self-preservation. When you controll the media, it's rather easy to do.

 

It can be difficult being the only one with the combination of the knowledge and the courage(or disregard for comfort) to say anything. Ive found it difficult to relate to people who apparently haven't been exposed to any of that information, when they are ill mannered, and demanding that you put on a magic show for them. It's like Daniel on the Karate Kid, when at first he felt like he could just have karate handed to him, without putting in any effort. (BTW, I may as well take the opportunity to once again mention the sequel series, Cobra Kai. I think many on here would enjoy it if they liked the original, and even if they didnt. :) ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you had any real balls, you'd post a current pic of yourself. That's what I wanna see.

 

Crazy-as-shit-man1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Im not sure how people can expect me to condense 20+ years of research into a few words. The people at the top have poured unlimited resources into remaining hidden, layers upon layers of red herring conspiracy theories to make it difficult for even the few folks like you and I who actually put an effort into seeking the truth. There are jackasses on here and elsewhere who will try to shut you down by using the well-worn label of "conspiracy theory"(yet they love to pimp the official conspiracy theory of their establishment masters, without labeling it as such. 9/11 is a great example). Even way back in the 60s, JFK had the balls to speak against these people, and he paid the price for it: (the press has done their best to defame his father, if people want a clue as to the nature of the people he was speaking about)

 

[video=youtube;Dcjr-TQtXhA]

 

I’m going to make an assumption here, I’m sure you’ll tell me if I’m wrong. I think your “ research “ is biased. When you’re only “ researching” one side of topic, the rabbit hole is wherever “ they” want to lead you. There’s no objectivity, no opposing views, no debunking of “ facts”. I used the Kennedy assassination as my example. Until I got involved in sites, symposiums, etc that allowed people to express different “ takes” , I couldn’t ( or wouldn’t ) see things any other way. People LOVE conspiracies. When I saw Geraldo show the Zapruder film to the public for the first time, I said, “ holy shit! His head snapped back! There had to be a shooter from the front!”. I could give you a list of names a mile long if you’d like, ( NAMES!) of people I’ve felt over the years might be involved in his death. But I also believe in the principle of Occam’s razor . The govt is too inept to keep something so monumental a total secret, and nobody talked ( don’t buy E. Howard Hunts deathbed confession ). So, sensei SJ, I want names, based on your “ research”. I’ve watched the Matrix, I’m not taking either pill 💊, maybe I’m “ comfortably numb”, or whatever metaphor you want to label people based on all the movies, music and YouTube videos you’ve consumed over your lifetime. You’re the Mary Katherine Gallagher of the board. Look that one up! SUPERSTAR!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I’m going to make an assumption here, I’m sure you’ll tell me if I’m wrong. I think your “ research “ is biased. When you’re only “ researching” one side of topic, the rabbit hole is wherever “ they” want to lead you. There’s no objectivity, no opposing views, no debunking of “ facts”. I used the Kennedy assassination as my example. Until I got involved in sites, symposiums, etc that allowed people to express different “ takes” , I couldn’t ( or wouldn’t ) see things any other way. People LOVE conspiracies. When I saw Geraldo show the Zapruder film to the public for the first time, I said, “ holy shit! His head snapped back! There had to be a shooter from the front!”. I could give you a list of names a mile long if you’d like, ( NAMES!) of people I’ve felt over the years might be involved in his death. But I also believe in the principle of Occam’s razor . The govt is too inept to keep something so monumental a total secret, and nobody talked ( don’t buy E. Howard Hunts deathbed confession ). So, sensei SJ, I want names, based on your “ research”. I’ve watched the Matrix, I’m not taking either pill 💊, maybe I’m “ comfortably numb”, or whatever metaphor you want to label people based on all the movies, music and YouTube videos you’ve consumed over your lifetime. You’re the Mary Katherine Gallagher of the board. Look that one up! SUPERSTAR!

 

Have you seen the Zapruder film in HD?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have you seen the Zapruder film in HD?

 

Many times, especially frames 312-314

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Many times, especially frames 312-314

 

It's weird, really does look like the driver turns and shoots. But can anybody be sure? I can't

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greer didn’t shoot him, but it sold some books! Mortal Error.....JFK assassination is a cottage industry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I’m going to make an assumption here, I’m sure you’ll tell me if I’m wrong. I think your “ research “ is biased. When you’re only “ researching” one side of topic, the rabbit hole is wherever “ they” want to lead you. There’s no objectivity, no opposing views, no debunking of “ facts”. I used the Kennedy assassination as my example. Until I got involved in sites, symposiums, etc that allowed people to express different “ takes” , I couldn’t ( or wouldn’t ) see things any other way. People LOVE conspiracies. When I saw Geraldo show the Zapruder film to the public for the first time, I said, “ holy shit! His head snapped back! There had to be a shooter from the front!”. I could give you a list of names a mile long if you’d like, ( NAMES!) of people I’ve felt over the years might be involved in his death. But I also believe in the principle of Occam’s razor . The govt is too inept to keep something so monumental a total secret, and nobody talked ( don’t buy E. Howard Hunts deathbed confession ). So, sensei SJ, I want names, based on your “ research”. I’ve watched the Matrix, I’m not taking either pill 💊, maybe I’m “ comfortably numb”, or whatever metaphor you want to label people based on all the movies, music and YouTube videos you’ve consumed over your lifetime. You’re the Mary Katherine Gallagher of the board. Look that one up! SUPERSTAR!

 

Pretty sure it's easier to come up with names attached to the Kennedy assassination, than it is to come up with names attached to whatever darkness is opposing this world. Yeah, there are roads we can take, but most of them are dead ends and they intentional. Put there to keep us walking in circles At least they're dead ends for people who frequent message boards. Research, real research needs to be done on the street. It takes time, sometimes entire lifetimes with still nothing to show for it except that it does exist. If he/they do not want to be found, for whatever reason he/they will not be. Kennedy said it himself "Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed."

 

Most research is biased. And for a lot of us it's biased because for whatever reason we woke up and began questioning the biased narrative that we were taught in the public school system. So I don't doubt for a minute that StraightJ is awake, and whatever music video, youtube video or paragraph that he puts on this board is not intended to say that he has all the answers, just that there is a problem and that we need to wake up. Asking him, me or anybody else on a message board for names is another dead end, because if Kennedy didn't have names, how are we supposed to have them?

 

And Straight, you need to stop getting bent out of shape, when someone attacks you, because you should know by now that you're going to be attacked.

 

Also, from what I've gathered, politicians (actors) are supposed to do what they're told and Kennedy didn't want to do that. And you saw what happened.

 

This is kind of written on the fly, because I have to fly. But I do enjoy being challenged by your posts. I'm asking myself more questions, thanks for that. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When I saw Geraldo show the Zapruder film to the public for the first time, I said, “ holy shit! His head snapped back! There had to be a shooter from the front!”.

 

i know you were talking to sj about previous convos you had with him so i might have missed something, but it wasnt clear why you put this sentence in there

 

you realize why kennedy's head snapped back, right? if you fire a bullet from a rifle into a melon it will fall in the direction of the shooter bc the force is concentrated more on the EXIT of the bullet than on the entrance

 

i just wanted to point that out, even though i dont get the context of why you included it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i know you were talking to sj about previous convos you had with him so i might have missed something, but it wasnt clear why you put this sentence in there

 

you realize why kennedy's head snapped back, right? if you fire a bullet from a rifle into a melon it will fall in the direction of the shooter bc the force is concentrated more on the EXIT of the bullet than on the entrance

 

i just wanted to point that out, even though i dont get the context of why you included it

 

Yes, I know about the jet effect, I’ve seen the Luis Alvarez experiment many times. I put it in there because my 18 yo brain saw that and assumed his head was pushed back by the “ grassy knoll shooters” bullet. My bias was towards conspiracy from that moment on. I’d have to reread my post, maybe I wasn’t clear on that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my humble opinion, the question of importance is why he was shot, more so than whether the bullet was magic or not. Even 4 people, each of different race, shot him, where does that get us?

 

Even if folks wish to believe it was Oswald, and whether or not he was a Manchurian candidate from the MK Ultra program, the motive is really the only thing I'd focus on if I were researching this.

 

If you notice anything in common from all the other assassinations/attempts, it might point you in the right direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my humble opinion, the question of importance is why he was shot, more so than whether the bullet was magic or not. Even 4 people, each of different race, shot him, where does that get us?

 

Even if folks wish to believe it was Oswald, and whether or not he was a Manchurian candidate from the MK Ultra program, the motive is really the only thing I'd focus on if I were researching this.

 

If you notice anything in common from all the other assassinations/attempts, it might point you in the right direction.

 

That’s irrelevant, unless you’re talking about why Oswald shot him, or can prove a conspiracy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That’s irrelevant, unless you’re talking about why Oswald shot him, or can prove a conspiracy

 

Why would motive be irrelevant? And I did say, "even if you wish to believe it was Oswald" and his magic bullet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why would motive be irrelevant? And I did say, "even if you wish to believe it was Oswald" and his magic bullet.

 

Because I believe you were implying that whether he did it alone or there were other shooters, he was still doing it on someone else’s behalf. Couldn’t he be, I believe the medical term is, a whack job?Who told him to shoot at Gen. Walker? Same nefarious shadowy spooky people? Listen, I could give you a list of questions I have about events that I’m not satisfied with the govts answer. Sometimes a nut is just a nut. I have MANY more doubts about the RFK and MLK assassinations than I do about JFK. If you want to throw out MK-ULTRA every time you have doubts, I guess I can’t stop you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because I believe you were implying that whether he did it alone or there were other shooters, he was still doing it on someone else’s behalf. Couldn’t he be, I believe the medical term is, a whack job?Who told him to shoot at Gen. Walker? Same nefarious shadowy spooky people? Listen, I could give you a list of questions I have about events that I’m not satisfied with the govts answer. Sometimes a nut is just a nut. I have MANY more doubts about the RFK and MLK assassinations than I do about JFK. If you want to throw out MK-ULTRA every time you have doubts, I guess I can’t stop you

 

Fair enough, you're entitled to your beliefs as much as anyone. So you're saying Oswald had no motive, and just had JFKDS? :)

 

Did Jack Ruby have LHODS?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fair enough, you're entitled to your beliefs as much as anyone. So you're saying Oswald had no motive, and just had JFKDS? :)

 

Did Jack Ruby have LHODS?

 

Would you say Ruby was a well- adjusted man?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...