SHAY NOW, sheenie SHEIN (shick old yidoid pedo Baruch 'Barry' Shein dba Barry Z. Shein (bzs@TheWorld.com) infeshting 700 Washington St B'righton Mass)...I JUSHT SHO happened to GOOGLE your circumcished jew shub-shishter Shuzan F. Binder jew pedo! GUESSH vot!
(too old to reply)
2019-11-04 14:19:55 UTC
On Mon, 04 Nov 2019 06:12:15 -0800, "shick old yidoid pedo Baruch
She is SHO googlefucked jew pedo BARUCH!
And it's ALL your jew FAULT!
No, VONDER she shitsh on you nowadaysh!
Well, yes.
Butt REGARDLESSH!....let'sh CONTINUE with the MERCILESSH and
Your, circumcished jew shishter Suzan F. Binder and her
circumcished jew hubby Marc W. Binder
Your, circumcished shitshke 'wife' Mary E. Riendeau Shein
Your, shenile circumcished jew mum Annie Shein (SHOOSH!)
Your, circumcished jew shub-uncle Hyman Shein (POP!)
Your, circumcished jew dad Shaul (LOLOK) Shein (zt"l/a"h since 1992)
and LASHT butt not LEASHT your, shubcherry-popped circumcished jew
shubnephew Zachary G. Binder!
Let the jewshaming CONTINUE!
2019-11-04 17:51:36 UTC
On Mon, 04 Nov 2019 06:19:55 -0800, clinically insane, pedophilic, serbian
bitch Razovic, the resident psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous
Post by NoSpamAtAll
Well, yes.
Well, YES, you ARE a VERY VERY sick asshole, pedophilic gay Razovic!
Pedophilic dreckserb Razovic arguing in favour of pedophilia, again:
"Isn't it time that paedophiles were admitted to the LGBTQ rainbow?
Now that every other sexual deviation seems to have been accommodated?"
MID: <Y8LUE.513827$***@usenetxs.com>
Michael Ejercito
2019-11-08 15:40:24 UTC
Post by Peeler
On Mon, 04 Nov 2019 06:19:55 -0800, clinically insane, pedophilic, serbian
bitch Razovic, the resident psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous
Post by NoSpamAtAll
Well, yes.
Well, YES, you ARE a VERY VERY sick asshole, pedophilic gay Razovic!
Indeed the mangina is.

Now here is Jack Marshall writing about the worst anti-gun activist ever.


Worst Anti-Gun, Anti-Gun Violence Activist Ever

The one thing I can admire in activists, even those whose agendas I find
wrong-headed and irresponsible, is integrity. Are they genuinely passionate
about what they advocate? Do they really believe the arguments they put
forth? Will they adhere to their stated principles even when it becomes
profitable or convenient to reject them? I may think an activist is
ill-informed, addicted to demagoguery and not very bright (Rep.
Octavia-Cortez comes immediately to mind), but I will always, perhaps
grudgingly, appreciate his or her passion, dedication, and persistence, if
they are accompanied by integrity.

And then we have activists like Ashley Auzenne, 39, a Texas mother who
fought for stricter gun control laws and an end to gun violence until last
week, when she used a gun to kill herself and her three young children,
Parrish, 11, Eleanor, 9, and Lincoln, 7.

I think it’s fair to call someone who says she wants to to end violence
(Auzenne’s Facebook profile pictures were accompanied with the hashtags
#Enough and #EndGunViolence) and then engages in it herself a hypocrite, a
liar who publicly pretended to hold one view while personally being capable
of engaging in the exact conduct she condemned when it suited her own
perceived needs.

Perhaps, on the other hand, we should regard her as the real life equivalent
of the villains in various TV shows and movies like 2007’s “Live Free or Die
Hard,” the third installment of the Bruce Willis “Die Hard” franchise. In
that movie, a tech whiz who had failed in his efforts to persuade the
government that crucial systems were vulnerable to hacker attacks sets out
to prove his point by becoming a cyber-terrorist who takes control of
government and commercial computers across the United States to launch a
“fire sale” disabling the nation’s infrastructure.

Does that kind of conduct qualify as a passion and commitment by an
activist? If so, it’s the ultimate utilitarian strategy, intentionally
causing death and destruction to focus attention on a greater threat. It
also fails multiple ethics tests, notably those of reciprocity and
Absolutism. The United States’ values and culture recoils at sacrificing the
lives of some to save the many.

All of this gives Ashley Auzenne too much credit, of course. Killing one’s
own innocent children to make a vivid public policy point isn’t dedication,
it’s madness. In all likelihood, the last thing this activist was thinking
about as she decided to start shooting was her anti-gun agenda. She had been
battling depression and anxiety in addition to painful physical ailments
such as arthritis and lupus, and had just reached the end-stages of an ugly
divorce. She snapped.

Maybe, in the abstract, this anti-gun zealot would have argued for “red
flag” laws that would make it more difficult for Americans to purchase guns
if they suffered from long-term illnesses, had endured stressful like
experiences such as a divorce, becoming unemployed, or losing a loved one,
in addition to being treated for emotional or mental illness. Maybe sane
Ashley would have pointed to the tragedy of mad Ashley as proof of the
rightness of her anti-gun, anti-gun violence mania.

Or maybe she was projecting her own mentality onto others by wanting to make
guns unavailable to her fellow citizens. There seems to be a lot of
projecting going on these days, with activists (and elected officials)
engaging in exactly the conduct they loudly accuse others of being
reprehensible for embracing.

In the end, whatever the cause, when a publicly passionate activist does
what she’s been condemning and protesting against it is reasonable to
conclude that her cause was not as sincere or thought-out as she pretended
it was. Like the anti-gay zealot who is a closeted gay himself, like the
anti-drug big city mayor who shares crack with an old girl friend, like the
politician who declares that abortion is murder and yet encourages his
mistress to have one, the anti-gun mom who shoots her children has
conclusively proven that she wasn’t the dedicated activist she was
pretending to be.

And that she was crazy, of course.