Jump to content

ConConfounder

Member
  • Content Count

    322
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hey, BeALoser.....when you explain your crackpot conspiracy theories, they just sound even more insane....as do you, you poor braindamaged wacko. "They are all really 'commies' and everybody on the left in America is in on it and all the encyclopedias are part of the conspiracy to cover it up." LOLOLOL. BTW, exactly which rightwingnutjob on which crappola blog wound you up and got your panties in a twist over a totally bullshyt fantasy about the non-existent nefarious activities of the "dreaded fabian socialists"? Was it Rush? Or Alex? Or some other nutjob?
  2. In the real world.....not the rightwingnut 'alternative universe'. World leaders laugh as Trump boasts of his achievements - AP News
  3. Sure you will, BeALoser. You'll debate me......and you'll lose, as you always do. Your head is incurably lodged up your butthole. You always lose because I have the scientific facts on AGW to support me, backed by the world scientific community and mountains of evidence. Or, in the case of your insanity about "Fabian Socialism", I have the historians and the encyclopedias on my side. While all you ever have are lies, pseudo-science and crackpot conspiracy theories. As usual for ignorant, clueless, and very gullible rightwingretards like you. Fabian Society The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright The Columbia University Press Fabian Society, British socialist society. An outgrowth of the Fellowship of the New Life (founded 1883 under the influence of Thomas Davidson), the society was developed the following year by Frank Podmore and Edward Pease. George Bernard Shaw and Sidney Webb joined soon after this and became its outstanding exponents. The group achieved recognition with the publication of Fabian Essays (1889), with contributions by Shaw, Webb, Annie Besant, and Graham Wallas. The Fabians were opposed to the revolutionary theory of Marxism, holding that social reforms and socialistic "permeation" of existing political institutions would bring about the natural development of socialism. Repudiating the necessity of violent class struggle, they took little notice of trade unionism and other labor movements until Beatrice Potter (who later married Sidney Webb) joined the group. They subsequently helped create (1900) the unified Labour Representation Committee, which evolved into the Labour party. The Labour party adopted their main tenets, and the Fabian Society remains as an affiliated research and publicity agency.
  4. You mean a response that always debunks your insane, anti-reality twaddle, BeALoser? You got that right.....for once. Yes, it is......as just about every sane intelligent adult would agree too. Oops, you must feel excluded. It is always so hilarious when you share one of the crackpot conspiracy theories that your cult of reality denial holds so dear, BeALoser. Is some deranged rightwingnut myth demonizing "Fabian Socialism" your new boogeyman, Loser? LOLOLOL. You are sooooo feebleminded! You have already shown us what kind of totally bogus sources you imagine are "authoritative sources" (pretty hilarious actually), and now you are claiming that the Encyclopedia Britannica is not a good source of factual information because they don't recognize or agree with your insane rightwingnut conspiracy theories and your demented denial of the world's scientific community's virtually unanimous conclusions regarding human caused global warming and its consequent climate changes. Just more evidence confirming your deranged disconnect from reality, Loser-man.
  5. Your poor little mind is so messed up, outofbrains. Your rightwingnut delusional stupidity is endless.
  6. Your moronic thread is DEAD, Skank, thoroughly debunked. Antarctica is losing increasing amounts of ice mass, and that is appreciably adding to sea level rise. The highly variable seasonal sea ice is irrelevant. Total thread fail! Glad you like solar though. Good luck with that.
  7. As historians have clearly established, Hitler was not a socialist, you poor delusional cretin, he was a fascist! He was an anti-Semetic mass murderer though, so for once, you actually got some tiny little bit of a post right.....instead of your usual totally insane posts. Although you revert to utter insanity with your demented claim that Democrats love Hitler.
  8. Ahhhh....the forum's Uber-Troll, ol' BeALoser, rises up from his dark little crackpot 'alternative universe' of rightwingnut reality denial to spew more retarded bullshyt from the usual rightwingnut sources of historical revisionism, pseudo-christian crackpots, and pathetic lies. And, of course, there is not a single historian or reputable historical source on his list of lies. He moronically imagines that everything fàctual or sciènce based must be "ludicrous", and completely misses the fact that he and his idiotic reality denial are what is really ludicrous. He only fools other retards, like many on this forum, who are too ignorant and gullible to check his fraudulent claims with reputable sources and actual history. So....first off is Bill Flax, a rightwing opinion writer, not any kind of historian, with ties to the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, an evangelical organization with a tangled web of corporate sponsors, including by foundations reportedly funded by the far right US oil billionaire Koch brothers. Second is "mises.org", which certainly misses the mark for sanity. It links to a crackpot organization called: The Ludwig von Mises Institute is an American think tank (tax-exempt!) specializing in Austrian school economics and political philosophy. It was established in 1982 with the approval of Margit von Mises, the widow of the Austrian school economist Ludwig von Mises. They have published many journals on political economy, economics, and philosophy, working from multiple angles to combine racism with wealth worship and empirical science denial. Econ majors will be pleased to know that LvMI offers fellowships, plus awards to those who have made (in their opinion) exceptional contributions in the field of economics. They offer an array of summer camp-style "seminars" where the future leaders of tomorrow can learn how to get laughed out of the boardroom take advantage of other suckers by saying "prax" a lot. (From: Ludwig von Mises Institute - RationalWiki Contents 1 Hail Hydra 2 Political positions 3 Conspiracy theories, pseudohistory, and pseudoscience 3.1 Pearl Harbor and 9/11 3.2 Climate change 3.3 Smarter than Einstein 3.4 Typhoid Mises 3.5 Blood for the Blood God! 3.6 White supremacy 4 Greatest hits 5 Luminaries 6 Mises Wiki 7 See also 8 External links 9 Notes 10 References Next is a really crackpot cult of utter weirdos called theroadtoemmaus, as anyone who looks at their website can clearly see. Once again, no historians. And BeALoser's final offering is just some quoted Nazi propaganda that he apparently and rather insanely takes as a literal and honest self description of Nazi-ism from the Nazi's chief propaganda pusher, Joseph Goebbels. LOLOLOL. So, now that the Loser's bullcrap has been debunked as just crackpot, reality-challenged political opinions without substance, here's the real world facts from a very reputable source....which, of course, the rightwingnut trolls, like BeALoser, must somehow reject and deny in order to maintain their insane myth based 'alternative reality' bubble. Watch him dance.... From Encyclopedia Britannica..... Were the Nazis Socialists? WRITTEN BY: Michael Ray Were the Nazis socialists? No, not in any meaningful way, and certainly not after 1934. But to address this canard fully, one must begin with the birth of the party. In 1919 a Munich locksmith named Anton Drexler founded the Deutsche Arbeiterp (DAP: German Workers’ Party). Political parties were still a relatively new phenomenon in Germany, and the DAP—renamed the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP; National Socialist German Workers’ Party, or Nazi Party) in 1920—was one of several fringe players vying for influence in the early years of the Weimar Republic. It is entirely possible that the Nazis would have remained a regional party, struggling to gain recognition outside Bavaria, had it not been for the efforts of Adolf Hitler. Hitler joined the party shortly after its creation, and by July 1921 he had achieved nearly total control of the Nazi political and paramilitary apparatus. To say that Hitler understood the value of language would be an enormous understatement. Propaganda played a significant role in his rise to power. To that end, he paid lip service to the tenets suggested by a name like National Socialist German Workers’ Party, but his primary—indeed, sole—focus was on achieving power whatever the cost and advancing his racist, anti-Semitic agenda. After the failure of the Beer Hall Putsch, in November 1923, Hitler became convinced that he needed to utilize the teetering democratic structures of the Weimar government to attain his goals. Over the following years the brothers Otto and Gregor Strasser did much to grow the party by tying Hitler’s racist nationalism to socialistrhetoric that appealed to the suffering lower middle classes. In doing so, the Strassers also succeeded in expanding the Nazi reach beyond its traditional Bavarian base. By the late 1920s, however, with the German economy in free fall, Hitler had enlisted support from wealthy industrialists who sought to pursue avowedly anti-socialist policies. Otto Strasser soon recognized that the Nazis were neither a party of socialists nor a party of workers, and in 1930 he broke away to form the anti-capitalist Schwarze Front (Black Front). Gregor remained the head of the left wing of the Nazi Party, but the lot for the ideological soul of the party had been cast. Hitler allied himself with leaders of German conservative and nationalist movements, and in January 1933 German President Paul von Hindenburg appointed him chancellor. Hitler’s Third Reich had been born, and it was entirely fascist in character. Within two months Hitler achieved full dictatorial power through the Enabling Act. In April 1933 communists, socialists, democrats, and Jews were purged from the German civil service, and trade unions were outlawed the following month. That July Hitler banned all political parties other than his own, and prominent members of the German Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party were arrested and imprisoned in concentration camps. Lest there be any remaining questions about the political character of the Nazi revolution, Hitler ordered the murder of Gregor Strasser, an act that was carried out on June 30, 1934, during the Night of the Long Knives. Any remaining traces of socialist thought in the Nazi Party had been extinguished.
  9. Having some dim idea that Nazis are 'bad', rightwing propaganda pushers try to fool the ignorant with factually false historical revisionism linking fascism, the most far, far rightwing ideology around, to liberalism and socialism, which are actually the exact ideological opposites of fascism. Retarded Republican CongessCritters try to push this demented propaganda meme and historians rightly refute and debunk them (see the OP). A really, really retarded rightwingnut troll tries to refute the historians by "quoting" Hitler......but he is so stupid and brainwashed that his supposed quote is actually some bogus bullshyt from a rightwingnut propaganda mill, and NOT an actual Hitler quote. Only brainwashed rightwing retards still swallow this moronic myth. This thread is thus a useful guide to identifying the useless delusional cretins on this forum. They line up to expose their delusional ignorance and argue about meaningless nonsense that has nothing to do with the evils of far rightwing fascism.
  10. REALLY Bad wordING HILARIOUS!!! I point out that rightwingretards believe a lie about Hitler and the fascist Nazis being really liberal socialists, with historical proof that that deranged bit of historical revisionism is a complete lie......and, of course, one of the most retarded rightwingnutjobs on this forum comes up with another deliberate lie to support the first lie. From one of the usual crackpot rightwingnut sources of malignant misinformation and dimwitted lies......LouderWithCrowder. In the real world...... Did Adolf Hitler Say That Nazis Are ‘Mortal Enemies of the Present Capitalist Economic System’? Snopes Fact Check Claim: Adolf Hitler was a “leftist” who stated that Nazis “are socialists [and] mortal enemies of the present capitalist economic system.” Rating: False About this rating Origin: Back in January 2016, conservative web site Louder with Crowder dipped its toes into the world of fact-checking with an article (“MYTH BUSTED: Actually, Yes, Hitler Was a Socialist Liberal”) that makes the claim that “leftists” have unfairly rewritten history to paint Hitler as right wing, based in part on the fact that the Nazi party had the word “socialist” in its name. Perhaps ironically, that article opens with a tidbit of literally rewritten history, misattributing a quote by Nazi party member Gregor Strasser to Adolf Hitler: While Hitler may have co-opted elements of this language when it was politically expedient, they are not his words. Instead, these are the words of early Nazi party official Gregor Strasser, printed in a 1926 pamphlet titled Thoughts about the Tasks of the Future. That pamphlet, as we will discuss in detail below, attempted to appeal to ultranationalist movements on both the left and the right at a time when the Nazis were a fringe political party seeking to carve out as big a part of the German electorate as possible. Strasser’s pamphlet went on to make these decidedly non-socialist sounding statements as well: Gregor Strasser was a prominent Nazi propagandist in the formative days of the Nazi party. A World War I veteran active in post-war anti-Soviet paramilitary activities, he — along with Adolf Hitler — became one of the two most prominent voices for the party as it attempted to build a cohesive ideology and broad support across the various factions within a deeply divided Germany. As discussed in a biography of Strasser: As it happens, Hitler was not a fan of Strasser’s ideas. While his efforts helped the Nazi’s with early electoral victories in the elections of 1928, his views became dangerously discordant with Hitler’s, and he was assassinated on Hitler’s orders in 1934: The fact that Hitler disagreed with Strasser’s view of “National Socialism” so much that he was killed in part for holding those views makes it all the more absurd to attribute this quote to Hitler, as Louder with Crowder has done. The political milieu of Germany in the 1920s was a hotbed of political unrest and paramilitary violence that cannot easily fit into simple “left” and “right” binaries. Hitler’s use of “socialism” attempted to borrow the rhetorical devices of the left, but not the ideological ones, as discussed in The Coming of the Third Reich by Richard Evans: The post suggests that “this nifty thing called ‘history’ in combination with ‘the internet'” can “bust this myth” that Hitler was right wing. However, the web site takes a superficial view of German history based, in large part, on a comically misattributed quote. If anything, Louder with Crowder has made a strong argument for including some books along with that internet research.
  11. Here's a good debunking of one of the rightwingretards' favorite falsehoods ---- moronically and very ignorantly claiming that Hitler and his Nazis were really liberal socialists, akin to American Democrats, rather than their historically accurate depiction as far right wing, racist, ultra-nationalist, mass murdering wackos, AKA - Fascists. Two of the most stupid and ignorant members of Congress recently tried to push this historical revisionist fake-history and their demented twaddle was immediately debunked by real historians. Adolf Hitler was not a socialist A Republican representative described Adolf Hitler as a socialist and compared Democrats to Nazis. Sadly, Rep. Brooks is far from alone in his [deranged] opinions. VOX By Jane Coaston Mar 27, 2019 On Monday, after the end of the Mueller investigation, Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks tookto the House floor to denounce the probe as “the big lie” — and to link it to what he said was another of history’s greatest lies. Discussing special counsel Robert Mueller’s nearly two-year investigation into President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign’s ties with Russia, Brooks said, “socialist Democrats and their fake news allies … have perpetrated the biggest political lie, con, scam, and fraud in American history.” Brooks went on, saying, “In that vein, I quote from another socialist who mastered big lie propaganda to a maximum, and deadly, effect.” And then, after reading a long quote about how “broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature,” Brooks got to his big conclusion: And Brooks was somehow not alone in making the “Nazis were socialists” argument in Congress this week. Rep. Louis Gohmert did the same, during a House Judiciary Committee meeting about a GOP resolution on the Mueller probe in which he said the Justice Department could, in the future, enable “another socialist like Hitler to come along.” There are many, many, many things wrong with Rep. Brooks’s and Rep. Gohmer’s understanding of Nazism, from a basic misunderstanding of Nazism and Nazi ideology to what I term the ‘Americanization’ of Nazism: an effort to put Nazi Germany somewhere on the American political axis, where it very much does not belong. But one of their core assumptions — “Nazis were socialists” — has become one of the biggest memes within a swath of the American Right. And it is woefully, almost hilariously incorrect. Nazism, socialism, and history From January 30, 1933, to May 2, 1945, Germany was under the control of the National Socialist German Workers Party (in German, the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei — Nazi for short). Founded in 1920, the Nazi Party steadily gained power within German electoral politics, leading to then-President Paul von Hindenberg appointing Adolf Hitler as chancellor of Germany in 1933. (Counter to some popular beliefs, Hitler was never “elected” either chancellor or to his ultimate role as führer.) Nazism arose in a very specific — and very German — political environment. To begin with, Germany had a long history of socialist and Marxist political organizing even before the First World War, which launched in 1914. (So no, Rep. Brooks, the Nazi Party was not the “socialist” party of Germany — that would have been the Social Democratic Party, or perhaps the Communist Party of Germany.) And following the end of the First World War — and more importantly, Germany’s loss in the war and, thus, the end of the German empire — German politics became incredibly contentious, even deadly. Communists and Freikorps — World War One veterans who became a right-wing militia of sorts during the 1920s — at times evenbattled in the streets. In 1919, for example, 15,000 Germans died in nine days of fighting between left-wing groups and right-wing groups on the streets of Berlin. Into that environment stepped Adolf Hitler, a failed artist from Braunau am Inn, Austria, who recognized the unique vulnerabilities of not just the German political system but the German populace itself, a populace that had just lost 19 percent of its male population to the war and was still enduring massive food shortages nationwide. He joined what was then called the German Workers Party (DAP) in 1919. The party renamed itself the NSDAP in 1920, and Hitler became party chairman in 1921. But despite joining what would be called the “National Socialist” German workers party, Adolf Hitler was not a socialist. Far from it. In fact, in July 1921, Hitler briefly left the NSDAP because an affiliate of the party in Augsburg signed an agreement with the German Socialist Party in that city, only returning when he had been largely given control of the party itself. Whatever interest Hitler had in socialism was not based on an understanding of socialism that we might have today — a movement that would supplant capitalism in which the working class would seize power over the state and the means of production. He repeatedly pushed back efforts by economically left-leaning elements of the party to enact socialist reforms, saying in a 1926 conference in Bamberg (organized by Nazi Party leaders over the very question of the party’s ideological underpinnings) that any effort to take the homes and estates of German princes would move the party toward communism and that he would never do anything to assist “communist-inspired movements.” He prohibited the formation of Nazi trade unions, and by 1929 he outright rejected any efforts by Nazis who argued in favor of socialistic ideas or projects in their entirety. Joseph Goebbels, who would eventually become Reich Minister of Propaganda once the Nazi Party seized control of Germany, wrote in his diary about Hitler’s rejection of socialism at that 1926 meeting, “I feel as if someone had knocked me on the head ... my heart aches so much. ... A horrible night! Surely one of the greatest disappointments of my life.” Rather, Hitler viewed socialism as a political organizing mechanism for the German people more broadly: a way of creating a “people’s community” — the volksgemeinschaft — that would bring everyday Germans (and businesspeople) together not based on their class but on their race and ethnicity. Thus, he would use the unifying aspects of “National Socialism” to get everyday Germans on board with the Nazi program while simultaneously negotiating with powerful businesses and the Junkers, industrialists and nobility, who would ultimately help Hitler gain total power over the German state. What Hitler actually thought about “socialism” The best example of Hitler’s own views on socialism are evident in a debate he had over two days in May 1930 with then-party member Otto Strasser. Strasser and his brother Gregor, who was an avowed socialist of sorts, were a part of the Nazi Party’s left wing, arguing in favor of political socialism as an essential ingredient in Nazism. But Hitler did not agree. When Strasser argues for “revolutionary socialism,” Hitler dismisses the idea, arguing that workers are too simple to ever understand socialism: And when Strasser calls for the return of 41 percent of private property to the state and dismisses the role of private property in an industrialized economy, Hitler tells him that will not only ruin “the entire nation” but also “end all progress of humanity.” In fact, Hitler dismisses even the idea of challenging the status of capitalism, telling Strasser that his socialism is actually Marxism and making the argument that powerful businessmen were powerful because they were evolutionarily superior to their employees. Thus, Hitler argues, a “workers council” taking charge of a company would only get in the way. Strasser then asks him directly what he would do with powerful steel and arms manufacturer Krupp, known today as ThyssenKrupp. Would Hitler permit the company to stay as big and powerful as it was in 1930? In this debate, Hitler isn’t making the case for socialism, much to Strasser’s dismay. He is making the case for fascism — in his view, not just an ideal system to organize government, but the only real option. “A system that rests on anything other than authority downwards and responsibility upwards cannot really make decisions,” he tells Strasser. The concept of the “people’s community” undergirded much of the National Socialist project. Much like the basic idea of fascism, a word that stems from the Italian word for a bundle of rods tied together tightly, National Socialism was intended to tie Germany together under one leader — Hitler, the führer — with “subversive elements” like Jews, LGBT people, Roma, and, yes, socialists and Communists, removed by force. In a 1923 interview with pro-Nazi writer George Sylvester Viereck, Hitler said, “In my scheme of the German state, there will be no room for the alien, no use for the wastrel, for the usurer or speculator, or anyone incapable of productive work.” In Hitler’s version of National Socialism, socialism was “Aryan” and focused on the “commonwealth” of everyday Germans — a group of people he unites as one based entirely on their race. In that same interview with Viereck, Hitler added: Both Otto Strasser and his brother Gregor paid the price for challenging Hitler and advocating for socialism within the Nazi party. Gregor was murdered during the Night of Long Knives in 1934, a mass purge of the left wing of the Nazi Party in which between 85 and 200 people were killed as part of an effort, in Hitler’s words, to prevent a “socialist revolution.” Otto Strasser fled Germany, ultimately seeking refuge in Canada. Nazism wasn’t a socialist project. Nazism was a rejection of the basic tenets of socialism entirely, in favor of a state built on race and racial classifications. On “the big lie” and Mein Kampf It’s that fact that those who attempt to arbiter (whether in good faith or in very, very bad faith) the socialist bona fides of the Nazi Party program seem to forget: Hitler’s politics were based on a foundation of racism and anti-Semitism, first and foremost. He would then combine that with his belief in the führerprinzip — the “leader principle” — which held that one supreme leader (Hitler) was the ultimate authority and “supreme judge” over the German people. This was the backbone of the Nazi Party, one that would ultimately lead Nazi Germany on the road toward mass murder. And that brings us to Rep. Brooks and his use of “the big lie” and why that was so problematic. First and foremost, the term “big lie,” which Brooks (and many others) have used to describe propaganda generally, was used by Hitler to refer to a very specific “lie.” In Mein Kampf, Hitler’s 1925 autobiography-cum-manifesto, he lays out that supposed myth: that Germany’s loss in the First World War was due to military failures, specifically of Erich Ludendorff, who served as quartermaster general of the German Army, and not to the influence of Jews. This is a reference to the “stab-in-the-back” myth that argued “subversive” elements (namely Jews) had been responsible for Germany’s loss in World War I, by “stabbing” German soldiers fighting in France and elsewhere “in the back” with treacherous machinations on the home front. In fact, just a few lines up from the section Brooks quoted, Hitler writes on the real enemy who perpetuated the big lie: It is impossible to extricate Hitler’s understanding of the idea of the “big lie” — a propaganda technique which argues that telling people “colossal untruths,” in Hitler’s words, is more effective than using small lies — from his argument that Jews are not only behind the “big lie” about Ludendorff, but that they are themselves a “big lie.” (It’s also worth remembering that Mein Kampf, like all manifestos, was written with the intent of being shared widely, and is not a diary of Hitler’s innermost thinking.) So Hitler wasn’t making an argument about American politics when he coined the term “the big lie.” He was making an argument about Jews, one that argued “international Jewry” was responsible for the failures of the First World War, and one that would ultimately lead to the horrors of the Holocaust. Nazism was a real political entity, not a political cudgel No American political party can be compared to the Nazi Party that controlled Germany for 12 years. Nazism has no American corollary. American liberalism is not at all like Nazism, and neither, for that matter, is American conservatism. Nazism arose in Germany, gained power in Germany, held power in Germany, and would ultimately fall at the end of the Second World War in Germany. Nazism aligned itself with industrialists and corporations that would ultimately utilize Nazi slave laborers and patent the chemicals used in Nazi death camps to kill millions of men, women, and children. The word “socialist” doesn’t change that, just as the word “Democratic” does not make the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea — North Korea — a democracy. So no, Hitler wasn’t a socialist. Nazism wasn’t a socialist project. And comparing American Democrats to Nazis is not just incorrect, but wrong, just as it is when American Democrats and liberals directly compare Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler. Nazism was a political project built on anti-Semitism, racism, and dictatorial verve, one that took place in a specific country and at a specific moment in history. We forget that fact at our own risk.
  12. The fact that the rightwing retards continue to push these dimwitted lies about this despicable corporate lobbyist/whore being one of the "founders of Greenpeace" (making the claim because Greenpeace has way more credibility than the Republicans) after seeing their lies completely debunked many, many times over the last decade or so, just confirms (besides the fact that they are trolls) what many people are saying, after seeing such massive amounts of confirming evidence.....Trump supporters have got to be the stupidest and most gullible people on the planet. Trump—and Fox—are lying about a corporate lobbyist being 'the founder of Greenpeace' Mark Sumner 2019/03/12 · Donald Trump spent Tuesday morning binge-watching Fox and excitedly tweeting out everything he saw. Honestly, it’s lucky America didn’t get an update about Matthew McConaughey’s driving choices, or those bears that use toilet paper. Instead Trump delivered something even more stupid — a tweet about how the “co-founder of Greenpeace” declared that climate change is “fake science” and that “carbon dioxide is the main building block of all life.” Even leaving aside the fact that carbon dioxide is not the building block of all life, the environmental expert Trump cites here was Patrick Moore — who has been getting another round of attention lately as a conservative darling. He’s beloved on the right not just for reliably railing against climate change, and the Endangered Species Act, and anything else where “even the founder of Greenpeace is against it!” would be handy, but also for calling Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a "pompous little twit.” In fact, that insult alone was enough to get him a whole segment on Fox News. But here’s the thing the “fair and balanced” network isn’t saying about their favorite Greenpeace founder. . . . He wasn’t a founder of Greenpeace. Moore was an early member, joining Greenpeace about a year after it started, but he’s no more a “founder” than everyone who worked at Apple or Google in their first year. Moore didn’t stick with Greenpeace long, because he found a much more lucrative scam. Thirty-three years ago, he left the organization and created a “consulting group” (which seems to consist only of himself) named Greenspirit Enterprises. And what does Greenspirit do? Represent oil companies. And coal companies. And uranium mining companies. And pesticide manufacturers. And basically anyone who wants to take a massive dump on the environment while putting an arm around the guy who was “the founder of Greenpeace.” As Greenpeace says, Moore was “not a co-founder of Greenpeace. He does not represent Greenpeace. He is a paid lobbyist, not an independent source.” Patrick Moore is this guy. The one who corporations bring in to “prove” whatever jackassery they’re up to is “safe.”
  13. And there goes Phuckhead615, once again moronically proving the truth of the OP.
  14. More rightwingnut lies and fraudulent myths. Your gullibility is astounding. Trump—and Fox—are lying about a corporate lobbyist being 'the founder of Greenpeace' Mark Sumner 2019/03/12 · Donald Trump spent Tuesday morning binge-watching Fox and excitedly tweeting out everything he saw. Honestly, it’s lucky America didn’t get an update about Matthew McConaughey’s driving choices, or those bears that use toilet paper. Instead Trump delivered something even more stupid — a tweet about how the “co-founder of Greenpeace” declared that climate change is “fake science” and that “carbon dioxide is the main building block of all life.” Even leaving aside the fact that carbon dioxide is not the building block of all life, the environmental expert Trump cites here was Patrick Moore — who has been getting another round of attention lately as a conservative darling. He’s beloved on the right not just for reliably railing against climate change, and the Endangered Species Act, and anything else where “even the founder of Greenpeace is against it!” would be handy, but also for calling Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a "pompous little twit.” In fact, that insult alone was enough to get him a whole segment on Fox News. But here’s the thing the “fair and balanced” network isn’t saying about their favorite Greenpeace founder. . . . He wasn’t a founder of Greenpeace. Moore was an early member, joining Greenpeace about a year after it started, but he’s no more a “founder” than everyone who worked at Apple or Google in their first year. Moore didn’t stick with Greenpeace long, because he found a much more lucrative scam. Thirty-three years ago, he left the organization and created a “consulting group” (which seems to consist only of himself) named Greenspirit Enterprises. And what does Greenspirit do? Represent oil companies. And coal companies. And uranium mining companies. And pesticide manufacturers. And basically anyone who wants to take a massive dump on the environment while putting an arm around the guy who was “the founder of Greenpeace.” As Greenpeace says, Moore was “not a co-founder of Greenpeace. He does not represent Greenpeace. He is a paid lobbyist, not an independent source.” Patrick Moore is this guy. The one who corporations bring in to “prove” whatever jackassery they’re up to is “safe.”
  15. Only fascist retards think like you do, Phuckhead33.
×