Helen Thomas: Jews Control White House, Congress

[Don]

The best evidence that she is right is the fact that within 72 hours after making these statements she was professionally destroyed.

A dumb goy like Mel Gibson who gets drunk and says unflattering things about God's chosen people is professionally destroyed. (What do Jews say about us when they get drunk?) By comparison, a nice Jewish boy like Roman Polanski drugs and rapes a 13 year old shiksa (i.e. Jewish slur for a gentile woman) and he is the toast of the town, i.e. Hebrewwood.

[Ayatollahgondola]

Originally Posted by Don

The best evidence that she is right is the fact that within 72 hours after making these statements she was professionally destroyed.

A dumb goy like Mel Gibson who gets drunk and says unflattering things about God's chosen people is professionally destroyed. (What do Jews say about us when they get drunk?) By comparison, a nice Jewish boy like Roman Polanski drugs and rapes a 13 year old shiksa (i.e. Jewish slur for a gentile woman) and he is the toast of the town, i.e. Hebrewwood.

As I remember: If Polanski was the toast of town, it was not in a US town. He was a fugitive for quite some time. Most people are very unhappy in exile, and quite restricted by passport. Changing planes in a country with a treaty, and you could be on your way back to trial. And do child molesters really give a damn about the religious persuasion of their victims? Maybe some do, but my exposure to them indicates that it isn't a consideration at all.
I think you have circumstantial evidence of your theories on jewish control, but you'd never get a conviction in a court of law, let alone the court of public opinion. I'd challenge you to do the hard work first. Get the videos of secret meetings, and show us copies of documents drawn up with ring imprints on bees wax seals. I'm not going to tell you that you're wrong; I really don't know. But I don't fall for innuendo unless you're a member of my secret society.

(What do Jews say about us when they get drunk?)

Who wants to hang out with drunks?

[ilbegone]

Originally Posted by Don

The best evidence that she is right is the fact that within 72 hours after making these statements she was professionally destroyed.

A dumb goy like Mel Gibson who gets drunk and says unflattering things about God's chosen people is professionally destroyed. (What do Jews say about us when they get drunk?) By comparison, a nice Jewish boy like Roman Polanski drugs and rapes a 13 year old shiksa (i.e. Jewish slur for a gentile woman) and he is the toast of the town, i.e. Hebrewwood.

What you say doesn't mean shit either without some names; it's just a broad, suggestive generalization which says nothing definative.

I'll ask you the same to either put up or shut up:

By name, just exactly who controls the media and lobbies Congress for Israel's interest?

[LAPhil]

Originally Posted by ilbegone

I'll ask you the same to either put up or shut up:

I can pretty much guarantee you he won't. He'd rather just keep taking the cheap unsubstantiated shots. You can't reason with someone who's irrational.

[Jeanfromfillmore]

If this tread continues to be abrasive, it doesn't matter who is being abrasive, I'll close it.

I know the written word is sometimes misunderstood because the emphases and what one is trying to stress isn't always relayed to the reader, and as a result people get angry.

[LAPhil]

Originally Posted by Jeanfromfillmore

If this tread continues to be abrasive, it doesn't matter who is being abrasive, I'll close it.

I know the written word is sometimes misunderstood because the emphases and what one is trying to stress isn't always relayed to the reader, and as a result people get angry.

What are you waiting for? It can't get too much worse than it is now.

[Ayatollahgondola]

Originally Posted by LAPhil

What are you waiting for? It can't get too much worse than it is now.

Ah c'mon; We can argue without fear here, can't we? If we have to silence someone to win, what have we won?

[LAPhil]

Originally Posted by Ayatollahgondola

Ah c'mon; We can argue without fear here, can't we? If we have to silence someone to win, what have we won?

I appreciate that attitude, AG. I just didn't care one way or the other, since the thread didn't seem to be going anywhere but downhill. Right now I'm just bewildered by the lack of activity on this board as a whole. When you look at the last thread on any topic it was hardly ever posted that day, which tells you how few posts there are. I guess this is off-topic, but that's partly what I'm reacting to here, my frustration at the failure of this organization to regenerate itself to what it once was. And I don't blame you for that, or Jean, or anyone else. I'm just at a loss to understand what's happened here.

[ilbegone]

Originally Posted by Jeanfromfillmore

If this tread continues to be abrasive, it doesn't matter who is being abrasive, I'll close it.

I know the written word is sometimes misunderstood because the emphases and what one is trying to stress isn't always relayed to the reader, and as a result people get angry.

Jean,

I'm not sure what you were trying to convey in the original cut and paste post. However, a lot of what has been presented after the originating post in this thread is very clear as to what the poster intended to relay.

I personally view this thread as it has evolved to be very distasteful and counter productive towards accomplishing the goal of true immigration reform. I truly wish it had never come up.

There is an extremely large difference between identifying culpable perpetrators and and the slanderous spray painting of innocent bystanders.

How much has the anti illegal immigration cause been successfully slandered in like fashion, with declarations by persons "on our side" such as posted in this thread to lend believability towards the charges?

It's not about being politically correct so much as as being scrupulously fair, honest and accurate about what is said and done.

Otherwise, there is no credibility and we lose.