Russian state news outlet Tass reported that Russian President Vladimir Putin demands the complete withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from the territories of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, after which peace negotiations can begin.
Putin added that Moscow was committed to ensuring the “unhindered and safe withdrawal” of Ukrainian forces if Kyiv agrees to such a concession.
The Kremlin’s conditions are unlikely to receive a warm reception in Kyiv, which has repeatedly stated that it will not concede territory to Russia.
42 comments:
Terms for ending the war... RUSSIA STARTED. Oh, but for you, it's the Russian propaganda line that they were "provoked by Nato". Why would Putin negotiate with Ukraine's "Nazi" government? If they negotiated (and came to an agreement with the CURRENT Ukraine government) then Putin will have failed in his effort to "deNazify" Ukraine.
Is "too senile to stand trial" going to be donald tRump's next defense? Because he is surely slipping. More and more every day. While Joe Biden is (and remains) mentally sharp.
"Can't make it up": Experts say transcript shows special counsel Robert Hur "lied" about Biden. The full transcript undercuts Hur's claims that Biden could not remember his son's death and had "poor" memory.
fyi, the liar Robert Hur released a partisan hit job on Joe Biden. Another Merrick Garland screw up in a pointless effort to prove the DOJ is unbiased. It is. But rightturds will NEVER believe it. Hur was appointed by donald tRump.
Did you see the pre-invasion lines in the second map? Ukraine and NATO were stupid for kicking the bear.
Call it the new Danzig Corridor.
\\Did you see the pre-invasion lines in the second map? Ukraine and NATO were stupid for kicking the bear.
:-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Qtard is laughing thinking about the many Ukrainians who are being slaughtered?
Your totalitarian cretinic alter-ego???
I even never doubt it.
Yawn.
Like when your SAMEBODY alter-ego(s) declared that it's possible to deny humans... HAVING human rights.
Well... right to stay alive -- it is one of Human Rights too... so, not thing surprising.
In this your self-admitting.
ARF ARF! ARF ARF!
ARF ARF! ARF ARF!
Qtard: Your totalitarian cretinic alter-ego??? I even never doubt it. Yawn.
Telling yourself? I agree.
Qtard: Like when your SAMEBODY alter-ego(s) declared that it's possible to deny humans... HAVING human rights.
Yes, you keep doing that. Insisting that the J6 insurrectionists attempt to wipe out the human right to democracy for everyone in the United States was justified. They could "decide for themselves" to end democracy in the United States.
Qtard: Well... right to stay alive -- it is one of Human Rights too... so, not thing surprising. In this your self-admitting.
I agree. Given your expressed hatred for human rights it is not surprising at all that you would laugh at the deaths of so many Ukrainians.
\\Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...
\\ Qtard: Your totalitarian cretinic alter-ego??? I even never doubt it. Yawn.
\\ Telling yourself? I agree.
You signed it "Qtard". AGAIN.
So... no surprise that your find it "telling yourself", cretin.
But... continue-continue, cretin. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Yes, you keep doing that. Insisting that the J6 insurrectionists attempt to wipe out the human right to democracy...
Is it???
Can you provide some proofs??? Of this totally cretinic claim.
Like, some QUOTE of my words... maybe. Where *I* call that people "insurrectionists" WHO "attempt to wipe out the human right to democracy..." -- that is always and only YOUR OWN words...
SAME, as "I *DO* deny..." em "having such right".
Yawn.
\\They could "decide for themselves" to end democracy in the United States.
Isn't democracy definition is "rule of the people"... HOW people themself, while executing their democratic rights (like right to protest) can "end democracy"????
That is possible ONLY with NewSpeakian lying re-definition of what democracy it.
Like "democracy... it's Rule of Democrats". ;-P
And...
\\I agree. Given your expressed hatred for human rights it is not surprising at all that you would laugh at the deaths of so many Ukrainians.
NewSpeakian babbling. AGAIN!
Yawn.
But... continue-continue, cretin. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...
\\ Qtard: Your totalitarian cretinic alter-ego??? I even never doubt it. Yawn.
\\ Telling yourself? I agree.
You signed it "Qtard". AGAIN.
Impossible. Given that I've never done that, I can't do it "again". I put the name of the person who wrote those words in front of the words quoted. SAME as you did.
You wrote "Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said".
Where you "singing" my name? Because YOU are "Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders"???
----------
So... no surprise that your find it "telling yourself", cretin. But... continue-continue, cretin. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Qtard told ITself. And I agreed with what Qtard told ITself. But you got confused and ended up laughing cretinically. Because "Idiots -- need very little to start laughing"... YOUR admission.
----------
\\Yes, you keep doing that. Insisting that the J6 insurrectionists attempt to wipe out the human right to democracy...
Is it???
Can you provide some proofs??? Of this totally cretinic claim.
Like, some QUOTE of my words... maybe. Where *I* call that people "insurrectionists" WHO "attempt to wipe out the human right to democracy..." -- that is always and only YOUR OWN words...
SAME, as "I *DO* deny..." em "having such right".
Yawn.
THAT was an accurate description of what happened. I can't quote any words from you. Because you never accurately described what happened on J6. You only lie about it. Call it "direct democracy" (those ARE you words).
And I never wrote "I *DO* deny..." em "having such right".
Only YOU have ever written that. Must be because that is YOUR belief.
----------
\\They could "decide for themselves" to end democracy in the United States.
Isn't democracy definition is "rule of the people"... HOW people themself, while executing their democratic rights (like right to protest) can "end democracy"????
Because the rioters on J6 were NOT "people themself". "People themself" voted for Joe Biden. Also some "People themself" voted for donald tRump, but respected the results of the election and did NOT show up and try to overturn the results of the election using violence.
That's your LIE -- that the SMALL number of people who were at the Capitol on J6 to try and overturn the results of the election are "people themself".
----------
Qtard: That is possible ONLY with NewSpeakian lying re-definition of what democracy it.
That's what YOU are doing. NewSpeaking "people themselves" to mean a SMALL number of insurrectionists who do not represent the will of the majority of the American people.
Qtard: Like "democracy... it's Rule of Democrats". ;-P
ONLY you have said that. It's your NewSpeakian way of saying "if Democrats win it's because they cheated".
Qtard: And... \\I agree. Given your expressed hatred for human rights it is not surprising at all that you would laugh at the deaths of so many Ukrainians.\\ NewSpeakian babbling. AGAIN! Yawn.
YOU hate democracy. PROVEN by your support for overturning the results of a democratic election. Stated OFTEN. Defended MANY times. But (to you) my DEFENSE of democracy -- and pointing out your hatred for it -- that's "babbling".
Qtard: But... continue-continue, cretin. **cretinic laughter*
Self encouragement. Yawn.
\\I put the name of the person who wrote those words in front of the words quoted. SAME as you did.
\\You wrote "Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said".
\\Where you "singing" my name? Because YOU are "Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders"???
That... was just copy-pasted QUOTE.
From this thread.
FACTUALLY showing WHO said that words -- well, more like -- in what part of this thread, under which account it was written.
And your names are... "name to em LEGION", by now.
So I prefer to refer to you as "cretin IT". Or just "cretin" by now.
And that is not name -- that is more like designator of your kind. ;-P
\\So... no surprise that your find it "telling yourself", cretin. But... continue-continue, cretin. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Qtard told ITself. And I agreed with what Qtard told ITself.
Ah... so that "telling yourself" was you talking with your other alter-egos?
Then, sorry for burging in, into your intellectual conversation. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\But you got confused and ended up laughing cretinically. Because "Idiots -- need very little to start laughing"... YOUR admission.
You still unable distingiush between "starting laughing without reason" and "laughing homericly because of damn big reason"???
Because you are cretin? ;-p
Surely. An that IS that BIG reason for me to laugh here. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
But... continue-continue, "pulling Charlie Gordon", cretin. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\\\Yes, you keep doing that. Insisting that the J6 insurrectionists attempt to wipe out the human right to democracy...
\\Is it???
\\Can you provide some proofs??? Of this totally cretinic claim.
\\Like, some QUOTE of my words... maybe. Where *I* call that people "insurrectionists" WHO "attempt to wipe out the human right to democracy..." -- that is always and only YOUR OWN words...
\\SAME, as "I *DO* deny..." em "having such right".
\\Yawn.
\\THAT was an accurate description of what happened.
Yap.
By DEMN propaganda.
Which was and still is -- DEMN interested in painting it that way.
Yawn.
\\ I can't quote any words from you. Because you never accurately described what happened on J6.
Yap.
Because I have NO reasons to paint it... anyhow.
So I just admitted facts of what happened, and what everyone was able to see through FACTUAL videos and fotos -- free people of America was just walking by a streets and entering public buildings...
yawn.
\\You only lie about it. Call it "direct democracy" (those ARE you words).
And is it not?
Let's double-check myself.
What if I used that definition wrongly.
OK, Google "direct democracy"
In direct democracy, the people decide on policies without any intermediary or representative, whereas in a representative democracy people vote for representatives who then enact policy initiatives.
Direct democracy - Wikipedia
Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Direct_democracy
Direct democracy | Definition, History, & Facts
Britannica
https://www.britannica.com › topic › direct-democracy
Direct democracy, forms of direct participation of citizens in democratic decision making, in contrast to indirect or representative democracy.
Direct democracy
The Constitution Society
https://consoc.org.uk › The Constitution Explained
At its most basic level, direct democracy means involving the public directly in making decisions. By contrast, representative democracy involves the public ...
The Main Forms of Public Activity in Direct Democracy
lawscience.com.ua
https://lawscience.com.ua › journals › tom-23-3-2018
Direct democracy in this context is not only democracy governance but also ability for people to participate in management of government. Also an important role ...
Well...
\\And I never wrote "I *DO* deny..." em "having such right".
You NEVER wrote "I *DO* deny" words(exactly, with SUCH highlighting of word DO)??? ;-P
What a cretinic lie. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
But... continue-continue, cretin. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Because the rioters on J6 were NOT "people themself". "People themself" voted for Joe Biden.
Hah.
So now you DENY em being people too???
\\Also some "People themself" voted for donald tRump, but respected the results of the election and did NOT show up and try to overturn the results of the election using violence.
Yap.
Because such a Human Right -- to decide what to do for themself -- to uprise against injustice... or just agree with enslavement. ;-P
\\That's your LIE -- that the SMALL number of people who were at the Capitol on J6 to try and overturn the results of the election are "people themself".
How many "Founding Fathers" of USA was????
\\That's what YOU are doing. NewSpeaking "people themselves" to mean a SMALL number of insurrectionists who do not represent the will of the majority of the American people.
Again.
How many "Founding Father" was??? How many SIGNATURES under Declaration of Independence???
Several millions?
\\YOU hate democracy. PROVEN by your support for overturning the results of a democratic election. Stated OFTEN. Defended MANY times. But (to you) my DEFENSE of democracy -- and pointing out your hatred for it -- that's "babbling".
Blah-blah-blah...
but why you NOT providing QUOTES, then? ;-P
Like *I* do -- that same quote, of yours -- "I *DO* deny...". ;-p
Your babbling. As always. NOT supported by any facts.
Yawn.
And are just a cretinic LIE.
But... continue-continue, your never-ending spree of lies, cretin. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Qtard: That... was just copy-pasted QUOTE. From this thread.
SAME thing I did. Copy and paste quotes from you. But you are not "anonymous". You are POSTING anonymously. YOU called yourself "Q". I made a nickname out of that, calling you "Qtard". SAME (again) as you did, calling me "Derpy". Though you stopped doing that (for the most part). Because you know it cuts against the MORONIC argument you are making. Which is that (somehow) *I* am "Qtard".
Qtard: FACTUALLY showing WHO said that words -- well, more like -- in what part of this thread, under which account it was written.
Lie. Otherwise you wouldn't say that me placing YOUR nickname in front of YOUR words means I'm thinking YOUR words are mine.
Qtard: And your names are... "name to em LEGION", by now. So I prefer to refer to you as "cretin IT". Or just "cretin" by now.
Even though NONE of those are applicable to me. That's just ad hominem. When all the evidence present on this blog STRONGLY indicates that YOU are a complete moron, not me. So, me calling you "Qtard" is valid.
WHY the f*ck would I call myself "Qtard"? WHY would I want to claim your MORONIC words as my words?
Qtard: And that is not name -- that is more like designator of your kind.
"Qtard" is your nickname and your designator. I never said it was your name. I don't know your name.
Qtard: So... no surprise that your find it "telling yourself", cretin. But... continue-continue, cretin. **cretinic laughter**
I am not a cretin and am not "telling myself". YOU are telling yourself.
Qtard: \\Qtard told ITself. And I agreed with what Qtard told ITself\\ Ah... so that "telling yourself" was you talking with your other alter-egos?
No. I don't have any alter egos.
Qtard: Then, sorry for burging in, into your intellectual conversation. **cretinic laughter**
I wouldn't need to write anything to "tell myself". I could just think whatever I wanted to "tell myself" and then I'd know it. I don't need to write something for another "alter ego" to read later (when this alter ego takes over). Because I don't have any alter egos. Not any that are the result of a split personality disorder. Because I don't have that mental illness.
Qtard: \\But you got confused and ended up laughing cretinically. Because "Idiots -- need very little to start laughing"... YOUR admission\\ You still unable distingiush between "starting laughing without reason" and "laughing homericly because of damn big reason"???
I can't "distingiush" because that isn't a word. But I definitely can distinguish. That is how I know you are laughing due to being an idiot.
Qtard: Because you are cretin? ;-p Surely. An that IS that BIG reason for me to laugh here. **cretinic laughter**
Self revealing talks.
Qtard: But... continue-continue, "pulling Charlie Gordon", cretin. **cretinic laughter**
Self encouragement.
Qtard: \\Yes, you keep doing that. Insisting that the J6 insurrectionists attempt to wipe out the human right to democracy...\\ Is it??? \\Can you provide some proofs??? Of this totally cretinic claim. \\Like, some QUOTE of my words... maybe. Where *I* call that people "insurrectionists" WHO "attempt to wipe out the human right to democracy..." -- that is always and only YOUR OWN words... SAME, as "I *DO* deny..." em "having such right". \\Yawn. \\THAT was an accurate description of what happened\\ Yap. By DEMN propaganda.
No, in reality. Reality isn't "propaganda". Well, I am sure TO YOU it is.
Qtard: Which was and still is -- DEMN interested in painting it that way. Yawn.
No "painting". Just looking at videos of what happened. J6 people doing violence. Fighting with police officers. YOU are the one attempting to do "painting".
Qtard: \\ I can't quote any words from you. Because you never accurately described what happened on J6\\ Yap. Because I have NO reasons to paint it... anyhow.
Lie. You painted it as "direct democracy" and people "walking streets and entering public buildings" to "ask questions". BIGLY painting.
Qtard: So I just admitted facts of what happened, and what everyone was able to see through FACTUAL videos and fotos -- free people of America was just walking by a streets and entering public buildings...
No, you lied about what happened. Which people were able to see though factual videos and photos. Rioters and insurrectionists leaving a rally (which the permit did not allow) and fighting with police officers to BREAK IN (breaking windows) to a public building that is normally open -- though was CLOSED on that particular day (why there were also barricades erected). "Public" does not mean that the building (and ALL parts of it) are open to the public ALL THE TIME. Public buildings can be closed. Portions can be closed to the public ALWAYS. Like private offices.
Qtard: yawn.
I agree. You will never stop repeating your moronity. EVER. Well, loss of internet access or death could stop you. But apparently you think you are immortal.
Qtard: \\You only lie about it. Call it "direct democracy" (those ARE you words)\\ And is it not?
No.
Qtard: Let's double-check myself. What if I used that definition wrongly.
You did.
Qtard: OK, Google "direct democracy". In direct democracy, the people decide on policies without any intermediary or representative, whereas in a representative democracy people vote for representatives who then enact policy initiatives.
This CONFIRMS that you are wrong. Because that isn't what happened on J6.
Qtard: Direct democracy, forms of direct participation of citizens in democratic decision making, in contrast to indirect or representative democracy. Direct democracy The Constitution Society ... At its most basic level, direct democracy means involving the public directly in making decisions. By contrast, representative democracy involves the public ...
"Involved" does not mean by violence. An insurrection is not "direct democracy". Violence is NOT democracy.
Qtard: Direct democracy in this context is not only democracy governance but also ability for people to participate in management of government.
Not by violence.
Qtard: Well...
Well, thanky for proving yourself WRONG.
Qtard: \\And I never wrote "I *DO* deny..." em "having such right"\\ You NEVER wrote "I *DO* deny" words(exactly, with SUCH highlighting of word DO)??? ;-P
No. Not in regards to denying anyone human rights. I STRONGLY support human rights.
Qtard: What a cretinic lie. **cretinic laughter**
TRUTH. ONLY you wrote this...
em "having such right" <<<< those are YOUR words.
Qtard: But... continue-continue, cretin. **cretinic laughter** \\Because the rioters on J6 were NOT "people themself". "People themself" voted for Joe Biden\\ Hah. So now you DENY em being people too???
No. ONLY you have made this assertion. The insurrectionists who rioted on J6 are DEFINITELY people. They have both human rights and human accountability for their actions. They aren't less than human (animals) because animals do not have the same accountability for their actions that humans do. They couldn't be tried and convicted for the crimes they committed if they were not people.
Also, "The people themselves" (as referenced in the preamble to the Constitution aka "we the people") means the population of the United States. Deciding for themselves to throw off monarchy for constitutional self governance. It is NOT a reference to insurrectionists throwing off Constitutional self governance in favor of installing an unelected ruler.
"The first three words in the Constitution are the most powerful: We the People. They declare that the Constitution derives its power, not from a king or a Congress but from the people themselves. This concept of popular sovereignty, power to the people, is the foundation upon which the entire Constitution depends". link
Qtard: \\Also some "People themself" voted for donald tRump, but respected the results of the election and did NOT show up and try to overturn the results of the election using violence\\ Yap. Because such a Human Right -- to decide what to do for themself -- to uprise against injustice... or just agree with enslavement. ;-P
What you think. That democracy is "injustice" and that democracy is "enslavement". You think this due to being a totalitarian who hates democracy.
Qtard: \\That's your LIE -- that the SMALL number of people who were at the Capitol on J6 to try and overturn the results of the election are "people themself"\\ How many "Founding Fathers" of USA was????
The Founder Fathers (formerly, according to you, The "Fathers Founders") were representatives of "The People" who desired self determination and self representation. The people who supported the crown were called "Tories".
The J6 insurrectionists were expressing their disagreement with a constitutional form of government -- the exact OPPOSITE of what the Founding Fathers advocated for. Ergo, there is NO COMPARISON between the two groups. People who want to overthrow democracy are NOT comparable to people who want to get rid of rule by democracy and replace it with rule by an unelected leader.
Qtard: \\That's what YOU are doing. NewSpeaking "people themselves" to mean a SMALL number of insurrectionists who do not represent the will of the majority of the American people\\ again. How many "Founding Father" was??? How many SIGNATURES under Declaration of Independence??? Several millions?
Of course not. In fact (as per Google) "at no time did more than 45 percent of colonists support the war". The DIFFERENCE is that the Founders (and those who agreed with them) were in favor of establishing a democratic form of government. The Founders believed in self determination -- in opposition to the rule of an unelected king.
While the J6 insurrectionists wanted to prevent the democratically elected president, Joe Biden, from assuming office. What they were fighting for was to get rid of democracy -- which is completely antithetical to what the Founders stood for.
Qtard: \\YOU hate democracy. PROVEN by your support for overturning the results of a democratic election. Stated OFTEN. Defended MANY times. But (to you) my DEFENSE of democracy -- and pointing out your hatred for it -- that's "babbling"\\Blah-blah-blah... but why you NOT providing QUOTES, then? ;-P
QUOTE: Because such a Human Right -- to decide what to do for themself -- to uprise against injustice... or just agree with enslavement. (calling overthrowing democracy a "human right" and calling democracy "injustice" and "enslavement").
You JUST wrote that. Yet, you need a quote? To remind you of words JUST WRITTEN???
Qtard: Like *I* do -- that same quote, of yours -- "I *DO* deny...". ;-p
I DO deny that violently overthrowing democracy to keep an unelected outgoing president is a "human right". I 100 percent deny that. But those are my words in SUPPORT of democracy. While YOUR words are all about opposing democracy.
Qtard: Your babbling. As always. NOT supported by any facts. Yawn.
NewSpeakian lie. I give facts OVER AND OVER.
Qtard: And are just a cretinic LIE. But... continue-continue, your never-ending spree of lies, cretin. **cretinic laughter**
Self referring talks again. Yawn.
" We the People"... aka - anyone who can stumble over the US border....
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and OUR Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Minus: "We the People"... aka - anyone who can stumble over the US border....
Absolutely not. That is a reference to citizens.
Minus: ...secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and OUR Posterity...
"Our" meaning White Men. The blessings of Liberty were for White Men. How it was at the time that was written and how you think it should stay. Though we've moved away from that a bit. Which very much angers you.
As for immigrants, we do have an immigration system. Which Democrats believe in. Though I'm sure you believe otherwise. We definitely need to do something about the border and immigration. But we WON'T. Proven by a deal being on the table that granted many concessions to rightturds. But donald tRump instructed Mike Johnson to tank it.
Will donald tRump (if he becomes predisent again) start mass deporting people in the country illegally? I hope we never find out. I've heard talk about it and people saying that would cause a recession and massive price increases, which I believe.
Though such an undertaking would be logistically complicated and very expensive. And Democrats would fight such efforts, of course. As would immigrant rights groups. So I have doubts as to whether or not that would happen. Even if dotard donald becomes predisent again. Remember that he did not build a wall.
donald tRump is an incompetent idiot who had absolutely no idea what he was doing the first time. Though that was a GOOD thing. He ended up not doing as much damage as he might have. Though he did still cause a lot of damage. But this time rightturds aligned with the magaturd White Supremacist pro-rich fascist agenda have done a lot of pre-planning. A second tRump predisency would be considerably worse.
And, if he were to appoint any more scotus judges, the court would go totally fascist White supremacist Christian nationalist. Apparently you long for Christian theocracy. I know Mystere does.
\\Because you know it cuts against the MORONIC argument you are making. Which is that (somehow) *I* am "Qtard".
But... you signed YOUR OWN WORDS with it. ;-P
And... describing what YOU DO... while claiming that "Qtard" DID IT. ;-p
Arguments based on such Open and Obvious facts -- you call "MORONIC argument you are making"...
but well, that is ALSO HAVE Open and Obvious Reason behind it -- you are lying cretin, who usually (almost all of the time) using NewSpeak. ;-P
But... I say -- continue-continue, cretin. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
That, do not bother me. And you can do it more, MORE, MOAAARRR!!!! ;-P
Be my guest. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Lie. Otherwise you wouldn't say that me placing YOUR nickname in front of YOUR words means I'm thinking YOUR words are mine.
????
You demonstrated that you are crazy dumb cretin.
Which mean -- how can I *know* what you "thinking"???? :-)))))))))))))))))))))))
I just OBSERVE your cretinic behavior. And trying to come up with some hypothesis.
In a scientific way. ;-)
Like for example... this your recurring claim that "Qtard" it's "YOUR nickname" -- it do not pass logical examination -- you cretinicly use it in a weird and random way, that do not correspond with any facts. ;-P
\\Even though NONE of those are applicable to me.
Why not? ;-P
\\That's just ad hominem.
To call crazy crazy??? ;-P
Why??? :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\When all the evidence present on this blog STRONGLY indicates that YOU are a complete moron, not me.
Yep.
Only.
You (one of multitude of SAMEBODY cretins?) NEVER able to provide FACTS... (well, once you did, quite recently, as I recall, to be fair, but...)
AND... EXPLAIN logically -- what that facts should mean.
You only screaming "No", "I NEVER said" and etc ANTI-factual BS.
And trying to "turn the table" with calling it back on me (calling me moron, cretin, crazy) -- WELL, which is PERFECTLY behavior of a crazy man in asylum screaming while fixed in a straitjacket "no, I'm not crazy. YOU are crazy". ;-P
Like in this excerpt... I tried to find MORE flashy one, with one really in straightjacket and drooling and screaming and struggling... but this one suffice to convey my point Just O.K. too. ;-P
Straitjacket
Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › S...
A straitjacket is a garment shaped like a jacket with long sleeves that surpass the tips of the wearer's fingers. Its most typical use is restraining people ...
\\WHY the f*ck would I call myself "Qtard"? WHY would I want to claim your MORONIC words as my words?
CURRENT you??? Yet one anonymous cretin that occupying SAMEBODY infested with whole bunch of cretins.
HOW should *I* know??? Answer to such a existential question. ;-P
Go consult with your other cretins.
Ah... sorry... you cannot. Because crazy people with split-personality disorder -- unable and unaware of their SAMEBODY counterparts.
Especially when they are in a Strong Denial phase of their craziness. ;-P
Those who are in milder phase -- can write letters to each other, as I heard. And that works as good therapy. ;-)
But... you have hysterical blindness -- and DO NOT recognize words written under same account as your own.
\\"Qtard" is your nickname and your designator. I never said it was your name. I don't know your name.
And why should *I* believe to such a unbelievably cretinic NewSpeaking liar... that that is the case??? ;-P
\\I am not a cretin and am not "telling myself". YOU are telling yourself.
Yap.
"I'm NOT crazy. YOU are crazy" -- that is what crazy people scream damn to often.
Yawn.
\\No. I don't have any alter egos.
And you have NO gaps in memory too? ;-P
:-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Like NOT remembering saying/writing here "I NEVER said it"????
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
And... even if I'd search through previous post threads... and will find and provide here totally FACTUAL excerpts -- written through SAME account -- you'd be screaming "that's not me -- that's Qtard"??? ;-P
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Naaah. You'd be crying "No" here too. Even though it all Stone Cold FACTS.
That's why YOUR MERE WORDS bear NO credibility here.
After SO MANY such cretinic LIES.
But... who cares. ;-P
Yawn.
\\I wouldn't need to write anything to "tell myself". I could just think whatever I wanted to "tell myself" and then I'd know it. I don't need to write something for another "alter ego" to read later (when this alter ego takes over). Because I don't have any alter egos. Not any that are the result of a split personality disorder. Because I don't have that mental illness.
Then... what about all that facts of having gaps in memory????
Not remembering saying "I *DO* deny..." for example. Or... admitting being liar. Or... well, I not interested to keep such list. Yawn. Just this examples is quite enough. Because of their notoriusness.
\\That is how I know you are laughing due to being an idiot.
Well... if one knows something -- one need to be able to EXPLAIN -- what one know, and why. ;-P
But.... naaaaaah, you NEVER able. ;-P
So... either you DO NOT know, and that is a LIE... OR, you are CRETIN -- and therefore cannot explain.
See??? My EXPLANATION here is strictly and perfectly LOGICAL. ;-P
And... by itself, is an evidance that I am smart. And KNOW what I'm talking about.
But... you, continue-continue, cretin. Continue "pulling Charlie Gordon". ;-)
\\Qtard: Because you are cretin? ;-p Surely. An that IS that BIG reason for me to laugh here. **cretinic laughter**
\\Self revealing talks.
Yeah??? :-)))))
And you can EXPALIN -- why and how that is "self revealing talks"??? ;-P
Naaaaaah. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
And that is -- damn self-revealing. Of your self-revealing self-exposing EVERY DEMN TIME... crtinity. ;-P
But... continue-continue, cretin. Your self-exposuring. ;-P
\\No, in reality. Reality isn't "propaganda". Well, I am sure TO YOU it is.
Yep, to you -- it is. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Because you are NewSpeaking liar. Everthing is vice versa for you. "Truth it's Lie". "Propaganda it's Reality".
And etc.
Thanky-thanky for confirming your cretinic credo YET ONE TIME. :-)))))))))))))))))))))
\\No "painting". Just looking at videos of what happened. J6 people doing violence.
By "very violently" going by streets??? ;-P
\\Fighting with police officers.
Because that police officers was trying to PREVENT em from freely going by streets?
And... who allowed em to do that -- toward free people?
\\Qtard: \\ I can't quote any words from you. Because you never accurately described what happened on J6\\ Yap. Because I have NO reasons to paint it... anyhow.
\\Lie. You painted it as "direct democracy" and people "walking streets and entering public buildings" to "ask questions". BIGLY painting.
if only you'd know what you are babbling... itself.
Yawn.
\\"Public" does not mean that the building (and ALL parts of it) are open to the public ALL THE TIME. Public buildings can be closed. Portions can be closed to the public ALWAYS. Like private offices.
And... it was???
\\"Involved" does not mean by violence. An insurrection is not "direct democracy". Violence is NOT democracy.
Bull Shit.
What was your War for Independence???
Was it NOT violence????
Despots ALWAYS trying to thwart Democracy. That's why people NEED TO respond to despotic violence with violence.
Or... there'd be NO Democracy. (well, but that is EXACTLY what such a totalitarian cretin as you want -- Democracy -- Rule of We the People -- TO NOT BE ABLE TO PROTECT ITSELF... from tyrany, isn't it, cretin? ;-P)
\\No. Not in regards to denying anyone human rights. I STRONGLY support human rights.
But ONLY NOT to that "J6 insurrectionists"... to go by streets, yes, cretin? ;-P
\\em "having such right" <<<< those are YOUR words.
This excerpt for example
No. Because Jews had rights. Have rights (as Jews did)? They can't be taken away. Don't have rights (as J6 insurrectionists did not -- there is no sore loser right to overthrow democracy)? They can't be taken away because they NEVER had them to begin with.
October 24, 2023 at 3:27 PM
From https://politicaltealeaves.blogspot.com/2023/10/dedicated-to-msm-simps-who-bring-us.html
You... YOURSELF... properly and inambigiuosly stated -- that "J6 insurrectionists"... AGIAN THAT *heinous* WORDS Don't have rights
Because???
But. AGAIN. YOUR OWN *heinous* WORDS They can't be taken away because they NEVER had them to begin with.
And that is your claim.
Yawn.
But... you will start screaming that is "Qtard"... or SAMEBODY else have written it, yes, cretin? ;-P
(you thought that i will not dig for QUOTE... this time too?)
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Also, "The people themselves" (as referenced in the preamble to the Constitution aka "we the people") means the population of the United States. Deciding for themselves to throw off monarchy for constitutional self governance. It is NOT a reference to insurrectionists throwing off Constitutional self governance in favor of installing an unelected ruler.
Ough'Coughs... because tyrants -- do not like to be overtroned. ;-P
You cretin JUST AGAIN revealed how you love tyrants... and how you despise mere ordinary men.
""
Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...
"The first three words in the Constitution are the most powerful: We the People. They declare that the Constitution derives its power, not from a king or a Congress but from the people themselves. This concept of popular sovereignty, power to the people, is the foundation upon which the entire Constitution depends". link
""
Yep.
And that is EXACTLY what you trying to eliminate -- NOT FRoM "a king or a Congress" BUT "from the people themselves".
But...
You, with your cretinic NewSpeakiean lies, trying to subvert... that that is NOT that people INSIDE Capitol, that trying to overshadow "We the People"... but "people themself" OUTSIDE of it -- are culprits.
Yawn.
\\What you think. That democracy is "injustice" and that democracy is "enslavement". You think this due to being a totalitarian who hates democracy.
Yap.
NewSpeakean lies of yours.
Yawn.
\\The Founder Fathers (formerly, according to you, The "Fathers Founders") were representatives of "The People"
Yeah???
When? From which moment? And through what means???
Was there AN ELECTIONS... to choose am to be "Founder Fathers"???
And BY WHAT law... that elections was organized???
And WHAT Congress have written THAT law???
Aaaaaah??? ;-)
\\The J6 insurrectionists were expressing their disagreement with a constitutional form of government -- the exact OPPOSITE of what the Founding Fathers advocated for.
Oh, yeah???
They NOT promoted idea to ABOLISH rule of law installed and protected by King???
Who knew.
Maybe... they LOVED king's rule? %-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
BTW... do you know that that was Constitutional Monarchy -- means, it was PRECISELY a "constitutional form of government" -- that "Founder Father" have upraised against.
\\Ergo, there is NO COMPARISON between the two groups.
That's just NewSpeakean lies of totalitarian cretin that trying to lie it's way out of own heinous lies, with such an obvious against the facts lies, but... continue-continue, cretin. You are cretin not for nothing. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Of course not. In fact (as per Google) "at no time did more than 45 percent of colonists support the war".
Yap.
Very similar to the level of support of Bi-den's election. ;-P
\\The DIFFERENCE is that the Founders (and those who agreed with them) were in favor of establishing a democratic form of government. The Founders believed in self determination -- in opposition to the rule of an unelected king.
Yap.
Because "Democracy -- it's Rule of Democrats"(tm)
Yawn.
:-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\QUOTE: Because such a Human Right -- to decide what to do for themself -- to uprise against injustice... or just agree with enslavement. (calling overthrowing democracy a "human right" and calling democracy "injustice" and "enslavement").
\\You JUST wrote that. Yet, you need a quote? To remind you of words JUST WRITTEN???
That in bold *I* have written TOO????
Well... let's double-check... what if I'm crazy, and have gaps in memory, and forgot writing something like that IN BOLD? %-))))))))
Copy-Pasting. Ctrl-Fing. That (calling overthrowing democracy a "human right" and calling democracy "injustice" and "enslavement").
Naaaah.
Predictably.
THAT words IN BOLD.
Was written JUST ONCE here (before my this comment).
And written it was... by Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...
Which is -- YOU.
Well.
Unless.
That is somebody ELSE out of that SAMEBODY bunch of cretins...
yawn.
And... cretin will play card "I not answered (t)here... because I am not immortal, and have no time for that"? ;-P
Qtard: \\Because you know it cuts against the MORONIC argument you are making. Which is that (somehow) *I* am "Qtard".\\ But... you signed YOUR OWN WORDS with it. ;-P
No. That never happened. Well, in your delusions. Nowhere else.
Qtard: And... describing what YOU DO... while claiming that "Qtard" DID IT. ;-p
No. That has never happened. Well, in your delusions. Nowhere else.
Qtard: Arguments based on such Open and Obvious facts -- you call "MORONIC argument you are making"...
Your delusions are NOT "open and obvious facts".
Qtard: but well, that is ALSO HAVE Open and Obvious Reason behind it -- you are lying cretin, who usually (almost all of the time) using NewSpeak. ;-P
Self revealing talks. I don't use NewSpeak. YOU use it. Just NewSpoke "almost all of time" in place of NEVER AND NONE OF THE TIME.
Qtard: But... I say -- continue-continue, cretin. **cretinic laughter** That, do not bother me. And you can do it more, MORE, MOAAARRR!!!! ;-P Be my guest. **cretinic laughter**
Of course your cretinity does not bother you. You're proud of it. Though you think your cretinity is smartness.
Qtard: \\Lie. Otherwise you wouldn't say that me placing YOUR nickname in front of YOUR words means I'm thinking YOUR words are mine.\\????
YOU wrote: "FACTUALLY showing WHO said that words". But then you claimed (moronically) that I'm claiming your words. By "signing" YOUR nickname to them. So you are NOT "FACTUALLY showing WHO said that words". That is a f*cking lie. Because your words are not my words. My QUOTING you (and putting YOUR nickname in front of those words) is NOT me claiming your words or thinking they are my words.
But you feign confusion to dodge being called out on that LIE.
Qtard: You demonstrated that you are crazy dumb cretin.
No, you did.
Qtard: Which mean -- how can I *know* what you "thinking"???? **cretinic laughter**
You are CONTINUALLY saying you know what I'm thinking. Saying that I'm thinking your words are my words. EVERY time you write "NewSpeak Yes", you're saying you know what I'm thinking. Asshole. BUT, you're right "how can I *know* what you thinking"... you obviously don't. But claim you do anyway.
Qtard: I just OBSERVE your cretinic behavior. And trying to come up with some hypothesis. In a scientific way. ;-)
You dunno what science is.
Qtard: Like for example... this your recurring claim that "Qtard" it's "YOUR nickname" -- it do not pass logical examination -- you cretinicly use it in a weird and random way, that do not correspond with any facts. ;-P
I use it to refer to YOU.
Qtard: \\Even though NONE of those are applicable to me\\ Why not? ;-P
Because I'm not a cretin. I got good grades in school. Was on the honor roll and the Dean's list. I consume a lot of news and am informed.
\\Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...
\\ Qtard: \\Because you know it cuts against the MORONIC argument you are making. Which is that (somehow) *I* am "Qtard".\\ But... you signed YOUR OWN WORDS with it. ;-P
\\ No. That never happened.
Here we go. AGAIN.
And what if I'd confirm it with perfectly FACTUAL quote? ;-P
:-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
You'd be LYING about it TOO.
Because -- you are cretinic LIAR. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Qtard: And... describing what YOU DO... while claiming that "Qtard" DID IT. ;-p
\\No. That has never happened.
SAME. As above. ;-P
\\Your delusions are NOT "open and obvious facts".
Yap.
Because you are NewSpeaking liar... that using word "delusion" to substitute word "reality".
Yawn.
And that is behavior you said "never happened", just above -- because you are liar.
AND.
\\Qtard: but well, that is ALSO HAVE Open and Obvious Reason behind it -- you are lying cretin, who usually (almost all of the time) using NewSpeak. ;-P
\\Self revealing talks. I don't use NewSpeak. YOU use it. Just NewSpoke "almost all of time" in place of NEVER AND NONE OF THE TIME.
Lies, lies, lies...
but... continue-continue, your cretinic lies, cretin. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Qtard: But... I say -- continue-continue, cretin. **cretinic laughter** That, do not bother me. And you can do it more, MORE, MOAAARRR!!!! ;-P Be my guest. **cretinic laughter**
\\Of course your cretinity does not bother you. You're proud of it. Though you think your cretinity is smartness.
Jealous? ;-P
:-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Qtard: \\Lie. Otherwise you wouldn't say that me placing YOUR nickname in front of YOUR words means I'm thinking YOUR words are mine.\\????
\\YOU wrote: "FACTUALLY showing WHO said that words". But then you claimed (moronically) that I'm claiming your words. By "signing" YOUR nickname to them.
Still same -- cretinic gibberish BS.
Even when you trying to EXPLAIN itself.
Well... nothing surprising -- you are total cretin non for nothing. And that is not a joke -- you freakingly CANNOT behave any other way. ;-P
Because -- cretin. (shrugs)
But... continue-continue, pulling Charlie Gordon, cretin. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\My QUOTING you (and putting YOUR nickname in front of those words) is NOT me claiming your words or thinking they are my words.
And what about when you placing there YOPUR words... or somebody else's words???
While still "putting YOUR nickname in front of those words"??? ;-P
What f***g RATIONAL and open to a SANE mind reason could be for that to happen? ;-)
\\Qtard: You demonstrated that you are crazy dumb cretin.
\\No, you did.
Yeah??
And you can QUOTE that place???
And give logical EXPLANATION -- how it is the case? ;-P
Naaaah.
Because you are cretins.
Cretins -- CANNOT accomplish even such a basic task.
Because -- they are CRETINS.
Have lowest intellectual abilities... out of those who can say/write words cogently. ;-P
\\You are CONTINUALLY saying you know what I'm thinking.
When ASKING you? ;-P
Every time.
\\Saying that I'm thinking your words are my words.
Well... why ELSE you'd be placing "Qtard" before em? ;-P
\\EVERY time you write "NewSpeak Yes", you're saying you know what I'm thinking.
Naaah.
What you have written... ONLY. ;-P
Your thinking process manifest itself in words you written -- but, you are cretin, and still unable to get it, yes, cretin? :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Qtard: I just OBSERVE your cretinic behavior. And trying to come up with some hypothesis. In a scientific way. ;-)
\\You dunno what science is.
Test me. ;-P
But... you will not, because it'll be THE SAME as it was with "you know nothing about Navalny"?
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Qtard: Like for example... this your recurring claim that "Qtard" it's "YOUR nickname" -- it do not pass logical examination -- you cretinicly use it in a weird and random way, that do not correspond with any facts. ;-P
\\I use it to refer to YOU.
So what??? ;-P
You do MANY cretinic things. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
So, that is just YET ONE of em. ;-P
But... continue-contonue, behaving like cretin, cretin. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))0
\\Qtard: \\Even though NONE of those are applicable to me\\ Why not? ;-P
\\Because I'm not a cretin. I got good grades in school. Was on the honor roll and the Dean's list. I consume a lot of news and am informed.
Yap.
I got it.
You are INFORMED cretin. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Qtard: \\That's just ad hominem\\ To call crazy crazy??? ;-P Why??? **cretinic laughter**
Because that "crazy" is your delusion. Or lies. Lies about seeing "crazy" where crazy isn't present. Except in yourself. But you keep projecting your craziness onto me.
Qtard: \\When all the evidence present on this blog STRONGLY indicates that YOU are a complete moron, not me\\ Yep. Only. You (one of multitude of SAMEBODY cretins?) NEVER able to provide FACTS... (well, once you did, quite recently, as I recall, to be fair, but...) AND... EXPLAIN logically -- what that facts should mean. You only screaming "No", "I NEVER said" and etc ANTI-factual BS.
That's another of your delusions. I sometimes write "no", which (in your delusions) is "always". Also "screaming", that is your delusion as well. You think you can hear me? "Know" I'm screaming because you hear a voice in your head screaming? A voice you think is mine?
And YOU write anti-factual BS, not me. Well, more projection.
Qtard: And trying to "turn the table" with calling it back on me (calling me moron, cretin, crazy) -- WELL, which is PERFECTLY behavior of a crazy man in asylum screaming while fixed in a straitjacket "no, I'm not crazy. YOU are crazy".
Naaah. That's just me seeing and correctly identifying someone who is projecting their moronity and craziness onto someone else. In this case, me.
Qtard: Like in this excerpt... I tried to find MORE flashy one, with one really in straightjacket and drooling and screaming and struggling... but this one suffice to convey my point Just O.K. too. ;-P
Speaking from your own experiences of being forced to wear a straightjacket? Screaming and drooling when locked in a padded cell? Seems likely.
Qtard: \\WHY the f*ck would I call myself "Qtard"? WHY would I want to claim your MORONIC words as my words?\\ CURRENT you??? Yet one anonymous cretin that occupying SAMEBODY infested with whole bunch of cretins.
There is ONLY a "current me". BUT, if I did have any "samebody" alter egos, I guarantee that NONE of them would want to claim your moronic words.
Qtard: HOW should *I* know??? Answer to such a existential question. ;-P
Why not? You "know" about these non existing "samebody cretins" -- WHY don't you know about why any one of them would want to claim your moronic words as their words? YOU are the one who made them up. They exist in your delusions, so they have whatever motivations YOU decide they do.
Qtard: Go consult with your other cretins.
Impossible. I can't consult with your delusions.
Qtard: Ah... sorry... you cannot. Because crazy people with split-personality disorder -- unable and unaware of their SAMEBODY counterparts.
You keep saying. From your personal experience of talking to a psychiatrist? Psychiatrist explaining to you about your mental illness? But you denying your craziness and projecting it on others? Yes?
Qtard: Especially when they are in a Strong Denial phase of their craziness. ;-P
Yeah. What I see you do. Strongly denying it is YOU that is crazy. Blaming others for YOUR craziness.
Qtard: Those who are in milder phase -- can write letters to each other, as I heard. And that works as good therapy. ;-)
Yeah. As you heard -- from your psychiatrist during your therapy. Thanky for confirming.
Qtard: But... you have hysterical blindness -- and DO NOT recognize words written under same account as your own.
I always recognize my own words.
Qtard: \\"Qtard" is your nickname and your designator. I never said it was your name. I don't know your name.\\ And why should *I* believe to such a unbelievably cretinic NewSpeaking liar... that that is the case??? ;-P
So, (in your delusions) I do know your name? Why don't I use it then?
Qtard: \\I am not a cretin and am not "telling myself". YOU are telling yourself\\ Yap.
"I'm NOT crazy. YOU are crazy" -- that is what crazy people scream damn to often.
Right. Like you just did. Confirming your craziness via your denials. What crazy people do. As per your admission.
Qtard: \\No. I don't have any alter egos.\\ And you have NO gaps in memory too? ;-P
No. Nothing out of the ordinary. Given that I don't have a photographic memory or perfect recall.
Qtard: **cretinic laughter** Like NOT remembering saying/writing here "I NEVER said it"????
**Cretinic laughter**
Of course I remember writing that. I've written it MANY times. Because you keep claiming I have said things that I never did. You believing that I ever denied writing that is your YOUR false memory. One generated by your defective crazy brain.
Qtard: And... even if I'd search through previous post threads... and will find and provide here totally FACTUAL excerpts -- written through SAME account -- you'd be screaming "that's not me -- that's Qtard"??? ;-P **cretinic laughter**
No. I've never said that words of mine were written by you.
Qtard: Naaah. You'd be crying "No" here too. Even though it all Stone Cold FACTS.
NewSpeak. To you LIES are "stone cold facts". You even cap "FACTS". As if that makes your lies magically facts.
Qtard: That's why YOUR MERE WORDS bear NO credibility here.
Self referring talks.
Qtard: After SO MANY such cretinic LIES.
Yeah. From you.
Qtard: \\I wouldn't need to write anything to "tell myself". I could just think whatever I wanted to "tell myself" and then I'd know it. I don't need to write something for another "alter ego" to read later (when this alter ego takes over). Because I don't have any alter egos. Not any that are the result of a split personality disorder. Because I don't have that mental illness\\ Then... what about all that facts of having gaps in memory????
There aren't any.
Qtard: Not remembering saying "I *DO* deny..."
I absolutely remember writing that, asshole.
Qtard: Or... admitting being liar. Or... well, I not interested to keep such list. Yawn. Just this examples is quite enough. Because of their notoriusness.
That never happened. I never admitted "being liar". I pointed out the FACT that everyone lies -- and that anyone who claims they NEVER lie is almost certainly lying. But you (due to cretinity) interpreted that as me "admitting" that I'm a liar. Which I did not.
Qtard: \\That is how I know you are laughing due to being an idiot\\Well... if one knows something -- one need to be able to EXPLAIN -- what one know, and why. But.... naaaaaah, you NEVER able.
You wrote (above) "You signed it "Qtard". AGAIN". Then you laughed. But I NEVER "signed" anything using your nickname. So WHY would you laugh? OBVIOUSLY you laughed due to being an idiot. A very logical conclusion.
Qtard: So... either you DO NOT know, and that is a LIE... OR, you are CRETIN -- and therefore cannot explain.
I do know. And I JUST explained.
Here is another example for you -- you wrote (above) "NewSpeakian babbling. AGAIN!" Then you laughed. This was in regards to me accurately pointing out that you have expressed hatred for human rights. MANY MANY times. The human
right to democracy. Which you STRONGLY believe should be gotten rid of in the United States. So WHY would you laugh? Your hatred for human rights isn't funny. Laughing (again) OBVIOUSLY due to idiocy.
Qtard: See??? My EXPLANATION here is strictly and perfectly LOGICAL.
No. I don't see. And no, your explanation is not logical. It is illogical.
Qtard: And... by itself, is an evidance that I am smart. And KNOW what I'm talking about.
That is evidence you're an idiot who doesn't have any idea what IT is talking about.
Qtard: But... you, continue-continue, cretin. Continue "pulling Charlie Gordon". ;-)
More evidence you are an idiot. A person can NOT "continue" to so something they have never done. It would need to be done at least ONCE first. Before they could "continue" to do it.
Qtard: Because you are cretin? ;-p Surely. An that IS that BIG reason for me to laugh here. **cretinic laughter**\\Self revealing talks\\Yeah??? **short burst of cretinic laughter** And you can EXPALIN -- why and how that is "self revealing talks"??? ;-P Naaaaaah. **extended cretinic laughing**
Of course I can explain. What you said -- it applies to yourself. Therefore it is "self revealing".
Qtard: And that is -- damn self-revealing. Of your self-revealing self-exposing EVERY DEMN TIME... crtinity. ;-P But... continue-continue, cretin. Your self-exposuring. ;-P
Your "self exposuring".
Qtard: \\No, in reality. Reality isn't "propaganda". Well, I am sure TO YOU it is\\ Yep, to you -- it is. **cretinic laughter**
"Yep, to you -- it is"... AGREED! To you it definitely is.
Qtard: Because you are NewSpeaking liar. Everthing is vice versa for you. "Truth it's Lie". "Propaganda it's Reality".
Yes. YOU are a NewSpeaking liar for whom everything is vice versa. I agree.
Qtard: Thanky-thanky for confirming your cretinic credo YET ONE TIME. **cretinic laughter**
Talking to yourself again? You must be. Because I have no such credo. While you obviously do.
Qtard: \\No "painting". Just looking at videos of what happened. J6 people doing violence\\
By "very violently" going by streets??? ;-P
No. Nobody who walked on the street was arrested. ONLY people who fought with police officers and/or entered the Capitol.
Qtard: \\Fighting with police officers\\Because that police officers was trying to PREVENT em from freely going by streets?
They didn't. They walked by the streets and nobody stopped them until they got to the Capitol. Then they encountered the barricades which were there to prevent entry to the Capitol, which was closed.
Qtard: And... who allowed em to do that -- toward free people?
Not who, what. And that would be their own lawbreaking actions. Free people can decide to break the law. But then they are (if they are caught) held accountable. That's the way it works.
Qtard: \\ I can't quote any words from you. Because you never accurately described what happened on J6\\ Yap. Because I have NO reasons to paint it... anyhow. \\Lie. You painted it as "direct democracy" and people "walking streets and
entering public buildings" to "ask questions". BIGLY painting\\ if only you'd know what you are babbling... itself.
I do know. I'm "babbling" truth.
Qtard: \\"Public" does not mean that the building (and ALL parts of it) are open to the public ALL THE TIME. Public buildings can be closed. Portions can be closed to the public ALWAYS. Like private offices\\ And... it was???
Yes. More evidence you dunno what you're talking about.
Qtard: \\"Involved" does not mean by violence. An insurrection is not "direct democracy". Violence is NOT democracy\\ Bull Shit. What was your War for Independence??? Was it NOT violence???? Despots ALWAYS trying to thwart Democracy. That's why people NEED TO respond to despotic violence with violence.
The wannabe despot donald tRump tried to thwart democracy by sending his minions to the Capitol to END it. The Capitol police NEEDED to respond to donald tRump's despotic violence with violence. In defense of the Capitol and DEMOCRACY (that thing you hate passionately).
Qtard: Or... there'd be NO Democracy.
Exactly. If the rioters sent by donald tRump had been successful democracy would have ended.
Qtard: (well, but that is EXACTLY what such a totalitarian cretin as you want -- Democracy -- Rule of We the People -- TO NOT BE ABLE TO PROTECT ITSELF... from tyrany, isn't it, cretin? ;-P)
Asking yourself? That is DEFINITELY what you want and are arguing passionately in favor of.
Qtard: \\No. Not in regards to denying anyone human rights. I STRONGLY support human rights. But ONLY NOT to that "J6 insurrectionists"... to go by streets, yes, cretin? ;-P
Asking yourself again? You've already said yes. Many times. You wanted them very much to "go by streets" and use violence to end democracy in the United States.
Qtard: \\em "having such right" <<<< those are YOUR words.\\ This excerpt for example No. Because Jews had rights. Have rights (as Jews did)? They can't be taken away. Don't have rights (as J6 insurrectionists did not -- there is no sore loser right to overthrow democracy)? They can't be taken away because they NEVER had them to begin with. October 24, 2023 at 3:27?PM
Exactly. They have ALL human rights. But not the imaginary one you made up. That "right" isn't a right. They never had it so it can't be taken away.
Qtard: You... YOURSELF... properly and inambigiuosly stated -- that "J6 insurrectionists"... AGIAN THAT *heinous* WORDS Don't have rights.
No. I did not, liar. I was only referring to the "right" you made up.
Qtard: Because??? But. AGAIN. YOUR OWN *heinous* WORDS They can't be taken away because they NEVER had them to begin with.
No. Not "them". ONLY that "right" to overthrow democracy you keep cretinically insisting is a "right". When it isn't. Those are YOUR heinous words. That sore losers have a "right" to end democracy for everyone else.
Qtard: And that is your claim.
No, that's a fact. Not a "claim".
Qtard: Yawn.
Indeed. This discussion has been going on a long time. With you arguing AGAINST democracy and me arguing in favor of it. You calling defending democracy "heinous". Because of your love for totalitarianism and intense hatred for democracy. People deciding for themselves in a free and fair election to vote for Joe Biden to be their president.
Qtard: But... you will start screaming that is "Qtard"... or SAMEBODY else have written it, yes, cretin? ;-P
No. Qtard (you) is saying (counter factually) that it didn't write those anti-democracy words. Qtard (you) keeps saying (counter factually) that it supports democracy by ENDING it. NewSpeaking democracy to mean getting rid of democracy.
Qtard: (you thought that i will not dig for QUOTE... this time too?)
A quote that proves your lie that I deny human rights? Yeah, I thought you would not give one. Because I know I never wrote anything like that for you to quote. Which you proved -- by "digging" and not finding one. Quoting me DEFENDING democracy and calling your fake "human right" out as the bullshit it is.
Qtard: \\Also, "The people themselves" (as referenced in the preamble to the Constitution aka "we the people") means the population of the United States. Deciding for themselves to throw off monarchy for constitutional self governance. It is NOT a reference to insurrectionists throwing off Constitutional self governance in favor of installing an unelected ruler\\ Ough'Coughs... because tyrants -- do not like to be overtroned. ;-P
You are NewSpeaking again. Calling a democratically elected leader a "tyrant".
Qtard: You cretin JUST AGAIN revealed how you love tyrants... and how you despise mere ordinary men.
YES! I agree with what you said about your alter ego "you cretin". IT absolutely despises "mere ordinary men" -- the voters. Those who voted for Joe Biden and those who voted for donald tRump but respect the democratic process. "You cretin" wanted the tyrant donald tRump to retain power through the use of violence.
Qtard: \\"The first three words in the Constitution are the most powerful: We the People. They declare that the Constitution derives its power, not from a king or a Congress but from the people themselves. This concept of popular sovereignty, power to the people, is the foundation upon which the entire Constitution depends"\\Yep. And that is EXACTLY what you trying to eliminate -- NOT FRoM "a king or a Congress" BUT "from the people themselves".
That is what YOU want to eliminate. Proven by you continuing to argue that the results of that election (in which THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES chose Joe Biden) should have been overturned with violence.
Qtard: But... You, with your cretinic NewSpeakiean lies, trying to subvert... that that is NOT that people INSIDE Capitol, that trying to overshadow "We the People"... but "people themself" OUTSIDE of it -- are culprits.
Lie. I never said anything like that. "people themself OUTSIDE of it" voted for Joe Biden. The culprits were the people who tried to take that right AWAY from The People Themselves. And YOU keep defending these culprits that tried to end democracy.
Qtard: \\What you think. That democracy is "injustice" and that democracy is "enslavement". You think this due to being a totalitarian who hates democracy\\ Yap. NewSpeakean lies of yours.
Your words. You say your words are "NewSpeakean lies"? I agree.
Qtard: \\The Founder Fathers (formerly, according to you, The "Fathers Founders") were representatives of "The People"\\ Yeah??? When? From which moment? And through what means??? Was there AN ELECTIONS... to choose am to be "Founder Fathers"??? And BY WHAT law... that elections was organized??? And WHAT Congress have written THAT law???
The Continental Congress.
Qtard: Aaaaaah??? ;-)
Cretin thinks it caught me with a "gotcha". But it only proclaimed IT's ignorance. i.e. IT's inability to discuss things IT knows nothing about.
Qtard: \\The J6 insurrectionists were expressing their disagreement with a constitutional form of government -- the exact OPPOSITE of what the Founding Fathers advocated for\\ Oh, yeah???
Yes.
Qtard: They NOT promoted idea to ABOLISH rule of law installed and protected by King???
No. That would be impossible. Because the United States doesn't have a king.
Qtard: Who knew.
Non cretins.
Qtard: Maybe... they LOVED king's rule? **cretinic laughter**
Yes. Well, the rule of the person they wanted to make king -- donald tRump.
Qtard: BTW... do you know that that was Constitutional Monarchy -- means, it was PRECISELY a "constitutional form of government" -- that "Founder Father" have upraised against.
One with a KING at the top. Hence the "monarchy" part. They replaced a king at the top with a president elected by The People.
\\Because that "crazy" is your delusion. Or lies. Lies about seeing "crazy" where crazy isn't present. Except in yourself. But you keep projecting your craziness onto me.
No evidences???
And what that all facts of you having gaps in memory? Not recognizing own words? Absolutely counter-factual lies???
and etc, etc, etc... does it look like behavior of anyone sane???
Naaah. It not.
And you cryes "No, I'm NOT crazy. You are" -- they also perfectly in sync with you being crazy. ;-P
"Only the truly insane person never questions their own sanity."(tm) ;-P
\\Qtard: \\When all the evidence present on this blog STRONGLY indicates that YOU are a complete moron, not me\\ Yep. Only. You (one of multitude of SAMEBODY cretins?) NEVER able to provide FACTS... (well, once you did, quite recently, as I recall, to be fair, but...) AND... EXPLAIN logically -- what that facts should mean. You only screaming "No", "I NEVER said" and etc ANTI-factual BS.
\\That's another of your delusions. I sometimes write "no", which (in your delusions) is "always".
What a crazy turd. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))
WHERE I said "always"???? I said "You only screaming"... and then gave several variants of answers you USUALLY do. And that is open list.
That is YOU -- stupid. That trying to use such generalizations. Often.
\\Also "screaming", that is your delusion as well. You think you can hear me? "Know" I'm screaming because you hear a voice in your head screaming? A voice you think is mine?
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
oh... so you are whispering? ;-P
Good to go. I will know from now on.
It suits you being crazy even more. ;-P
\\And YOU write anti-factual BS, not me. Well, more projection.
Yeah??? :-)))))))))))))))))))))
And you, probably, can point to that my words -- properly quoted -- where I write something "anti-factual"???
Naaaah. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Naaah. That's just me seeing and correctly identifying someone who is projecting their moronity and craziness onto someone else. In this case, me.
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Yet one of same bunch of SAMEBODY cretins? ;-P
\\Qtard: Like in this excerpt... I tried to find MORE flashy one, with one really in straightjacket and drooling and screaming and struggling... but this one suffice to convey my point Just O.K. too. ;-P
\\Speaking from your own experiences of being forced to wear a straightjacket?
Yeah??? %-))))))))))))))))))))))))
Cause I am Bruce Willis? And that is excerpt from movie I was taking part -- 12 monkeys???
:-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
What a cretin you are. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
To try something like that. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Screaming and drooling when locked in a padded cell? Seems likely.
I. Didn't mentioned "padded cell". ;-P
You did it.
From own experience? :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Here, I checked it, with Google "locked in a padded cell".
And found that really -- that is what they do with crazy people.
I didn't knew it.
Thank you for sharing you experience. Now I know even better -- that reason of your cretinity. Of being crazy cretin. ;-P
\\There is ONLY a "current me".
Yeah.
You are right.
There is only one of alter-egos who govern the body of split-person crazy people. ;-P
\\BUT, if I did have any "samebody" alter egos, I guarantee that NONE of them would want to claim your moronic words.
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Because they all "truth tellers"? :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Why not? You "know" about these non existing "samebody cretins" -- WHY don't you know about why any one of them would want to claim your moronic words as their words? YOU are the one who made them up. They exist in your delusions, so they have whatever motivations YOU decide they do.
NewSpeakean use of "you" instead of "I"?
\\You keep saying. From your personal experience of talking to a psychiatrist? Psychiatrist explaining to you about your mental illness? But you denying your craziness and projecting it on others? Yes?
You already forgot... because that was said to some other of SAMEBODY cretins?
That I was already explaining that part... that that is colloquial knowledge.
Like from movies watched. ;-P
But... you have gaps in memory... of that times, yes, cretin?
So... instead... you filled that lacking memories, with your own experience of talks with psychiatrists? About which you in your delusions thinks that they not happened. Happened with SAMEBODY else? ;-P
\\Qtard: Especially when they are in a Strong Denial phase of their craziness. ;-P
\\Yeah. What I see you do. Strongly denying it is YOU that is crazy. Blaming others for YOUR craziness.
And *I* "do it"... with screaming "no, I'm not crazy. YOU are"???? ;-P
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Or... that is just AGAIN, some FALSE memories -- of your own experience which you in your crazy delusion trying to place on other people? ;-P
\\Yeah. As you heard -- from your psychiatrist during your therapy. Thanky for confirming.
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
And from where comes this "your psychiatrist during your therapy"???
Have I MENTIONED something like that???
Might be just yet one FAKE memory of yours, yes, cretin? :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Qtard: But... you have hysterical blindness -- and DO NOT recognize words written under same account as your own.
\\I always recognize my own words.
Like THIS your own words "your psychiatrist during your therapy" -- your recollections of your experience talking with psychiatrist? ;-P
\\Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...
\\ Here is another example for you -- you wrote (above) "NewSpeakian babbling. AGAIN!" Then you laughed. This was in regards to me accurately pointing out that you have expressed hatred for human rights. MANY MANY times. The human
\\ right to democracy. Which you STRONGLY believe should be gotten rid of in the United States. So WHY would you laugh? Your hatred for human rights isn't funny. Laughing (again) OBVIOUSLY due to idiocy.
Some other cretin intruded into your typing... to create such a gap in text? ;-P
As to question at hand -- all is very simple -- it is very ordnary reaction of sane and rational people -- when they listening to/reading some incredulous fact-less babbling. ;-P
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
That is what humor based on.
Like -- why people laughing when they in circus -- watching at merry tricks of some stupid clowns????
Because they idiots... as you tried to presume here?
Naaaah. Obviously not.
Because that clowns doing stupid things -- and it's damn funny. ;-P
But... you are cretin. And you unable to feel fun from what clowns in circus do, am I right???
Because you feel yourself being in their place, walking in their shoes? ;-)
Now... you are free to claim "No. You are wrong. I doing smart thing ONLY". Be my guest. Serve me a good laugh. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Qtard: See??? My EXPLANATION here is strictly and perfectly LOGICAL.
\\No. I don't see.
Of course.
Because you are cretin. Cretins -- do not understand LOGIC. ;-P
\\And no, your explanation is not logical. It is illogical.
Then... you should be able to provide CORRECT, logical explanation. Show where logical error happened. And why it wrong.
But...
naaaah. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))
You are cretin.
And all such your claims -- means nothing. ;-P
You just cretinicly trying to use words meaning of which you do not get. :-))))))))))))))))))))
And that is silly-funny thing to observe.
And that's why I'm laughing.
But... you will NOT GET IT anyway, even AFTER such a direct and thorough explanation -- that I see you as that stupid clown in circus, because you are cretin. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))
But... continue-continue, cretin. You clownish stupid tryes. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\More evidence you are an idiot. A person can NOT "continue" to so something they have never done. It would need to be done at least ONCE first. Before they could "continue" to do it.
Because you keep forgetting that you did it?
Somebody else of SAMEBODY cretins did it? ;-P
\\Of course I can explain. What you said -- it applies to yourself. Therefore it is "self revealing".
Poor thing.
You just said thing with other words -- that's called "rephrasing".
And not "explaining". :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Explaining -- involves: Showing FACTS and applying LOGIC to that facts. ;-P
But... even though I EXPLAINED it to you many-many times, in this past two years...
you still UNABLE to grok it.
Because -- cretin. You are. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
But... contonue-continue, cretin. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Yes. YOU are a NewSpeaking liar for whom everything is vice versa. I agree.
:-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Like NewSpeaking liar like you could say something else? ;-P
Yes, cretin?
Instead of this obviously NewSpeak using lie -- with substituting "I" with "you".
Yawn.
Damn self-revealing.
But, that is why you are totally cretinic liar -- liars who even slightly more intelligent, trying to conceal their lies.
\\Qtard: Thanky-thanky for confirming your cretinic credo YET ONE TIME. **cretinic laughter**
\\Talking to yourself again? You must be. Because I have no such credo. While you obviously do.
Yeah???
And your words is not YOUR WORDS... this, just above: "No, in reality. Reality isn't "propaganda"."? ;-P
About calling people "J6 insurrectionists"... though NOT A ONE of em was judged for "insurrection".
And even one who most notoriously called "insurrectionist" -- dRump. Are not in jail, and going to be elected. And gonna participate in debates... with Bi-den. ;-P
Must be because -- Bi-den, just want that "insurrectionists" dRump to be re-elected??? ;-P
Instead of punished. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\No. Nobody who walked on the street was arrested. ONLY people who fought with police officers and/or entered the Capitol.
Well... is "fighting with police" also called "insurrection" in USA law??? ;-P
\\Free people can decide to break the law. But then they are (if they are caught) held accountable. That's the way it works.
YAP, cretin.
You GOT it.
At last. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
That's EXACTLY what having Human Rights to Decide for Themself mean.
But...
I'm sure, that is just a fluke. Just a random occurrence of your cretinic random babbling appeared to became concise and true phrase. :-)))))))))))))))))))))00
And... you will confirm it with continuing cretinic babbling further. :-))))))))))))))))))))))))))0
\\The wannabe despot donald tRump tried to thwart democracy by sending his minions to the Capitol to END it. The Capitol police NEEDED to respond to donald tRump's despotic violence with violence. In defense of the Capitol and DEMOCRACY (that thing you hate passionately).
Yap.
Perfect excerpt from DEMN Propaganda. ;-P
\\Exactly. If the rioters sent by donald tRump had been successful democracy would have ended.
Yep.
"Democracy it's Rule of Democrats"... could be ended that time. ;-p
\\Qtard: \\em "having such right" <<<< those are YOUR words.\\ This excerpt for example No. Because Jews had rights. Have rights (as Jews did)? They can't be taken away. Don't have rights (as J6 insurrectionists did not -- there is no sore loser right to overthrow democracy)? They can't be taken away because they NEVER had them to begin with. October 24, 2023 at 3:27?PM
\\Exactly. They have ALL human rights. But not the imaginary one you made up. That "right" isn't a right. They never had it so it can't be taken away.
Now you DID IT again.
Called em non-humans. Non-deserving having Human Rights.
Yawn.
\\Qtard: You... YOURSELF... properly and inambigiuosly stated -- that "J6 insurrectionists"... AGIAN THAT *heinous* WORDS Don't have rights.
\\No. I did not, liar. I was only referring to the "right" you made up.
"Made up"???
By placing mentioning of it into Declaration of Independence of USA text? And into United Nations Human Right charter? ;-P
Yeah... you are totalitarian cretin who HATE such mentioning that Humans have Human Rights -- very much, it seems.
\\No. Not "them". ONLY that "right" to overthrow democracy you keep cretinically insisting is a "right". When it isn't. Those are YOUR heinous words. That sore losers have a "right" to end democracy for everyone else.
Babbling of totalitarian cretin. AGAIN.
Yawn.
\\No, that's a fact. Not a "claim".
Yep.
That you are totalitarian cretin -- it's firmly established fact.
By now.
\\Indeed. This discussion has been going on a long time. With you arguing AGAINST democracy and me arguing in favor of it.
Yep. With crying "I *DO* deny..." em having their democratic right to question elected officers.
Yawn.
Because you are totalitarian cretin -- that sure that mere people DO NOT, and CANNOT be allowed... or even cannot be ADMITTED... to have such natural and obvious Decmocratic and Human Rights -- questioning those who they elected.
As it happens in cases of liliPut and liliXi.
People there CANNOT come to their palaces, and start asking questions -- they can only came with flags and wag em by command, to show how they happy to have such a "democratic" rulers over themself.
\\A quote that proves your lie that I deny human rights? Yeah, I thought you would not give one. Because I know I never wrote anything like that for you to quote. Which you proved -- by "digging" and not finding one. Quoting me DEFENDING democracy and calling your fake "human right" out as the bullshit it is.
With saying "...they NEVER had them to begin with". Their Human Rights.
Oh, yes. You are biggly NewSpeaking liar. And totalitarian cretin.
And now, you even admitted it being FACT.
:-))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Blogger The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...
\\ Qtard: \\Also, "The people themselves" (as referenced in the preamble to the Constitution aka "we the people") means the population of the United States. Deciding for themselves to throw off monarchy for constitutional self governance. It is NOT a reference to insurrectionists throwing off Constitutional self governance in favor of installing an unelected ruler\\ Ough'Coughs... because tyrants -- do not like to be overtroned. ;-P
\\ You are NewSpeaking again. Calling a democratically elected leader a "tyrant".
Hitler was democratically elected.
So what??? He is not tyrant???
Well... many-many such examples are in history -- when people who at first came through democratic elections -- further became autocrats, and even tyrants.
\\That is what YOU want to eliminate. Proven by you continuing to argue that the results of that election (in which THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES chose Joe Biden) should have been overturned with violence.
And???
Where *I* claimed something like that????
That is just your DEMN propaganda howling such a lies. That people that came to ask questions, was gonna "overturn election".
Because, yeah, from DEMNs point of view -- it was dangerous, what if their cheating would be exposed.
That's why they started all that propaganda hawling.
Yawn.
\\The culprits were the people who tried to take that right AWAY from The People Themselves. And YOU keep defending these culprits that tried to end democracy.
Yeah... people themself... tried to end democracy, which is "rule of the people". Over-rule/over-throne themself???? %-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
That is EXACTLY that NewSpeak LIE that DEMN propaganda trying to brainwash people minds with.
That Rule of The People -- is NOT rule of the people. Because "Democracy... it's Rule of Democrats". ;-P
\\Qtard: \\The Founder Fathers (formerly, according to you, The "Fathers Founders") were representatives of "The People"\\ Yeah??? When? From which moment? And through what means??? Was there AN ELECTIONS... to choose am to be "Founder Fathers"??? And BY WHAT law... that elections was organized??? And WHAT Congress have written THAT law???
\\The Continental Congress.
And that "continental congress" have had ANY right to over-rule LAWS of The King? ;-P
Or... they just Decided for Themself... having such rights??? ;-)
""
The First Continental Congress convened in Philadelphia in 1774 in response to escalating tensions between the colonies and the British, which culminated in passage of the Intolerable Acts by the British Parliament following the Boston Tea Party.
The First Congress met for about six weeks, mainly to try to repair the fraying relationship between Britain and the colonies while asserting the rights of colonists,
""
\\Qtard: They NOT promoted idea to ABOLISH rule of law installed and protected by King???
\\No. That would be impossible. Because the United States doesn't have a king.
So???
That mean that just anybody can RE-name his surroundings, and declare itself independent? ;-P
\\Qtard: Maybe... they LOVED king's rule? **cretinic laughter**
\\Yes. Well, the rule of the person they wanted to make king -- donald tRump.
"Insurrectionists" that declared Independence of USA???? :-)))))))))))))))))))))))
How prophetic of em. :-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
\\Qtard: BTW... do you know that that was Constitutional Monarchy -- means, it was PRECISELY a "constitutional form of government" -- that "Founder Father" have upraised against.
\\One with a KING at the top. Hence the "monarchy" part. They replaced a king at the top with a president elected by The People.
Yeah.
And who ALLOWED em? ;-P
Which LAW explicitly gave em SUCH A RIGHT -- to dismiss Right Of a King to Govern, LAWS written by constitutional assembly -- Parliament?
Post a Comment