Monday, January 30, 2012
Monday, January 23, 2012
Sunday, January 22, 2012
WW II Historical Revisionism and The Eager To Help Plantation Negro 003 • DV University • Spring 2012
Deconstruction of the eager to help Plantation negro meme will reveal a reoccurring theme which characterizes Hollywood's single annual feel good Black film: The value of Black men is universally in doubt and must be demonstrated and proven in order for Black men to self actualize.
"Give us a chance massa! Give us a chance tuh fight and die tuh pwove we deeserv tuh be tweeted like menz suh!"
This Hegelian head fake is the perpetuation of the latest round of Neocon inspired historical revisionism which aims to elevate WWII to the ultimate and most noble of all conflicts. It wasn't. It was a conflict engineered by international banking interests and one in which the US never had any business involving itself.
It is currently fashionable to justify all contemporary engineered conflicts by analogizing them to WWII: "Of course we must attack Iran! Imagine if we had done nothing to stop the Nazis!"
"Saddam Hussein is Hitler!"
"Gaddafi is Hitler!"
"Ahmadinejad is Hitler!"
Silly little Black History Month movies like this are designed to emotionally invest Plantation Negros in the noble conflict myth of WWII. Instead of assessing the real motivations for war ... we are likely to grant or withhold our support dependent upon how it makes us feel emotionally.
Which is how Plantation Negros were tricked into propping up the current fascist regime, and blindly supporting its proxy - Barack Obama.
To Plantation Negros a black Presidential fantasy is more emotionally satisfying than a black Proxy reality.
.
Saturday, January 21, 2012
Our Only "Friend" In The Middle East?
Newspaper Editor: Israel Should Consider Assassinating Obama [UPDATE]
Andrew Adler, the owner and publisher of the Atlanta Jewish Times, a weekly newspaper serving Atlanta's Jewish community, devoted his January 13, 2012 column to the thorny problem of the U.S. and Israel's diverging views on the threat posed by Iran. Basically Israel has three options, he wrote:
Andrew Adler, the owner and publisher of the Atlanta Jewish Times, a weekly newspaper serving Atlanta's Jewish community, devoted his January 13, 2012 column to the thorny problem of the U.S. and Israel's diverging views on the threat posed by Iran. Basically Israel has three options, he wrote:
- Strike Hezbollah and Hamas,
- Strike Iran, or
- Order a hit on Barack Obama.
Friday, January 20, 2012
The Impending Irrelevance of College • DV University • Spring 2012
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. —
Florida
A&M University Police have confirmed that they have arrested four
students in connection with another marching band hazing incident. WFTV has confirmed the four students were in the clarinet section of the marching band. They are Denise Bailey, Hakeem Birch, Anthony Mingo and Brandon Benson.
"This is not a hate crime, this is a hazing crime, and that's what we are here to say today. We want to make the record very clear that FAMU has a 50-year history, a culture in this band of hazing," said the attorney's parents Christopher Chestnut.
Champion was beaten so badly, that the medical examiner said his body went into shock and he bled to death. An autopsy revealed extensive bruises to his chest, arms, shoulder, and back. The medical examiner ruled Champion's death a homicide.
Witnesses also said that Robert Champion was gay, which was something his parents didn't know.
Chestnut confirmed that Champion led an alternative lifestyle, but said the hazing was not a hate crime. Chestnut said the beating was a case of hazing, due to Champion's opposition to the act.
1) College students? Damn. Looks like they let anyone into college these days. (they do)
3) Hate crime? Uh oh. Homosexual clarinet players must not be able to withstand ritual stompings like heterosexual clarinet players.
,
Why didn't President Obama Nominate A Sista?
Elena Kagan (pronounced /ˈkeɪɡən/), [2] born April 28, 1960[1]) is Solicitor General of the United States. She is the first woman to hold that office, having been nominated by President Barack Obama on January 26, 2009, and confirmed by the U. S. Senate on March 19, 2009. Kagan was formerly dean of Harvard Law School and Charles Hamilton Houston Professor of Law at Harvard University. She was previously a professor of law at the University of Chicago Law School. She served as Associate White House Counsel under President Bill Clinton.
On May 10, 2010, President Obama announced Kagan as his nominee to become the 112th Justice on the U. S. Supreme Court, filling the expected vacancy created by the announced retirement of Justice John Paul Stevens at the end of the Supreme Court's 2009-2010 term. [3][4] If confirmed, she would become the fourth female Supreme Court justice in United States history and third on the court's current bench. She would also be the eighth Jewish justice in United States history and the third on the current bench. - Wikipedia
JH said...
I wasn't clear. Pls read, "more interesting".....better fodder for conversation than the lack of melanin in the nominee's skin. I've opposed the views that hold the pres to some "help the cause" standard.
What it MAY say are a number of things: Is BHO in fact an activist, promoting diversity on the court (Sotomayor, now Kagan)? Is it that "newfangled" diversity that includes gays as some group needing representation? Are BHO's jewish allies representative of his politics? A pander? A statement? Irrelevant? Since "jewish" was the "old liberal", is lesbian the "new"? how about that there will be no Protestants on the court? (I think).
My opinion? - I couldn't care less about the justice being black. Other than a black-history month phamplet update and a "warm and fuzzy", what do we get?
Relations with the Jews is at all time low. BO hasn't repealed "don't ask don't tell" as promised.
Is that all coincidence? Are you high?
JH said...
R., You're probably right that nobody else is gonna do it.
Although, a better question than the status of my sobriety is why you want it done so badly? Let me know, what do we "get" with a black, female nominee?
On May 10, 2010, President Obama announced Kagan as his nominee to become the 112th Justice on the U. S. Supreme Court, filling the expected vacancy created by the announced retirement of Justice John Paul Stevens at the end of the Supreme Court's 2009-2010 term. [3][4] If confirmed, she would become the fourth female Supreme Court justice in United States history and third on the court's current bench. She would also be the eighth Jewish justice in United States history and the third on the current bench. - Wikipedia
JH said...
I wasn't clear. Pls read, "more interesting".....better fodder for conversation than the lack of melanin in the nominee's skin. I've opposed the views that hold the pres to some "help the cause" standard.
What it MAY say are a number of things: Is BHO in fact an activist, promoting diversity on the court (Sotomayor, now Kagan)? Is it that "newfangled" diversity that includes gays as some group needing representation? Are BHO's jewish allies representative of his politics? A pander? A statement? Irrelevant? Since "jewish" was the "old liberal", is lesbian the "new"? how about that there will be no Protestants on the court? (I think).
My opinion? - I couldn't care less about the justice being black. Other than a black-history month phamplet update and a "warm and fuzzy", what do we get?
The R. said...
Does JH stand for jewish hypocrite? Of course it's PART of his job to get a sista on. No one else is gonna do it. Relations with the Jews is at all time low. BO hasn't repealed "don't ask don't tell" as promised.
Is that all coincidence? Are you high?
JH said...
R., You're probably right that nobody else is gonna do it.
Although, a better question than the status of my sobriety is why you want it done so badly? Let me know, what do we "get" with a black, female nominee?
Jewish Hypocrite? I don't get it.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Advanced Propaganda Deconstruction 505 - How The Civil Rights Movement & "Black History" Set Black People Back 50 Years • DV University • Fall 2010
When I was a kid I visited my grandmother in Baltimore every summer. I remember on her kitchen wall she had three photographs: Martin Luther King, John F. Kennedy and Jackie Robinson.
Jackie became a hero of mine by default.
One, we were born on the same day. More importantly, he wasn't just an athlete, he was also a college graduate and an officer in the army, which qualified him in the eyes of my father as a man worthy of admiration.
Today, every February a million or so American kids, black and white alike, dutifully choose Jackie Robinson as the subject of their "Black History Month" project.
One of my sons asked me what was special about Jackie Robinson and if he should do a report on him. I told him "Jackie broke the color barrier in baseball. You know. He was the first black player allowed to play in the Major Leagues."
My son stared back at me blankly ... like ... "and"?
I laughed and tried to relate why the fact that this great baseball player was "allowed" to play in the Major Leagues was a big deal.
My son asked me why did the Brooklyn Dodgers choose Jackie Robinson and how did they know he was a good player if he wasn't allowed to play. I explained that Jackie had become a star in what was called "The Negro Leagues".
My son asked me "What's a Negro League?".
I told him that in the early days of baseball there were several leagues. The American, The National and The Negro leagues were the dominant leagues. After a number of years the American League and the National Leagues merged but they would only allow white players on the teams.
"Did the Negro Leagues have stadiums and stuff?"
Oh yeah man. They had stadiums that were owned and operated by black people. The teams were owned by black men. They had radio broadcasts with black commentators, black agents, black managers, sponsors, the concessions were owned and operated by blacks and they had hundreds of thousands of fans. Even white fans attended the games because it was the best baseball in the world.
"What happened to the Negro League?"
Well, after Jackie Robinson was "allowed" to play in the Major Leagues other black stars followed him and the fans stopped supporting the Negro Leagues and followed their stars to the Major Leagues. Soon the Negro Leagues just faded away.
My son looked at me for a long moment.
"Daddy, I think I'm going to do my report on Kwame Ture."
JH said...
Good one...kinda hurt me up....but good one nonetheless. Damn, what if we followed the Garvey model in ATHLETICS...oh, shit, we'd have killed 'em!
But don't be afraid to still love Jackie.
Still another narrative places Jackie in the same context as MLK, Ali and Barak Obama. Cool ass brothas, god's sons, who exemplified all the characteristics that white people thought THEY had masterd (being a christian, carrying one's self calmly without submission to primal urges, manipulating the media, and becoming president of the mf'en USA, respectively)...and in turn, having the swarms of white people on their nutz to this present day, wishing they had it like we do. These guys proved out "black supremacy", as I see you like to talk about. "Envy of the World", to borrow a book title that I liked.
One, we were born on the same day. More importantly, he wasn't just an athlete, he was also a college graduate and an officer in the army, which qualified him in the eyes of my father as a man worthy of admiration.
Today, every February a million or so American kids, black and white alike, dutifully choose Jackie Robinson as the subject of their "Black History Month" project.
One of my sons asked me what was special about Jackie Robinson and if he should do a report on him. I told him "Jackie broke the color barrier in baseball. You know. He was the first black player allowed to play in the Major Leagues."
My son stared back at me blankly ... like ... "and"?
I laughed and tried to relate why the fact that this great baseball player was "allowed" to play in the Major Leagues was a big deal.
My son asked me why did the Brooklyn Dodgers choose Jackie Robinson and how did they know he was a good player if he wasn't allowed to play. I explained that Jackie had become a star in what was called "The Negro Leagues".
My son asked me "What's a Negro League?".
I told him that in the early days of baseball there were several leagues. The American, The National and The Negro leagues were the dominant leagues. After a number of years the American League and the National Leagues merged but they would only allow white players on the teams.
"Did the Negro Leagues have stadiums and stuff?"
Oh yeah man. They had stadiums that were owned and operated by black people. The teams were owned by black men. They had radio broadcasts with black commentators, black agents, black managers, sponsors, the concessions were owned and operated by blacks and they had hundreds of thousands of fans. Even white fans attended the games because it was the best baseball in the world.
"What happened to the Negro League?"
Well, after Jackie Robinson was "allowed" to play in the Major Leagues other black stars followed him and the fans stopped supporting the Negro Leagues and followed their stars to the Major Leagues. Soon the Negro Leagues just faded away.
My son looked at me for a long moment.
"Daddy, I think I'm going to do my report on Kwame Ture."
JH said...
Good one...kinda hurt me up....but good one nonetheless. Damn, what if we followed the Garvey model in ATHLETICS...oh, shit, we'd have killed 'em!
But don't be afraid to still love Jackie.
Still another narrative places Jackie in the same context as MLK, Ali and Barak Obama. Cool ass brothas, god's sons, who exemplified all the characteristics that white people thought THEY had masterd (being a christian, carrying one's self calmly without submission to primal urges, manipulating the media, and becoming president of the mf'en USA, respectively)...and in turn, having the swarms of white people on their nutz to this present day, wishing they had it like we do. These guys proved out "black supremacy", as I see you like to talk about. "Envy of the World", to borrow a book title that I liked.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Monday, January 16, 2012
Were Martin Luther King Jr. Here Today ... He Would Smack Barack Obama ... And Endorse Ron Paul
“I
am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world
revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values.
We must rapidly begin the shift from a "thing-oriented" society to a
"person-oriented" society. When machines and computers, profit motives
and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant
triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being
conquered... The choice is ours, and though we might prefer it otherwise
we must choose in this crucial moment of human history.”
- Martin Luther King, Jr., “Beyond Vietnam,” 1967
Was The Civil Rights Movement A Trick To Get Black People To Demand Temporary 'Privileges' Instead of Their Natural Rights?
The Billionaire Oligarchy and the Civil Rights Movement
The
major philanthropic foundations of America (primarily the Rockefeller
Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation, and a host of
others), represent the interests of the most highly concentrated
sources of power in the world. The foundations are run by and for major
elite interests, who simultaneously control the economic and political
apparatus of entire nations and the world economy.
The foundations were
founded in the early 20th century as a means of these same elites to
steer social progress, and ultimately undertake projects of social
engineering. It was these very same foundations that were the principle
financiers of the eugenics movement, which gave birth to scientific
racism and ultimately led to the Holocaust
In short, these
foundations had one principle aim: to socially engineer society
according to the wishes of their owners. Through the banks and
corporations these elites owned, they came to dominate the global
economy. Through the think tanks they established, they steered politics
and imperial foreign policy, and through the foundations, they
engineered ‘culture’ and co-opted social movements into social
engineering projects. Thus, every threat to the established social order
would become an asset in its advancement and legitimization. Andrew Gavin Marshall
Does The 'Civil Rights' Myth Serve As A Tool To Make Black People Think of The Federal Government As A Savior?
that dude said...
You're actually hawking "small government"?
Small government is cities that can't afford to keep the lights on all night long.
Small government is less services for poor suckas who support their own destruction.
I don't see any rich people with less government support in small government. In fact, small government means there are no checks and balances to raptor capitalism.
And you're trying to spin as a "man up" moment?
You're actually hawking "small government"?
Small government is cities that can't afford to keep the lights on all night long.
Small government is less services for poor suckas who support their own destruction.
I don't see any rich people with less government support in small government. In fact, small government means there are no checks and balances to raptor capitalism.
And you're trying to spin as a "man up" moment?
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Is President Obama's Surge A Trap?
Cynthia McKinney said ...
Last night, President Obama announced both his decision to add 30,000 U.S. troops to the mire in Afghanistan and his desire to see other countries and N.A.T.O. match his surge. Thanks to U.S. taxpayers, mercenaries will continue to be a part of the foreign presence in Afghanistan. The Republicans support the President’s move and are expected to reward President Obama with the bulk of their Congressional votes to pass his plan. CONT=>
Mr. Gray Conservative said ...
Mr. President, you say that we were compelled to fight a war in Afghanistan because on September 11, 2001, nineteen men—belonging to a group you refer to as "al Qaeda"—managed to establish control over approximately four pieces of American's transportation infrastructure which were used to murder nearly 3,000 people.
Mr. President, you say that this group, "al Qaeda", was allowed to maintain a safe-haven in Afghanistan from which to plan and train for their attacks.
Mr. President, according to the FBI, the knowledge and training which was required to pilot the hi-jacked vehicles that were used in the attack on America was gained in Florida. ...
Mr. President, the pilots who crashed planes into America's infrastructure on September 11, 2001 did not receive flight training in Afghanistan. There is no Afghan Flight Training School in Afghanistan.
Mr. President, how will sending 34,000 additional troops to Afghanistan prevent someone from executing another attack on America when the nature of the instigating attacks depended upon the successful appropriation of America's own transportation infrastructure to achieve violent ends?
DMG said...
I think those who are most vocal about the Presidents decision, probably had two scripts made up. One AGAINST him withdrawing troops, and one AGAINST him escalating the conflict.
Personally, I think if any retaliation or defeat of Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan was to be achieved, the window has now passed. I actually doubt the objective of disabling Al-Qaeda can be achieved with military force. Poor folks tend to think poorly of people with guns making them more hungry, and nobody likes foreign forces coming into their house, no matter the intentions.
Denmark Vesey said ...
DMG, if we were ever able to "defeat Al-Qaeda" ... how would we know?
What does a "defeat of Al-Qaeda" look like?
Personally I think people who still use the term "Al Qaeda" as if there truly exists a centralized organized terrorist group threatening the United States ... are ... well ... stupid.
"Al Qaeda" is a boogie man term to pacify Plantation Negros & Plantation Crackas. A memetic invention of transnational intelligence agencies. An umbrella term applied to any faction of resistance to globalist hegemony. A Hegelian Head Fake. The first time Bin Laden ever heard the term "Al Qaeda" was on TV ... after the 911 attacks.
Until you average Americans understand the true nature of this "war" these shenanigans will continue unabated until they destroy this great nation.
Last night, President Obama announced both his decision to add 30,000 U.S. troops to the mire in Afghanistan and his desire to see other countries and N.A.T.O. match his surge. Thanks to U.S. taxpayers, mercenaries will continue to be a part of the foreign presence in Afghanistan. The Republicans support the President’s move and are expected to reward President Obama with the bulk of their Congressional votes to pass his plan. CONT=>
Mr. Gray Conservative said ...
Mr. President, you say that we were compelled to fight a war in Afghanistan because on September 11, 2001, nineteen men—belonging to a group you refer to as "al Qaeda"—managed to establish control over approximately four pieces of American's transportation infrastructure which were used to murder nearly 3,000 people.
Mr. President, you say that this group, "al Qaeda", was allowed to maintain a safe-haven in Afghanistan from which to plan and train for their attacks.
Mr. President, according to the FBI, the knowledge and training which was required to pilot the hi-jacked vehicles that were used in the attack on America was gained in Florida. ...
Mr. President, the pilots who crashed planes into America's infrastructure on September 11, 2001 did not receive flight training in Afghanistan. There is no Afghan Flight Training School in Afghanistan.
Mr. President, how will sending 34,000 additional troops to Afghanistan prevent someone from executing another attack on America when the nature of the instigating attacks depended upon the successful appropriation of America's own transportation infrastructure to achieve violent ends?
DMG said...
I think those who are most vocal about the Presidents decision, probably had two scripts made up. One AGAINST him withdrawing troops, and one AGAINST him escalating the conflict.
Personally, I think if any retaliation or defeat of Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan was to be achieved, the window has now passed. I actually doubt the objective of disabling Al-Qaeda can be achieved with military force. Poor folks tend to think poorly of people with guns making them more hungry, and nobody likes foreign forces coming into their house, no matter the intentions.
Denmark Vesey said ...
DMG, if we were ever able to "defeat Al-Qaeda" ... how would we know?
What does a "defeat of Al-Qaeda" look like?
Personally I think people who still use the term "Al Qaeda" as if there truly exists a centralized organized terrorist group threatening the United States ... are ... well ... stupid.
"Al Qaeda" is a boogie man term to pacify Plantation Negros & Plantation Crackas. A memetic invention of transnational intelligence agencies. An umbrella term applied to any faction of resistance to globalist hegemony. A Hegelian Head Fake. The first time Bin Laden ever heard the term "Al Qaeda" was on TV ... after the 911 attacks.
Until you average Americans understand the true nature of this "war" these shenanigans will continue unabated until they destroy this great nation.
NOT THAT I'M KEEPING SCORE
Rehearsal For The Civil Rights Movement ... Who Wrote The Play?
In 1932 Myles Horton, a former student of Reinhold Niebuhr, established the Highlander Folk School in Monteagle, Tennessee. The school, situated in the Tennessee hills, initially focused on labor and adult education.By the early 1950s, however, it shifted its attention to race relations. Highlander was one of the few places in the South where integrated meetings could take place, and served as a site of leadership training for southern civil rights activists. Rosa Parks attended a 1955 workshop at Highlander four months before refusing to give up her bus seat, an act which ignited the Montgomery bus boycott.
Saturday, January 14, 2012
The Civil Rights Movement Was A Trick • Introduction To Modern Indentured Servitude • Proferssor Dolls.Life • DV University • Spring 2011
Dolls.Life said...
14th amendment:
This chapter is about the best kept secret in America. The government knows about the information in this chapter, but they will not admit it.
As we learned in chapter 1, every individual born in one of the 50 sovereign states was born an individual American sovereign, with inalienable rights. Those inalienable rights included life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The pursuit of happiness included the right to engage in a common occupation or business without a license, to travel freely from one place to another without permission from the state (driver's license), the inalienable right to acquire and possess property without paying property tax, etc.
What Do They Want? From Whom Do They Want It? Did They Get It?
HotmfWax said...
Four years before the Civil Rights Act passed, lunch counters in downtown Nashville were integrated within four months of the launch of the Nashville Student Movement’s sit-in campaign.
Students were beaten and jailed, but they won the day, Gandhi-style, by shaming the bigots with their simple request to be served like anyone else. The sit-ins then sparked sympathy boycotts of department stores nationwide. The campaign wasn’t easy, but people seized control of their own lives, shook their communities, and sent shockwaves through the country. State and city governments were far slower to respond.
Why is this inspirational history ignored in the current controversy? I can think of only one reason. So-called progressives at heart are elitists who believe – and want you to believe – that nothing good happens without BIG government.
To acknowledge that young people courageously stood down the bigots long before the patronizing white political elite in Washington scurried to the front of the march would be to confess that government is not the source of all things wonderful. Recall Hillary Clinton’s belittling of the grassroots civil rights movement when she ran against Barack Obama: “Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964…. It took a president to get it done.”
History says she is wrong. People were realizing the dream directly.
One might reasonably ask if Title II at least did no harm since it only codified what was already happening. The case can be made that it was harmful. The effort to pass the Act diverted the grassroots movement from self-help, mutual aid, and independent community action to lobbying, legislation, and litigation – that is, dependence on the white ruling elite. Direct efforts undertaken by free individuals were demoted to at best a supporting role.
That was a loss for freedom, justice, and independence. Our country is the worse for it.
Four years before the Civil Rights Act passed, lunch counters in downtown Nashville were integrated within four months of the launch of the Nashville Student Movement’s sit-in campaign.
Students were beaten and jailed, but they won the day, Gandhi-style, by shaming the bigots with their simple request to be served like anyone else. The sit-ins then sparked sympathy boycotts of department stores nationwide. The campaign wasn’t easy, but people seized control of their own lives, shook their communities, and sent shockwaves through the country. State and city governments were far slower to respond.
Why is this inspirational history ignored in the current controversy? I can think of only one reason. So-called progressives at heart are elitists who believe – and want you to believe – that nothing good happens without BIG government.
To acknowledge that young people courageously stood down the bigots long before the patronizing white political elite in Washington scurried to the front of the march would be to confess that government is not the source of all things wonderful. Recall Hillary Clinton’s belittling of the grassroots civil rights movement when she ran against Barack Obama: “Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964…. It took a president to get it done.”
History says she is wrong. People were realizing the dream directly.
One might reasonably ask if Title II at least did no harm since it only codified what was already happening. The case can be made that it was harmful. The effort to pass the Act diverted the grassroots movement from self-help, mutual aid, and independent community action to lobbying, legislation, and litigation – that is, dependence on the white ruling elite. Direct efforts undertaken by free individuals were demoted to at best a supporting role.
That was a loss for freedom, justice, and independence. Our country is the worse for it.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Little Brotha Don't Get It ...
Precisely Makeru thereby making Ron Paul "The Perfect Proxy to carry out the agenda of the oligarchic psychopathocracy." He's saying what we want to hear.
People are more informed than ever about the feds the IMF etc. Therefore you need a Ron Paul who will speak the same rhetoric that Americans want to hear. He can't do shit. These niggas will off him in a second. Oh but I guess Im supposed to have hope.
LOL to think Ron Paul is apart of some grassroots movement by the people, bwoi ya'll buggin' same shit..Obama says I'll end the war, Paul says I'll take out the Fed...bullshit..may as well keep Obama there for the sake of history.
His Royal Highness Denmark Vesey said ...
See.That's the mistake ya'll cats making.
Taking advantage of the opportunity afforded by Ron Paul's candidacy has nothing to do with a "grassroots movement by the people".
Man, fuck a grassroots movement. "Grassroots" is just another word for broke.
I told you 5 years ago. I'm going to tell you again today. The war is fought with memes. Not votes. Not even bullets and bombs. Memes are currency. Memes are money. Memes are power.
Ron Paul is a very useful fucking meme.
He proves the emperor has no clothes.
Plantation Negros ... deep down inside ... deeeeeeeeep down inside ... WANT to think Massa is all powerful.
"Whan Pawl cayn't do shit!
Duh Olygarkic Sycopathahcrusy is ALL POWERFULLL
Aint No Use Even Twyin' Tuh Wesistt!
He cayn' Ahdit Duh Fed!
WHO HE DINK HE IZZZZ?
Weeeez Alllll NIGGGAS!!!
"
The Israelization Of America 303 • DV University • Spring 2012
.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Monday, January 09, 2012
An Introduction To Plantation Negro Logic 001 • DV University • Spring 2012
- Study history. Whenever and wherever the Plantation feeds negros, the negros become slaves.
- CNu said...
- Whaaat?????
- I'm shocked you didn't think of DV and have that event catered by Whole Foods. They woulda hooked you up with kale, sprouts, celery, wild black African quinoa, carrots, ginger, cauliflower, bottles of first-pressed organic Greek olive oil, cumin, tumeric, bananas, nectarines, avocados, onions, wild talapia, fresh spinach linguine, tomatoes, gluten-free chia seed muffins, bok choy, string beans, fresh pesto, limes, and pink salt.
- You coulda called it The Blackest New Years Eve event in Beaumont.
- Denmark Vesey said ...
- Whaaat?????
- Don't listen to DV. He crazy. Have the event catered by Walmart. They will hook you up with genetically modified factory meat, High Fructose Corn syrup, hydrogenated oils, estrogen mimicking BPA's, pesticides, fluoride, mind altering antidepressants, microwaved macaroni and cheese, cloned Frankenstein meat, growth hormone treated cows milk, artery clogging starches, diabetes causing dairy products, "vegetables" completely void of nutrition, cancer causing canola oil, white bread, spam and a tub of "I can't believe it's not butter."
- You can call it the The Fattest New Year's Eve event in Beaumont.
- .
Saturday, January 07, 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)