You cannot ignore history but by bringing that up you make the point I am making. Christianity spread by violence but so did Islam the difference now? One will still kill you for being an infidel. I wish religion didn't exist but wishing is a fools game. The reality is, it does exist and they all teach bigotry. Bigotry I can live with my head I cannot not live without.
You simply must be kidding me. The violence this one nation's military has meted out this past twelve years handily exceeds all Muslim-sponsored violence worldwide in that time.
Well while your trying to pick a fight thanks for the statistics.
Please don't mistake a rebuttal for "picking a fight". Unless you want to make the claim that dissent is a form of hostility. That would be a startling redaction of the American way. cn
Not only are you not a bible scholar but you obviously don't know shit about the bible. The bible is full of stonings, killings, rape in the name of "God". Do some reading in the old testament and see what a great religion it is...
Old testament is all kinds of fucked up. Suppose to stone your wife for almost anything. She suppose to get knocked up by your brother if you die without giving a son. The old laws don't matter to those who accept Jesus Christ as their savior, hence the new testament. So technically speaking Jewish people should be doing all of that crazy shit because they don't accept him as the son of God and their savior.
OOO first post and it's all about me, I feel special. So tell me why do they teach not to follow the old testament? Didn't it go from an "eye for an eye" to turn the other cheek and what about that "thou shall not kill" thing? I am not scholar as admitted but I remember that, I also never said Christianity was a great religion, in fact I believe I said I am atheist and called all religions foolish.
It does seem absurd, and beneath contempt to boot to create a false account at a racist web site, but the link you provided shows a join date of August, 2012. I don't recall when the claims by Buck, and others started but it does seem like it was a few months ago, i.e. before August.
And this is the thread where it started:OK you can judge for yourself, in this post here by our Red1966 he claims to have seen and known of voter fruad commited by democrats , , , and im not disputing it at all, but i think the connection between the posts
OHIO
Originally Posted by canndo
Anyone who cannot afford or cannot obtain supporting documents will not be able to vote. Anyone who cannot get to issuing centers will not be able to vote - like maybe folks in retirement or nursing homes or those who don't have autos - typicaly if one does have a car then they already have sufficient ID. As I said, not everyone is in the same situation, but they are still citizens. The SCOTUS decision which makes this argument moot (I don't recall the name) showed that in the state - Ohio I think, examined, 40,000 people would be disenfranchised. Now the equation is pretty simple, subtract the number of illegal voters who would be kept from voting from the number of legal voters ID requirements would keep from voting, if you get a positive number then you are pretty much fucking democracy in the ass. Repubs have little problem with this sort of thing. I find it highly interesting that on the one case - global warming, conservatives demand positive, irrefutable figures before they will act to prevent, but in the other, Voter ID, they need no proof that even a handful of illegal votes have been cast before they are perfectly willing to be "preemtive".
Originally Posted by Red1966
Who can't obtain ID? You can register and vote by mail. Voter fraud is fucking democracy. Dems have little problem with voter fraud, in fact, they are very good at it. I have seen voter fraud committed with my own eyes, so you're not going to convince me it doesn't happen. You're such a hack.
#63 red1966
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 4
[HR][/HR] What makes me so sick is the ruling in Ohio which allows afro-american preachers to bus their congregations to the polls after their Sunday sermon. It's this mixing of religion and politics which the Democrats pretend to oppose until it helps them.
seems it could be just a coincidence, or could be a member playing a mean trick . . . . . . i dont think either of these
and when Cheese brought this up recently Red said that cheese accsue dhim in june/july if i have to find the post i quoted it so no after teh fact editing will change it
turns out cheese said it in September not june/july as red claimed .. and reason why this matters is that red claimed CHeese accused him months before the join date of that profile on stormfront which it seems may be a lie . . i cant be certain cheese didnt accuse him of it earlier but as far as i have seen so far the earliest date was in September not june/july as red claimed before the red character at stormfront joined that site
If you are so confident, then cite it and we can start the debate!
All I can say is: Buck, if you, or anybody else, created a false account for Red on stormfront, that is a VERY fucked up thing to do.
This was the post to which I responded. You simply said "violence". For you to come after the fact and say "but I meant religious violence only!" won't wash.
Once again, you move your goalposts when it suits you, even as you frantically try to nail your interlocutors down on their use of words. The 5th-grader thing was indeed lame as all ass, and you constructed that one on your own, unassisted. cn
So, who was the first to make the claim that Red was an SFer, Buck or Chesus?
People don't tend to ask for proof if it's already something they believe. If they believe it, the evidence has already convinced them.
I get choice? Oh, happy me! Me take woman! Goat kicks and camel too tall.
Since chesus and UncleShitsHisPants made the claim a month before the join date on the Stormfront account, that is the logical conclusion. Harrekin wants to believe otherwise, so he's happy to ignore logic and continue to engage in slander. They pretend to have such high morals, but their behavior belies their pretense. Imagine if their type were to have a free hand running the country.
Stop being such a little bitch, I don't honestly care what you believe or don't as long as you don't act on it. Freedom of expression, even if it's wrong.
Did you ever answer my math problem, H? You've had several days to sober up since I posted the problem.
Below find the earliest post I found before I tired of looking. Dated 8-14-2012 at 05:06PM in a thread titled " The compassionate left" (https://www.rollitup.org/politics/553280-compassionate-left-15.html#post7863244). I believe there were a couple of earlier posts, also. Note in that post, it is stated the Stormfront post was made a month earlier. So that would mean I supposedly joined in July. Note also Red1966 has a capital "R". Later posts, after Chesus joined Stormfront, he quotes it as red1966, no capital "R". Go to the original post by Chesus and click on the links. They only point to RIU. Now, you can be a man and apologize, or you can can continue making a fool of yourself.OK you can judge for yourself, in this post here by our Red1966 he claims to have seen and known of voter fruad commited by democrats , , , and im not disputing it at all, but i think the connection between the posts
OHIO
Originally Posted by canndo
Anyone who cannot afford or cannot obtain supporting documents will not be able to vote. Anyone who cannot get to issuing centers will not be able to vote - like maybe folks in retirement or nursing homes or those who don't have autos - typicaly if one does have a car then they already have sufficient ID. As I said, not everyone is in the same situation, but they are still citizens. The SCOTUS decision which makes this argument moot (I don't recall the name) showed that in the state - Ohio I think, examined, 40,000 people would be disenfranchised. Now the equation is pretty simple, subtract the number of illegal voters who would be kept from voting from the number of legal voters ID requirements would keep from voting, if you get a positive number then you are pretty much fucking democracy in the ass. Repubs have little problem with this sort of thing. I find it highly interesting that on the one case - global warming, conservatives demand positive, irrefutable figures before they will act to prevent, but in the other, Voter ID, they need no proof that even a handful of illegal votes have been cast before they are perfectly willing to be "preemtive".
Originally Posted by Red1966
Who can't obtain ID? You can register and vote by mail. Voter fraud is fucking democracy. Dems have little problem with voter fraud, in fact, they are very good at it. I have seen voter fraud committed with my own eyes, so you're not going to convince me it doesn't happen. You're such a hack.
#63 red1966
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 4
[HR][/HR] What makes me so sick is the ruling in Ohio which allows afro-american preachers to bus their congregations to the polls after their Sunday sermon. It's this mixing of religion and politics which the Democrats pretend to oppose until it helps them.
seems it could be just a coincidence, or could be a member playing a mean trick . . . . . . i dont think either of these
and when Cheese brought this up recently Red said that cheese accsue dhim in june/july if i have to find the post i quoted it so no after teh fact editing will change it
turns out cheese said it in September not june/july as red claimed .. and reason why this matters is that red claimed CHeese accused him months before the join date of that profile on stormfront which it seems may be a lie . . i cant be certain cheese didnt accuse him of it earlier but as far as i have seen so far the earliest date was in September not june/july as red claimed before the red character at stormfront joined that site
