I guess while I'm waiting for Alfred Adask's 4/5 show to be archived, I could go back to the notmygovernment.us/forum and make fun of everyone that posts there.
Let's take a look at
Nothing Happens by Accident. Remember, I'm not going more than a page deep, it's for my own sanity.
Here's a thread about
gold confiscation. LB Bork is just speculating here, though I would love to be the fly on LB's wall when this does happen.
Did any of you catch that
PAC e-letter about how LB Bork saw
Nightjohn and immediately compared his delusions in law and other conspiracy theories (read: running a scam) to being a literate slave who tries to teach other slaves during the Civil War? No? Well, you should. It's a must read.
LB Bork swoons for an unrelated documentary called
Human Resources (go figure), apparently it has an integral part to his
Human Resources page on his flagship website. The way that he discusses it, it seems as if his "organization" birthed it, or had major involvement with the production, but it's not his at all. He's just riding on the documentary's coattails, trying to pad his bullshit with legitimacy. That added Matrix reference is simply
eye rolling.
As far as the documentary goes, I watched a good 30 minutes of it, and then skimmed around. Like I said before, the documentary
is not related to his delusions on the 14th Amendment, it's just barely related to his Human Resources Discussed rant, or how he thinks were all slaves. On a side note:
Noam Chomsky makes an appearance in the documentary - so if your like me and you love Chomsky to death, watch the documentary. It's pretty good documentary, I just not interested in finishing it right now (2hrs long).
Re: Human Resources, the documentary
Reply #5 - Dec 13th, 2010 at 9:07pm
David C wrote on Dec 13th, 2010 at 8:53pm:
Man, that film on psychiatry was infuriating, LB.
For sure... A good piece by the Scientology people, but it about ends there. Watch Tom Cruise, OMG:
I'm noticing weird responses with regards to Scientology. Here, LB Bork made a thread about Scientology's
anti-psychiatry exhibit + doc. Whether or not LB believes in this has yet to be seen, but it's not the first time that he has fallen for dumb things. Of course, forums poster
Jerry has to be a moron and talk about HRC (Obamacare) "like it applies to him" (Surprise, it does! But he doesn't yet know how).
I've been wondering if there is some kind of connection between the two, or that LB Bork admires Scientology because it's more organized in every facet - a 'republic' that has the man power and management to break free of the United States and be its own country (it's hardly a republic in structure, but it's more government than LB's ragtag State Nationals.)
Hey, remember LB's thread about me, and his latest post being a CBN video on 'Multiculturalism' in France? Well, he posted it
here to no response. You know, the more that I read LB's posts, the less doubt I have of LB's racist views. Now, he doesn't post much about race or other ethnicities, but he sure doesn't mind posting racist articles and videos. LB probably does this because he wants to share his shitty views, but he doesn't want the responsibility that comes after sharing them, so he lets
them do the talking for him so he can deflect any claims of racism on his part (Ex: "I'm not racist, I never said anything of the sort. I just posted this article with a
suggestive title, that's all..."). It's obvious that he has a problem with Islam and it's adherents. It's also obvious that he has a thing against Latinos and other 'immigrants.'
Further evidence of racism can be found
here, also
the video he linked. Basically, LB Bork took a
sensationalist Fox News report at face value, and spouted his own racist opinion like a dumbass.
Non-white people that are not even US citizens get 1 vote counted as 6.
Good thing he fell for this lie hook, line, and sinker; it makes great ammunition. So LB, answer this: Why does race matter if they're not citizens? What's wrong with non-white people having six votes if everyone gets to have six votes? Haven't you ever heard of
cumulative voting before?
Southern
Apologism in this thread (not really, just the first link to the
article). Choice complaints:
- Lincoln's suspension of Habeas Corpus and due process (legal during war)
- Emancipation Proclamation not freeing the slaves as he once thought. (but it did in fact free slaves. Wikipedia cites real sources).
- Lincoln made government irreparably big, destroyed states rights (a bloo bloo bloo....)
- Holy God this paragraph: Of all the big lies about the War Between the States, the biggest of all may be that it was necessary to end slavery. The truth is that many illustrious Southerners, including Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee, recognized that slavery had to come to an end. But it should not come by force of arms, they felt; not at the point of a gun, but rather through the free consent of the owners, with the proper preparation of the slaves. To get them ready for their own freedom, for example, Lee’s wife insisted the family’s slaves be taught to read and write, and the women how to sew.
Enough said. Well,
maybe not.
So I decided to see what the next page is all about, since it's only two pages, and I was greeted with this thread about
North Carolina Council of Churches electing their first openly gay president. Why am I not surprised by this?
This thread is simply goddamn crazy.
Ever wonder what LB Bork's take on the
Separation of Church and State? From the horses mouth:
Separation of Church and State
I have seen a lot of opinions on the separation of church and state misconceptions.
Due to the humanism being taught under the New World Order system, there are a number of people that take on a stance that might be called libertarian. Another issue I have noted is that a lot of people are running around calling themselves sovereigns. Both of these stances have a similar pattern of linear thinking. Linear thinking is regurgitative thought patterns which are acquired as a result of rote learning, mostly from books, without the ability to apply any alternate applications or external logic. Both of these ideologies have the principle of I can do what ever I want as long as I do not hurt anyone else. The question is who is to decide what hurts someone else?
These attitudes are derived from the Constitution acting as supreme law. That is to say, most of these types scream Constitution provides me my unalienable rights. One should note that the Constitution is not the Paramount law.
So, how did this come about? I believe that some of this occurrence comes from the oppressive civil law system that has been created under the Fourteenth Amendment. Another theory is subversive actions teaching people individualism so a divide and conquer effect is achieved. This is to keep people from forming communities and working together so they are then controlled by man.
This brings us to the separation of church and state. One must understand that in the original form of the constitutional system in the United States, separation of church and state meant the Federal government not having any say in what a state did in regard to a belief system; each state had its own.
So if state was unique, what set of rules governed people on a societal level? Could one run around without clothing if they thought this was proper? Again who makes the rules?
The simple answer to this is the paramount law: The law of God (the Bible).
Sorry, I do not care who you are, your moral values are derived from the law of God. If the law from the Bible is not followed people will be controlled by man. That is what we have now. A custom and usage (common law) society cannot exist without a unified belief system of morals.
p.s. do not confuse religion with the Bible.
Thomas Jefferson conveniently ignored.
Well played, LB Bork. Cherry picking at it's finest.
Re: Seperation of Church and State
Reply #13 - Feb 13th, 2010 at 12:53pm
Lexington1775 wrote on Mar 1st, 2009 at 9:45am:
It is fine to live YOUR life by the laws of the Bible. But I have a problem when you try to impose those 'laws' on others. I view the Bible as a select collection of writings (by men) from the Jews and early Christians but not the Word of a supreme being and therefore not The Laws that I am forced to live by. Granted, the Bible is a good foundation to live by. But so are some of the teaching of The Buddha and others.
Sorry, Lexington... You have no clue how a common law system would work.
"Those people not governed by God will be ruled by tyrants." —William Penn
Re: Seperation of Church and State
Reply #14 - Feb 13th, 2010 at 12:56pm
Wizard Killer wrote on Feb 13th, 2010 at 10:40am:
I think I like the quote from Thomas Paine...
And I am posting this for all you that want to venerate "states" or the "United States" or whatever...
"My country is the WORLD and my religion is to do good."
Sounds a bit communistic. And let's let Ted Bundy define what "GOOD" is.
Good posts swallowed by LB's cuntiness.
You know, it's posts like these that make me wonder if LB is trying to start his own theocracy. Maybe that's another reason why he would admire Scientology, because not only does it represent the marriage of church and state, it represents LB's strong desire to be "president" and "pope" simultaneously. With that being said, if I were dumb enough to become a State National, I sure as fuck don't want to live in LB's special state.
Will I be brave enough to venture into
The Conspiracy Corner? Stay tuned to find out!
No comments:
Post a Comment