You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Pope pisses off Muslims
- Thread starter Pekelo
- Start date
let's see now........if u wish to be enlightened about muhammed go to your search engine......place ur little cursor on the blank space......type in muhammed wives........go thru the massive files and see the 6 yr old.......see t he one who was very rich who was his "sugar mama".....while he preached poverty for others....this pervert is the only source and basis for islamic religion......all came from and thru him.....practiced by very ignorant masses like catholicism...........he had all the women he wanted while limiting others to 4 at a time.......while saying they were for sex and abusive treatment........the original pedophile and when he wanted anything to go his way he simply he got a revelation from God......as far as Catholicism being the Christian leader is ridiculously off base......they worship the Pope and Mary Jesus is a distant third.......Note the name Christian.....Jesus is the head of the christian church not the Pope..Mary is hardly mentioned in the new testament........and they pray to her???? give me a break....the bible is specific about prayer.........read the New Testament bible and you might have to say "wow". The Pope does not speak for Christians as he is placing himself as head of the Church of Jesus....which is sacrilege.........
Just to clarify RM. My point to LoZZZer and to EVERYONE who looks upon the U.S. invasion of Iraq as a "criminal" act. IMO the U.S. being in Iraq is not at all different than the U.S. declaring war on Germany in 1941. Hitler was the elected chancellor of a sovereign republic. Germany never attempted an overtly aggressive act toward the U.S. nor to our territories. In other words Hitler was just a guy doing bad things to "his people" much like what Saddam was doing to the Kurds and dissenting Shiites. The question I posed to LoZZEr was "is the degree of tyranny the arbiter of entering an unprovoked war?
There's interesting parallels between the two men. While Saddam feared a Shia majority would ultimately lead secular Iraq down the road to an Iranian style theocracy, Hitler felt that a small number of Jews (Germany was 1% Jewish) would endorse a Soviet inspired proletariat revolution in Germany. History of course ignores the viable communist threat perpetuated during the German economic crisis of the 1920's into the early 30's.
The treaty at Versailles caused Germany horrific hardship. The allies forced a particularly unjust settlement upon Germany especially considering that they did not start WWl but were merely responding to obligations contained by treaty. Nazism was a response to nationalistic Germans who wanted their land back.
IMO, Roosevelt was a war monger who sought out conflict with the two nations who were on the front line against communism. Germany and Japan. 500,000 American men (when we only had a population of 150m) lost their lives fighting a war that had no American interest. People will say, "well what if Hitler hadn't been stopped?" Well I'd answer to those, "do you think FDR's blowjob to Stalin at Yalta created a BETTER life for those in partitioned East Germany, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Lithuania, etal than the alternative of Nazism. All we did was beat Hitler so that we could prop up the U.S.S.R and spend trillions the next 45 years fighting communist aggression via the Cold war. We also lost another 100,000 boys in Korea and Viet Nam against communist forces funded by Red China. It was however the FDR administration who went apeshit over every "act" of "aggression" by Japan in China.
In the defeat of Germany the Brit's and U.S. bombed Dresden causing the deaths of possibly 200,000 people. Dresden was a nice town and held ZERO strategic importance. It's bombing was a war crime.
So yes, RM, I think FDR was not only as bad as Hitler I think he was worse. Hitler had an axe to grind. He was trying to do what he thought was best for Germany, as misguided as a genocidal war may be. FDR's motivation? Like Bush he wanted to be BMOC. He was a mamma's boy in a wheel chair who hadn't fucked his wife in 15 years. He was a commie admirer who handed Eastern Europe over to Russia. He fought a war not to help the world but to build an arms making industrial giant impervious to the nagging depression that he was unable to end. Little known fact but U.S. unemployment was as great in 1939 as it was at the "height" of the depression. As everyone should know, about 70% of American's were OPPOSED to the U.S. fighting on the side of Britain prior to Pearl Harbor. By egging the Jap's on, FDR got permission to fight the war he had been seeking for so long.
There's interesting parallels between the two men. While Saddam feared a Shia majority would ultimately lead secular Iraq down the road to an Iranian style theocracy, Hitler felt that a small number of Jews (Germany was 1% Jewish) would endorse a Soviet inspired proletariat revolution in Germany. History of course ignores the viable communist threat perpetuated during the German economic crisis of the 1920's into the early 30's.
The treaty at Versailles caused Germany horrific hardship. The allies forced a particularly unjust settlement upon Germany especially considering that they did not start WWl but were merely responding to obligations contained by treaty. Nazism was a response to nationalistic Germans who wanted their land back.
IMO, Roosevelt was a war monger who sought out conflict with the two nations who were on the front line against communism. Germany and Japan. 500,000 American men (when we only had a population of 150m) lost their lives fighting a war that had no American interest. People will say, "well what if Hitler hadn't been stopped?" Well I'd answer to those, "do you think FDR's blowjob to Stalin at Yalta created a BETTER life for those in partitioned East Germany, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Lithuania, etal than the alternative of Nazism. All we did was beat Hitler so that we could prop up the U.S.S.R and spend trillions the next 45 years fighting communist aggression via the Cold war. We also lost another 100,000 boys in Korea and Viet Nam against communist forces funded by Red China. It was however the FDR administration who went apeshit over every "act" of "aggression" by Japan in China.
In the defeat of Germany the Brit's and U.S. bombed Dresden causing the deaths of possibly 200,000 people. Dresden was a nice town and held ZERO strategic importance. It's bombing was a war crime.
So yes, RM, I think FDR was not only as bad as Hitler I think he was worse. Hitler had an axe to grind. He was trying to do what he thought was best for Germany, as misguided as a genocidal war may be. FDR's motivation? Like Bush he wanted to be BMOC. He was a mamma's boy in a wheel chair who hadn't fucked his wife in 15 years. He was a commie admirer who handed Eastern Europe over to Russia. He fought a war not to help the world but to build an arms making industrial giant impervious to the nagging depression that he was unable to end. Little known fact but U.S. unemployment was as great in 1939 as it was at the "height" of the depression. As everyone should know, about 70% of American's were OPPOSED to the U.S. fighting on the side of Britain prior to Pearl Harbor. By egging the Jap's on, FDR got permission to fight the war he had been seeking for so long.
Quote from Rearden Metal:
"ZZZzzzzzzz (Sep 14, 2006 1:04:06 PM)
i have to get that on record Pabst
ZZZzzzzzzz (Sep 14, 2006 1:04:16 PM)
you think FDR worse than Hitler
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 1:04:21 PM)
as bad
ZZZzzzzzzz (Sep 14, 2006 1:04:22 PM)
you admire Hitler, hate FDR
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 1:04:22 PM)
yes"
_________
WTF Pabst? Admire Hitler???
Please tell me the troll just made this up.
Say it ain't so, Pabst.
Spin...
True colors, yesterday we saw...
True colors, yesterday we saw...
Quote from Pabst:
Just to clarify RM. My point to LoZZZer and to EVERYONE who looks upon the U.S. invasion of Iraq as a "criminal" act. IMO the U.S. being in Iraq is not at all different than the U.S. declaring war on Germany in 1941. Hitler was the elected chancellor of a sovereign republic. Germany never attempted an overtly aggressive act toward the U.S. nor to our territories. In other words Hitler was just a guy doing bad things to "his people" much like what Saddam was doing to the Kurds and dissenting Shiites. The question I posed to LoZZEr was "is the degree of tyranny the arbiter of entering an unprovoked war?
There's interesting parallels between the two men. While Saddam feared a Shia majority would ultimately lead secular Iraq down the road to an Iranian style theocracy, Hitler felt that a small number of Jews (Germany was 1% Jewish) would endorse a Soviet inspired proletariat revolution in Germany. History of course ignores the viable communist threat perpetuated during the German economic crisis of the 1920's into the early 30's.
The treaty at Versailles caused Germany horrific hardship. The allies forced a particularly unjust settlement upon Germany especially considering that they did not start WWl but were merely responding to obligations contained by treaty. Nazism was a response to nationalistic Germans who wanted their land back.
IMO, Roosevelt was a war monger who sought out conflict with the two nations who were on the front line against communism. Germany and Japan. 500,000 American men (when we only had a population of 150m) lost their lives fighting a war that had no American interest. People will say, "well what if Hitler hadn't been stopped?" Well I'd answer to those, "do you think FDR's blowjob to Stalin at Yalta created a BETTER life for those in partitioned East Germany, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Lithuania, etal than the alternative of Nazism. All we did was beat Hitler so that we could prop up the U.S.S.R and spend trillions the next 45 years fighting communist aggression via the Cold war. We also lost another 100,000 boys in Korea and Viet Nam against communist forces funded by Red China. It was however the FDR administration who went apeshit over every "act" of "aggression" by Japan in China.
In the defeat of Germany the Brit's and U.S. bombed Dresden causing the deaths of possibly 200,000 people. Dresden was a nice town and held ZERO strategic importance. It's bombing was a war crime.
So yes, RM, I think FDR was not only as bad as Hitler I think he was worse. Hitler had an axe to grind. He was trying to do what he thought was best for Germany, as misguided as a genocidal war may be. FDR's motivation? Like Bush he wanted to be BMOC. He was a mamma's boy in a wheel chair who hadn't fucked his wife in 15 years. He was a commie admirer who handed Eastern Europe over to Russia. He fought a war not to help the world but to build an arms making industrial giant impervious to the nagging depression that he was unable to end. Little known fact but U.S. unemployment was as great in 1939 as it was at the "height" of the depression. As everyone should know, about 70% of American's were OPPOSED to the U.S. fighting on the side of Britain prior to Pearl Harbor. By egging the Jap's on, FDR got permission to fight the war he had been seeking for so long.
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:
ZZZzzzzzzz (Sep 14, 2006 1:04:06 PM)
i have to get that on record Pabst
ZZZzzzzzzz (Sep 14, 2006 1:04:16 PM)
you think FDR worse than Hitler
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 1:04:21 PM)
as bad
ZZZzzzzzzz (Sep 14, 2006 1:04:22 PM)
you admire Hitler, hate FDR
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 1:04:22 PM)
yes
Look at the TIME log, asshole! Do you think I was "simultaneously" answering your question at 1:04:22 about "admire" with a yes. I was still completing my answer to the "as bad" question you lying, disingenuous piece of dothead manure. I hardly "admire" Adolph Hitler. Although compared to you Hitler is a saint.........
Why don't you repost the ENTIRE exchange, dothead?
I posted a link to it, and people who read it can decide for themselves.
Those who were there in the chat room, they also made comments about your admiration of Hitler...
I especially like this quote from you, displaying your full admiration for Hitler:
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 12:50:28 PM)
compared to FDR
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 12:50:35 PM)
Hitler was Socrates
and
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 1:03:43 PM)
u showed your stripes
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 1:03:51 PM)
if u think Hitler wrong
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 1:03:53 PM)
BUT
ZZZzzzzzzz (Sep 14, 2006 1:03:53 PM)
stripes?
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 1:03:57 PM)
FDR right
ZZZzzzzzzz (Sep 14, 2006 1:04:01 PM)
oy vey
Those who were there in the chat room, they also made comments about your admiration of Hitler...
I especially like this quote from you, displaying your full admiration for Hitler:
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 12:50:28 PM)
compared to FDR
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 12:50:35 PM)
Hitler was Socrates
and
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 1:03:43 PM)
u showed your stripes
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 1:03:51 PM)
if u think Hitler wrong
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 1:03:53 PM)
BUT
ZZZzzzzzzz (Sep 14, 2006 1:03:53 PM)
stripes?
Pabst (Sep 14, 2006 1:03:57 PM)
FDR right
ZZZzzzzzzz (Sep 14, 2006 1:04:01 PM)
oy vey
Quote from Pabst:
Look at the TIME log, asshole! Do you think I was "simultaneously" answering your question at 1:04:22 about "admire" with a yes. I was still completing my answer to the "as bad" question you lying, disingenuous piece of dothead manure. I hardly "admire" Adolph Hitler. Although compared to you Hitler is a saint.........
Why don't you repost the ENTIRE exchange, dothead?
I'm hardly the first person to describe Hitler's decade long rise rise from penniless coffee house agitator to German chancellor as a product of genius. FDR was a liar on par with LBJ.
In the 1940 presidential election campaign Roosevelt promised to keep America out of the war. He stated, "I have said this before, but I shall say it again and again and again; your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars." Nevertheless, FDR wanted to support Britain and believed the United States should serve as a "great arsenal of democracy." Churchill pleaded "Give us the tools and we'll finish the job." In January 1941, following up on his campaign pledge and the prime minister's appeal for arms, Roosevelt proposed to Congress a new military aid bill.
I suggest those inclined read this lengthy article about the political impetous toward World War.
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p135_Weber.html
In the 1940 presidential election campaign Roosevelt promised to keep America out of the war. He stated, "I have said this before, but I shall say it again and again and again; your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars." Nevertheless, FDR wanted to support Britain and believed the United States should serve as a "great arsenal of democracy." Churchill pleaded "Give us the tools and we'll finish the job." In January 1941, following up on his campaign pledge and the prime minister's appeal for arms, Roosevelt proposed to Congress a new military aid bill.
I suggest those inclined read this lengthy article about the political impetous toward World War.
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p135_Weber.html
So you view Hitler as a genius.
Yep, admiration....
Yep, admiration....
Quote from Pabst:
I'm hardly the first person to describe Hitler's decade long rise rise from penniless coffee house agitator to German chancellor as a product of genius. FDR was a liar on par with LBJ.
In the 1940 presidential election campaign Roosevelt promised to keep America out of the war. He stated, "I have said this before, but I shall say it again and again and again; your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars." Nevertheless, FDR wanted to support Britain and believed the United States should serve as a "great arsenal of democracy." Churchill pleaded "Give us the tools and we'll finish the job." In January 1941, following up on his campaign pledge and the prime minister's appeal for arms, Roosevelt proposed to Congress a new military aid bill.
I suggest those inclined read this lengthy article about the political impetous toward World War.
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p135_Weber.html