Posts
Most of us remember scenes in western movies in which a gun hand forces a sodbuster to dance by shooting at the ground near the reluctant dancer’s feet. That’s what comes to mind when I see American citizens who don’t believe there’s any such thing as same-sex “marriage,” but are forced to dance to whatever tune homosexual activists wish to play.
Don’t want to rent out your B&B for a lesbian wedding in Vermont because you’re Roman Catholic and believe homosexual acts are sinful? Too bad. You’re going to dance, sucker, like it or not. You may not be shot at, but you’ll be forced to pay $30,000 to settle a lawsuit by the ACLU and the State of Vermont.
Dance, sucker! Dance!
 |
| NOTACLU |
Don’t want to make floral arrangements to celebrate two men “marrying” each other? Seventy-year-old Christian grandmother Barronelle Stutzman was sued by the State of Washington. "The message of these rulings is unmistakable: The government will bring about your personal and professional ruin if you don't help celebrate same-sex marriage," said Kristen Waggoner, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, who argued before the court in December. It’s not like the men couldn’t find a gay florist to arrange their flowers. They’re about as ubiquitous as gay hairdressers or interior decorators. They singled out the old grandmother to exercise power.
Dance, sucker! Dance!
Don’t want to photograph a lesbian “wedding”? You’re a bigot and you’re going to be sued the way Elane Photography in New Mexico was. The owners, Jonathan and Elaine Huguenin, lost their appeal and had to pay too. Well, by now you’re perhaps realizing that I could go on and on citing cases of Americans who refused to help celebrate something that violated their religion, their conscience, as well as natural law and historical precedent going back for millennia. If they refuse to dance they lose their businesses and a lot of money.
 |
| No more husband and wife |
I can’t help wondering if some of the many finding themselves in the crosshairs of the LGBTQ Community ever voted for “gay rights” referenda in their individual states. Do they regret those votes now that they’re finding themselves targets of those laws? They seemed so benign when they were first proposed, but the fangs hidden from voters during the “equal rights” campaigns are now being bared.
"I can be a nice guy, or..."
Does all this sound like it’s getting to be too much? You didn’t think it would ever get this bad? Well, that’s just tough. You better get your mind right, because like the Strother Martin character in “Cool Hand Luke,” the LGBTQ Community speaks as one voice saying: “I can be a good guy, or I can be one real mean sum-bitch. It’s up to you. It’s all up to you.” You don’t like it? You spend a night in the box.
"Spend a night in the box."
Here in the 21st century though, “the box” is called “Sensitivity Training.” Governor Moonbeam Jerry Brown recently signed a law requiring all California health care providers to undergo LGBT Sensitivity Training because, as brietbart.com wrote: “Jason Galisatus, a gay-rights activist for the Peninsula region of San Francisco claims that gay senior citizens are being drawn back into the closet when dealing with insensitive hospital staff.” Better to brainwash tens of thousands of doctors and nurses at taxpayer expense than have one homosexual feel uncomfortable telling an “insensitive” doctor about his behavior in a gay bathhouse.
59 comments:
Here's what Tom's column would look like in bygone times:
Don't want to rent a room to a colored man because you believe they are less than human?
Dance, sucker, dance!
Don't want to hire a woman (let alone let her vote)?
Dance, sucker, dance!
Don't want to let an inter-racial couple shop in your store because you think it is wrong?
Dance, sucker, dance!
Don't want to serve a jew at your restaurant?
Dance, sucker, dance!
Well times have changed, and they are still changing.
So keep dancing sucker!!
I LOVE this column. It makes me feel so great that things are still improving!!
Thanks Tom for expressing what many of us think about same-sex marriages, transgender demands, and the new laws that favor them. If gays want to marry call it a civil union; marriage is between a man and a woman, same for transgenders. The media, movies, TV, and the changes in school curricula are bringing this country down, all having an impact on young and older minds as well.
Aubry said:
"marriage is between a man and a woman"
…and voting used to be just between men.
…and freedom used to be just for whites.
The country is changing, so keep dancing, sucker!
Hurray for Tom for finding yet another reason to post a picture of a gay bathhouse!
Wow, Tom is taking it harder than a young bathhouse beauty!!!
Some folks are just a glutton for punishment. I hear that attitude is extremely popular in the bathhouses!
I wonder if the Crew Club paid Tom for the free advertising.
I'm with you Earl, what BS that you can't even discriminate anymore without some pesky little special interest group yapping at your heels.
You'd fit in well with us, Brother Tom! We here at ISIS also believe that deep seated religious beliefs should dictate the lives of the minority!
The bakers never denied selling any of their wares to the gay couple, even knowing that they were gay. You can disapprove of anyone's lifestyle and still sell them a cake. The problem arose when the gay couple wanted them to bake them a cake for the gay wedding, which forces them to be a participant. Participating in the gay wedding is the problem. So you see, this is not a discrimination issue, it is a freedom of religion issue. Plain and simple.
Participate? What, were the bakers asked to pop out of the wedding cake?
When you will make some people wedding cakes and not others that IS discrimination, plain and simple. Using religion as your excuse does not change this. People kill because of their religious beliefs. Do their deeply held beliefs change the facts or let them off the hook? No, same as when they discriminate in the name of "god".
Rhonda, I think you should follow St. Paul's advice and just pipe down.
"I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must be silent."
I will not dance. You'll have to shoot me.
I will not change my deep-seated religious beliefs either, and there are millions like me.
As demonstrated above, the left tolerates no dissent. Along these lines, polarization continues in America and confrontation looms.
It won't be pleasant.
It's useless to try and reason with them, Rhonda. They're not reasonable.
It's confrontation they seek.
I wouldn't call what your detractors are doing as confrontation. Mocking is what they're doing. People confront when they sense a threat, so that is actually what is happening here but it is you that is being confrontational. People mock you because your impotent rage is hilarious and you simply don't get that you and your kind are becoming extinct and are not really regarded as much of a threat these days. Your screeds do not influence anyone, they only amuse. Your bigotry and ignorance most likely has not infected your children and grandchildren and it will most certainly die with you.
Very well put, Sami. The old delusional bigoted dinosaurs like to think that instead of just fading away that there will be some big confrontation that will restore all the discrimination that their deep seated beliefs call for and wipe out all that Civil Rights nonsense!
Impotent rage is hilarious!
And yes, I read Tom purely for the humor....like him calling others unreasonable!!
It ought to be obvious that the changes in our nation are not pleasing Him! The debasement of our current society is surely to bring down the wrath of God upon us. Those who deny that there is a God have much to learn, either now or later. Tom is correct and those who think he is wrong will someday see how wrong they are.
I truly can't tell if Gaffer is for real or just another mocker!
"I will not dance. You'll have to shoot me."
Oooh, tough guy doesn't dance!
But he sure does whine!
The rapid,sad decline in Western civilisation is difficult to stomach especially as it has become so entrenched in the cultures that transformed stone-age societies into thriving culture.
Apart from the trans-generational rise in the effect of THC on those who preside over public policy, we ought not to be surprised at the philosophical incarnation of subjectivism and collectivism. Our societies are being 'transnatured' to an ideology devoid of metaphysic and casuistry; where the foundation of the Judaeo-Christian law and ethic is being snipped away and the hormones of moral and legal anarchy are injected.
The so-called 'intellectual elites', having finally moved beyond 'See Spot Run', skipped the millenial development of human understanding that understood 'reality' as, of necessity, being compatible with nature; so that even that which makes 'us' 'us' is forcefully denied. Behaviour and nature become one and the same. 'If I think it, it is'.
That is the new law of the land.
The freedom to kill unborn babies, euthanise the sick and elderly, remove the genitals of a person and miraculously invent a new creature, all advance the fiction upon which such choices are based and clothed in euphamisms.
Your President Obama, peace be upon him, has banned the expression of religious faith within the armed forces; except when speaking with a chaplain. So, chatting up your buddy in a theatre of battle about 'climate change' is not only allowed but the most important topic for every American, but praying to God that you live and defeat the enemy is now subject of a court-martial. This has been challenged by one Rear Admiral Lee of the Coast Guard whose distinguished career and service is now trumped by the Lie.
The idiocy of the Left has established into civil law the equating of human nature with human behaviour. The respecting of a person for who they are and what they are is written into the Rights that we inherited from centuries ago. That ugly racism and real sexism has taken some time to eradicate is both true and ought to be celebrated.
Forcing Catholic nuns to subsidize the prescription for the 'abortifacent'pill or Orthodox Christians, Jews or Muslims to, not only bake a 'Gay Cake' but write 'Support Gay Marriage' on it (as was the case in Northern Ireland)is nothing but a small example of the cultural tyranny that is plaguing our civilisation.
It is never 'freedom' when the 'law' forces one to disobey his conscience, i.e., an informed and deeply held personal conscience.
Just because the au courant Left have largely won public policy, especially in matters that once were known only in the sewer, ought not to mean an intolerance for the foundation that, in its' inherent weakness based on freedom, requires one to 'dance' to that tune.
"The respecting of a person for who they are and what they are is written into the Rights that we inherited from centuries ago"
Exactly. That is why you bake the damn cake and shut up, because the "gay cake" (Hmmm....chocolate on chocolate action?) is being made for people that are respected for who and what they are.
It is never 'freedom' when the 'law' forces one to disobey his conscience, i.e., an informed and deeply held personal conscience."
So Timothy McVeigh should have been free to bomb? What makes his informed and deeply held personal conscience any different than yours?
Thank goodness the left is winning on public policy. It is a great sign that human kind is doing good for the sake of doing good, and not trying to justify their actions on some archaic book.
When you talk of the decline of western civilization, could you tell me what era was the peak? When was this ideal time before things started to decay. I will await your answer if you have one.
"It is never 'freedom' when the 'law' forces one to disobey his conscience, i.e., an informed and deeply held personal conscience."
It's also not freedom when one group denies rights to another group that the first group enjoys for themselves.
It's kind of creepy when Tom posts NAMBLA related pictures which are totally irrelavent to the topic.
Thank you Fred and Steve for underscoring my point.
Like all Leftist ideology, identity is 'collective' and 'group rights' an invention, not inherent in nature but a tool employed towards achieving status within the body politic.
Human rights, those that belong to every human being of every race, colour et al cannot be confused with 'civil rights' per se. There is no moral imperative for certain identity groups to have more rights than any other group or individual. Gay people, being human, have as many rights as anyone else. Some places have altered civil law, those that do not necessarily flow from human nature, with a pretense to 'human rights'. States can create a whole variety of civil laws to suit their novel political objectives and inventing a new form of 'marriage' is an example of that. It doesn't change human reality but merely pretends that it does.
The couple in the bakery didn't refuse to bake the cake because the guys were homosexual, it was because they we being asked to contribute to a moral and political message, i.e., 'Support Gay Marriage', that they could not, and should not be required to do. It would be interesting to see how such a case in a Halel shop would be judged today. The Republic of Diversity would have to decide which trumps the other in their own philosophical vocab: Homophobia versus Islamophobia.
By the way Fred, your 'chocolate on chocolate action' comment would, in some places in Canada and the UK be regarded as a slur against Gays and judged as hate speech. Some have been arrested for less.
It's interesting that you regard a terrorist has having had a deeply informed personal conscience. That's breathtaking.
Our historic civilisation has been the foundation of every advanced culture and society where it has taken root; where the freedom and dignity of human beings defined the quality of life in an evolution of thought and character and the witness of the common man, warrior and saint.
It was not necessary to call blacks white, or to call women men, but the civil union must be called marriage? Is it really about equality? Just asking...
Common Man, Warriors, Saints. If those categories get ground into dust, what does that leave?
Spies, Mad Prophets. Sometimes one works with what they have gots. Leaves traces after stuff dies down.
The man-made laws of a society have to trump the laws of a religion, because we can no sooner define religion than we can define art. Anyone can create their own religion that permits them to act however they choose, and compels others to act in certain ways simply because it’s what their religion requires.
And how many of the pious are truly orthodox, and how many, imbued with the Holy Spirit, observe only the tenants and dictates that are easy and convenient. Some of the most vocal are all too eager to selectively apply God’s law.
Leviticus lays out the rules and regs as it were and informs the faithful how God expects them to live their lives. We can’t eat anything from the ocean that doesn’t have fins and scales. What laws do the faithful advocate regarding the farming, fishing, transportation, sale and consumption of oysters, clams, urchins, seaweed, etc?
We can’t eat any land animal that doesn’t have a split hoof and chew their cud.
We heard about the assault on religion that contraception causes when health insurance covers it. How many Christian men undergo vasectomies for the purpose of contraception? Who among the faithful rail against insurance plans that pay for that practice?
"Who among the faithful..."
And there you have it.
The term "Faithful" seems to have suffered the same slings and arrows of outrageous "usage" as
the word "educated"(amongst others).
CaptDMO
"I truly can't tell if Gaffer is for real or just another mocker!"
He is for real and illustrates perfectly the main tenet of "Poe's Law".
Greg, with all that babbling you never answered the question. When exactly was this golden era before western civilization started to collapse?
And as far as the point on terrorists, did you stop to think that maybe I wasn't claiming that McVeigh had a conscious, but that you and all others who discriminate against people for being born the way they are, do not have one?
No way can Gaffer be for real! Really? Threatening us with the fear of hell fire? If anyone needs that threat to be a good and decent human being it surely does not speak well of them.
It has been politically expeditious for homosexuals to claim a genetic or biological imperative because they can then piggyback on the civil rights movement. Saying they're "born that way" has been very successful to further their agenda.
Scientific evidence in support of that claim? Thin, at best. Scientific proof? None. It may be politically correct, but it's scientifically incorrect.
Several of the 3500 students I've taught over the years claimed to be "gay" when in high school or college, but ultimately married someone of the opposite sex and settled into heterosexuality quite easily.
Ben Carson MD, a scientist, is roundly criticized for his contention that it's sexual preference and not sexual orientation. The stridency of the criticism is not evidence that he's wrong. The left and its media lapdogs hate hearing it because it undercuts the narrative.
Tom, as always gets asked when you try to say homosexuality is a preference:
When did you choose to be gay?
Why would anyone choose to live a life full of discrimination and hate from low-lifes such as yourself?
Has it ever occurred to you that the students "who are now in heterosexual marriages" did that due to intense social and family pressures? Look up the idea of a "beard."
Listen, having many homosexual friends, and a few family members who are gay. You do nothing more than cause intense harm by posting things like you do. You have absolutely no idea how hard it is to go through puberty, slowly realizing that you are not like "you're supposed to be." You see your teachers telling you that being gay is wrong, a choice, and that by choosing it you are bringing all of the harm and damage and hate and sadness you will face in your life on yourself.
Tom. You dedicated your life to helping children become adults. But I can never honor your service, because while doing so you destroyed many, many others.
There's a possibility that biological factors may play a role for some with same-sex attraction. Studies about a "hormone wash" in utero being an influence should be followed up.
I suspect that for the majority of those claiming to be "gay," the reasons for their same sex attraction stem from nurture rather than nature.
Trouble is, only those kinds of studies are receive government funding, because they further the narrative. Studies looking into the effects of being sexually molested as children on subsequent sexual attraction are not funded because they don't further the narrative.
The same is true for studies looking for evidence of human-caused climate change. They get all the funding. Studies looking for evidence of other factors causing climate change do not. That's the way it is in academia.
And, the studies in support of homosexuals being "born that way" or those in support of human-caused climate change are publicized widely. However, when you ask for the actual data supporting their conclusions, you cannot find it. It's missing, or it's been destroyed. Other times, it's just been fudged.
I cannot tell you how many studies I've read supporting whatever the latest fad was in education. When I asked for the actual data, it was absent. I was always referred to "other studies" or "surveys of the literature," none of which contained empirical data.
Tom, could you please cite some evidence about government funding being refused in the studies you mention?
Of course studies showing global warming is almost certainly man made is widely publicized - just as studies showing the hazards of tobacco finally were...because almost all scientiests were in concencus. And are you kidding about the actual data supporting their conclusions are missing? It is very easy to find, but you will not find it if you restrict yourself to Fox News or your favorite web-sites. Here is one link that leads to lots of data.
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
Here is another that debunks some of your suspicions about homosexuality.
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/10-myths
It is stunning to see the lack of critical thinking reacting this issue of gay marriage etc. ever ask why the media pushes this bs? Why this issue is all over tv and print media, internet too? This "issue" is running cover for the fake war on terror and not only our war crimes ( drones etc) but the fake killing of bin laden, the boston bombing and sandy hook. Oh and that little thing called 9/11!
All of these events were hoaxes, faked or on the case of 9/11 based on outright lies. E.g. It is a fact bin laden wasnt wanted for 9/11.
So we are told that gay marriage is some big issue! It ain't folks. The percentage of gay people is minuscule in this country. And by the way, I could not care less if one is gay or not. Don't care it ain't my business. Wanna get married? Go ahead. But something is seriously wrong when we go from tolerance to outright promotion of gay issues. We don't have the luxury of arguing about it when we are engaged in an endless bullshit war on terror, our president is picked by corporations and foreign agents, and our infrastructure crumbles. Among the numerous other issues in America.... But gay marriage? This is what fires you all up? Seriously? Just proves that the two party paradigm has ruined critical thinking...stop listening to corporate media--- CNN, fox, etc are not the press corps this country needs and had at one time. They are propaganda agents period!! And.... Ever look into who is pushing this agenda?
Wake up folks! The truth ain't pretty
Hey dipstick do you have any clue as to what that NAMBLA cartoon is about? Huh? Are you promoting NAMBLA or do you not research what you post?
Wow...
Even though you called me a dipstick, I'll explain because I'm such a nice guy.
The ACLU defends all things "gay." Fifteen years ago it defended NAMBLA when it was accused of inciting the two homosexuals who raped and murdered little Jeffrey Curley and dumped his body in southern Maine. The story is here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20000831/aponline171914_000.htm
It also sued the two Catholic B&B owners in Vermont I mentioned above who refused to let two lesbians get "married" in their facility.
I looked on Google Images for an appropriate image, and there was the one you saw posted above. I thought it very appropriate to shine light on what the ACLU does -- who it defends and who it persecutes.
Oh, and the caption NOTACLU is something I saw once on a license plate in Bridgton.
The ACLU doesn't have a clue.
Here's a post from Peter that came to me as an email like the rest, but for some reason did not appear in this forum:
Peter has left a new comment on your post "Better Get Your Mind Right":
Tom, it is obvious you have not had a real heart to heart conversation with gays that struggle with the fact of who they are. Many will tell you they wish they were not gay. I personally had a relative who killed himself over the guilt (he was born into a very religious family and told from a young age that homosexuality was a sin) and over his "messed-up" life. He was married with two young children, so please, Tom, do not take the fact that some teens who say they are gay and end up marrying the opposite proves that sexuality is a choice. I do believe that some people are born bi-sexual as well, which could also explain that matter. I believe that for anybody whom homosexuality is a real choice must be bi-sexual. Just think of the physical aspects of the matter. I don't believe that anybody can choose to be physically aroused any more than they can choose to have their mouth water while looking at food they desire. Personally, there is absolutely NO way I could ever get aroused by looking at a nude male, just as I could never have my mouth water by looking at a plate of tripe. Can YOU imagine getting turned on by naked men? Could it possibly be a choice for you?
I think you being a bit too cynical claiming that gays are just lying to get more rights. Scientific proof? Perhaps not yet, but is their scientific proof that God exists? No, so why do you believe? And why use science as part of your argument when you disregard science in other matters such as global warming?
I don't want this to turn into mean-spirited attacks on each other, but rather a real conversation where we consider the others side and answer their questions. I would be glad to answer any questions you have for me if you answer mine.
Cheers.
Peter,
I posted two of the above in answer to your post I just put up. Also, I read the link from the Southern Poverty Law Center claiming to debunk 10 myths about homosexuality.
Again, they were surveys of the research without actual data. There were links to other studies, some of which I went to, but again: no actual data. Logical fallacies abound especially: ad hominem, appeal to authority, and bandwagon fallacy.
I remain unpersuaded, but open to actual, empirical data.
Peter makes a good point about believing in God without proof yet dismissing innate homosexuality because there’s no incontrovertible proof. You believe in a virgin birth, a man walked on water, healed the blind and lame with his touch, multiplied the loaves and fishes, rose from the dead and, I’m assuming, every other fantastic Biblical anecdote that occurred thousands of years ago, yet you refuse to accept the possibility that homosexuality is not a choice.
".. bandwagon fallacy"
Is that the "Well everyone KNOWS...." defense, the "9 out of 10 in the sample surveyed say...." defense, or simply the original "The Emperor's New Clothes" logical fallacy?
Is there any "official data" on
"...after peer review, ?% of the following Humanities PhD "social" scientists, and ?% of PhD "Political" Scientists, papers, plagiarizing other unconfirmed "Gub'mint" payroll scientists, citing Anthropomorphic Global Warming PROOF, as well as Natal Gay "gene"/DNA PROOF", have been redacted? (without "academic" consequence apparently)
For some reason, I never see that
on (ie)MSNBC, AOL, NYT, Twitter, or The Daily Sun!
CaptDMO
Oppps....forgot.
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/207227/
NOT one of "The usual suspects" in Teleprompter, Jurno-list, scripted propaganda "reporting"!
I don't know why my posts keep showing up when I first post them and then not being there when I come back to this site.
Anyway, Tom, perhaps I missed it but could you please tell me where I can find the link or the evidence you gave showing that studies "not looking for" human caused global warming are not funded while the other studies are?
Also, the NASA site has TONS of data about global warming.
My other question was wondering why Tom, and others, are so quick to dismiss the majority of scientists and yet so quick to latch onto any little study or claim to the contrary. Do these relatively few other studies really contain a lot more evidence and data? Not that I've noticed.
CaptDMO, that study you had a link to was a study about how easily people's minds are changed. Donald P. Green does other studies about voting habits. Perhaps he is anti-gay (or anti-choice, if you will), who knows. What was your point in posting that link?
I cannot believe this is the issue that fires you all up! 9/11, endless war on terror based on lies, faked terror attacks, and a phony school shooting have steered this country for near 15 years now. Yet despite the proof you'd all rather cry conspiracy theory and argue over gay marriage!
( and I don't care if one is gay or not. At all. But something is fishy about a society that pushes and promotes homosexuality.... Especially when the population is minuscule...Hmmm golly gee maybe time
to employ critical thinking)
Played like fiddles.....
And the aclu is doing their job. As sick and twisted as it is. Maybe look at who runs the ACLU, the media and movies and connect some dots...
I think that people who say they don't believe in global warming fall into two camps. One, people who make a profit from big oil and are fighting in the interest of these large corporations, and two, people who have been duped by Fox News and other anti-liberal entities. Look how long tobacco was able to pull the same crap. Fool the public as long as you can in order to milk the profits.
Anonymous, Im an idiot ?
Did you read my post? Because as I said I have no problem with homosexuality. I do have a problem with the blatant promotion of homosexuality and this transgender issue. There is a difference. Have you not noticed this in the media? Seriously? So no, it isn't an issue of equality. At all.
You seem to be a simpleton who can only think within the confines of the dualistic paradigm---liberal or conservative. Thankfully the world works a bit differently... Take some responsibility for the information you digest
Congratulations Ireland!!!!!!
Conspiracy believers are the ultimate motivated skeptics. Their curse is that they apply this selective scrutiny not to the left or right, but to the mainstream. They tell themselves that they’re the ones who see the lies, and the rest of us are sheep. But believing that everybody’s lying is just another kind of gullibility.
Conspiracy? What are you talking about? I get that the latest fad in denial is to cry "conspiracy theory" because reality is indeed scary. And.... Gullibility? Haha! Seriously? This from someone who blindly accepts that the corporate media juggernaut tells it like it is!! Wow! Cognitive dissonance much? Merely look at the joke that is the presidential election: Clinton and bush!!! Haha.. Yup we sure are free to choose our leaders! Haha..
And the left and the right is a contrived system. There is no difference between them in reality. Look at Obama. Drone murdering civilians, the least transparent admin in history after promises if the opposite, more endless war and domestic surveillance, Obama makes bush look like a Girl Scout yet the " left" still makes excuses tangent than demand change and truth. The right is equally as pathetic. It's a system designed to make you feel like you get a say. You don't. Again look at current candidates!
Bin laden was never wanted for 9/11. That's a fact. And I'm gullible?
Cave dwelling terrorists pulled of 9/11? Uhm... How exactly? And I'm the gullible one? Sandy hook shooting--- there is NO evidence and the absurdities and anomaly abound. And I'm gullible?
Wow!! Thanks for the laugh anonymous! Get back to your tv now!
I don't have cable, anon, so stop throwing accusations around. I also agree with a lot of what you say, like the two party system being a sick joke. You lose me though with the idea that dead children are not enough evidence for you. I have an old college friend who lost a niece in the shooting, so just give up your obnoxious, sick, gullible, hurtful, delusional crap.
*sigh*
IMHO, provided it would bear no "extra work/expense" for our host, time for "anonymous entries will NOT be accepted"?
SOME sort of ONE nom de byte per
unique "source"?
Sock puppets and vandals MAY reward the "Hit counter", but do little for decorum at a grown-up table.
Or Not, of course....
CaptDMO
Good suggestion Captain. I've been considering it and I may do it soon. I have to dive back into the Google workings of this blog and that, to this cyber-ignorant baby boomer, is a daunting task.
Perhaps next month.
And, it's easy for the same person to post under different pseudonyms as I suspect of the one who keeps suggesting Bin Laden didn't do 9-11 and there's no difference between the parties, etc.
But yeah, it often gets tiresome to wade through it all.
Anonymous- the truth about what happened at sandy hook is not what was reported. Not even close. Rather than list the numerous inconsistencies and discrepancies and the bizarre anomalies I urge you to do your own research. I have spent hours on this. Many many hours. Heck just watch Wayne carvers or Robbie Parker's press conferences for starters. Gene Rosen too. In the end the official narrative doesn't hold water. Sorry. ( and Lenny pozner, one of the allegedly murdered kids, somehow managed to also have been killed by the Taliban in Pakistan, again do your own research) we live in a very twisted evil world. You didn't know?
And tom and private dmo--- censorship! Great idea! That way you can avoid any confrontation! Brilliant! But you already lack the ability to confront the facts when presented. Or any challenges that aren't supported by corporate media. You guys really that afraid of truth and freedom? And tom, the bin laden 9/11 issue isn't a "suggestion" it is a fact.
"The reason why 9/11 isn't mentioned on usama bin laden's most wanted poster is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin laden to 9/11." Rex tomb chief of investigative publicity for 9/11.
And you watch/listen to dick Cheney say the same on YouTube. He says as much during an interview. Quote " we've never made the case or argued the case that somehow Osama bin laden was directly involved in 9/11, that evidence has never been forthcoming..."
Said to tony snow on his radio show. YouTube it.
So no, it isn't some tin foil hat fantasy, it's reality.
Sorry for speaking the truth! Better start censoring!
Hers an assignment: who was arrested on 9/11?
"And tom and private dmo--- censorship! Great idea! "
Of course, neither suggested that.
On the contrary, HIGHLIGHTING, contrarian opinion, and promoting
"intellectual ownership".
CaptDMO
Haha, oh no, of course not pvt. dmo--- why would anyone get that idea?! Ha!! You expect to be taken seriously? Please.... Anything to keep from hearing those pesky facts, huh? But that "intellectual ownership" quote was at least funny! Haha thanks!! Oh the irony!! Hahaha!!!
Maybe you should focus on the content rather than who is authoring posts. Maybe you should engage content rather than parade endless excuses and ad hominem bs wrapped in sophomoric drivel.
When can we expect the retraction tom? Regarding your Osama bin laden/9/11 lie? I don't expect anything less than silence--- par for the course...
Post a Comment