hillery can't stop - Page 24

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by Noitsyou on 11 August 2016 - 16:08

The irony of someone who relies on Breitbart for the facts screaming about honesty and justice. Justice is the fact that Andrew Breitbart, the founder, died a young man. He was a real scumbag who ruined innocent peoples' lives in order to fatten his wallet.

Prager

by Prager on 11 August 2016 - 22:08

Ah out of argument thus it follows that liberal will attack the person again or some straw man. This time dead one. Nice going. Same old irrelevant worn out sophistry sh-t .

Noitsyou you are getting boring.


Prager

by Prager on 11 August 2016 - 22:08

   Andrew Breitbart  was according to you a scumbag probably  because he was conservative and in comparison to you, actually was a publisher who left behind something important. 

 You mentioning a fact that he died young has no bearing on anything except that it opens a little a window into your mind since you seem to  mention it from time to time about people whom you hate, probably because their early demise  makes you happy. 


by Noitsyou on 11 August 2016 - 22:08

You try way too hard Prager. You don't know what a Straw Man argument really is. I was criticizing the honesty and journalistic integrity of Breitbart. It's a fact that Breitbart used an edited tape which resulted in a USDA employee getting fired. Breitbart settled out of court. The people Breitbart hired to "get" ACORN were paid less money than they ended up losing in the subsequent lawsuit brought by the employee for whom they again used edited footage to make look bad.

You are not a wealthy man, never have been and never will be. How would you feel about someone, much wealthier than you, who caused you to lose the way you made a living with a lie? I would call someone like that a scumbag.

So you see, it's not a Straw Man argument to point out someone is a liar when that someone is trying to pass themselves off as honest.

by Noitsyou on 11 August 2016 - 23:08

Prager said, "Andrew Breitbart was according to you a scumbag probably because he was conservative and in comparison to you, actually was a publisher who left behind something important.

You mentioning a fact that he died young has no bearing on anything except that it opens a little a window into your mind since you seem to mention it from time to time about people whom you hate, probably because their early demise makes you happy. "

Breitbart left behind a continuing legacy of dishonesty. But I provided FACTS to back up my statement, facts which you can always attempt to challenge. And no, I don't envy him. He could have died after writing the great American novel and it wouldn't change the fact he won't see his kids grow up but I will see mine. Remember what Achilles said to Ulysses about envying the dead.

And the whole thing about me mentioning people I hate who died young is something you made up. It's OK though, everyone knows you are a liar.

Prager

by Prager on 12 August 2016 - 03:08

yeah yeah yeah  ,.....boooooooring. ..... OK  according to you I am racist,  communist, never American but only a  foreigner, and on and on and on and now - liar...  As I said boooooooring.   I wonder what BS are you going to come up with next. 

 


by Noitsyou on 12 August 2016 - 04:08

I would be willing to admit I could be wrong about all of those things except for liar. I mean, you just don't stop with the lies. Not only can everyone see you lie they can also see that when I call you on it you don't refute it. You didn't even refute it in your response. All you did was another of your teenage girl defenses. This time, instead of calling me a hater, you used the whatever defense.


Prager

by Prager on 12 August 2016 - 18:08

I do not refute your acusations  because I do not care what you of all people call me.  


Prager

by Prager on 12 August 2016 - 19:08

Here is a conflict I see. Democrats are supposedly for women rights and gay rights and are couloir intellectual socialist yet they can not pass over their lips words radical Islam and terrorist- Islamists. However they do not realize that if Islamist or true socialists are going to take over they would be the first victims. I mean in Cambodia and China people with gasses or with other symbols of education were summarily put to prison or executed because the reason was- intellectuals wear eye glasses. Some say that that is ridiculous that would never happen here. And I say is it? Well we may not see execution of people wearing eyeglasses but the fact is that Democrats- Socialists- leftists- fascists do not want people to have creative thinking individuals around too much or at all. To them Knowledge is dangerous. They have no use for intelligentsia. They need and thus want herd mentality or in fancy word they want fascism where all are goosestepping to the beat of the same drummer. Dumbing down of students in school curbing or even forbidding of free unorthodox thinking and speech by forcing PC behavior and speech and demanding safe space as we see it these days especially in schools is exactly happening for same reason Pol poy killed people with glasses. It is intentional creation of dumb "yes" saying masses of useful idiots who in unison clap to BS which established leftist government feed them which is the fundamental definition of Fascism. 
I escaped this shit and now here we go again. I see it clearly coming at us while historically inexperienced and naive masses are being led like a dumb cows to a slaughter while smiling like idiots they are.


Prager

by Prager on 12 August 2016 - 19:08

 

From Wikipedia:

During their four years in power, the Khmer Rouge overworked and starved the population, at the same time executing selected groups who they believed were enemies of the state or spies or had the potential to undermine the new state. People who they perceived as intellectuals or even those who had stereotypical signs of learning, such as glasses, would also be killed. People would also be executed for attempting to escape from the communes or for breaching minor rules. If caught, offenders were taken quietly off to a distant forest or field after sunset and killed

 

Professionals and intellectuals – in practice this included almost everyone with an education, people who understood a foreign language and even people who required glasses (which, according to the regime, meant that they spent too much time reading books instead of working). Ironically, Pol Pot himself was an educated man with a taste for French literature and spoke fluent French. Many artists, including musicians, writers, and filmmakers were executed. Some like Ros Serey Sothea, Pan Ron, and Sinn Sisamouth gained posthumous fame for their talents and are still popular with Khmers today.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_Rouge






 


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top