Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.


All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 404 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 17  Next   
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 12:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 10:11 pm
Posts: 7494
Location: Outa da doghaus and I ain't goin' back!
Occupation: Arf! Arf! Arooooooooooo! (Get that damned kitty!)
AnitaMaria wrote:
:-bd

Maybe they can work it out so that Dummett--not just Irion--has to write a check to the DNC also. After all, as he has said many times, he is the architect of the strategy of suing the DNC. He's even named it after himself: Dummett's Dictum. :-*

Dummett can stuff his Dictum up his .... :twisted:

_________________
  • I know that there are no limits to which the powers of privilege will not go to keep the workers in slavery.
  • My friends, it is solidarity of labor we want. We do not want to find fault with each other, but to solidify our forces and say to each other: “We must be together; our masters are joined together and we must do the same thing.”
  • Pray for the dead, and fight like hell for the living.
—Mother Jones


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 7:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm
Posts: 13573
Location: New England
Occupation: Professor of Sociology
Van Aryan rejects the legal arguments being made by the Defendants. Those arguments are all based on precedents or statutes, and Van Aryan's chief aim is to overturn bad precedents and void unconstitutional statutes. His motto is "Strategically challenging flawed legal precedent to restore our Constitution."

Quote:
A letter from Founder VAN IRION

“It is time to focus not on justices but on the body of precedent they work from.” Amity Shlaes, 2010

Liberty Legal Foundation is dedicated to restoring Constitutional limits on government by overturning flawed legal precedent. We work towards this goal by filing lawsuits that challenge key legal precedent that is unconstitutional. The first battle we took on challenges the current legal interpretation of the Commerce Clause, as it was this interpretation that led Congress to believe they had the authority to pass Obamacare. The Obamacare Class Action not only seeks to overturn this completely onerous “health reform” bill but to also re-establish some significance of the 10th Amendment relative to the Commerce Clause. More than 28,000 Americans from all 50 states are named as individual plaintiffs in our nationwide Obamacare Class Action lawsuit (OCA) with more joining everyday.

Liberty Legal Foundation’s second battle, the Immigration Class Action (ICA), challenges the Federal government’s failure to secure our borders. The Obama administration’s recent lawsuit against Arizona raises the opportunity to challenge erroneous Supreme Court precedent on several issues including state sovereignty, standing doctrine, and pre-emption doctrine. As part of its lawsuit against Arizona, the Obama administration argued that Arizona’s law is pre-empted by Federal law. Liberty Legal Foundation will be pointing out that pre-emption begins with the presumption that Federal law is being enforced. The mere existence of Federal law, coupled with the Federal government’s explicit refusal to enforce its own law, should not prevent States from enforcing Federal law. Unfortunately, the District Court in Arizona has enjoined Arizona from enforcing Federal law. Liberty Legal Foundation will be engaging this battle with the aim to correct the District Court’s error and to force the Federal government to enforce Federal immigration law.

This war will take time and it will require your support. If you agree that our Constitution is being ignored by the Federal government and want to take an active role in reversing flawed legal precedent, please support Liberty Legal Foundation either directly or by joining the OCA and the ICA.

Crooks and Liars Feb. 1, 2009 Amity Shlaes is A Right Wing Hack by Susie Madrak. Shlaes is not an attorney or a political scientist. She is a journalist with a B.A. from Yale in English (magna cum laude).

_________________
"Someone should tell Mrs. Reagan that young people -- not even young people on drugs -- are not the ones responsible for the major problems besetting the world!" John Irving, A Prayer for Owen Meany: A Novel, p. 370.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 8:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 12:36 pm
Posts: 1964
Plutodog wrote:
AnitaMaria wrote:
:-bd

Maybe they can work it out so that Dummett--not just Irion--has to write a check to the DNC also. After all, as he has said many times, he is the architect of the strategy of suing the DNC. He's even named it after himself: Dummett's Dictum. :-*

Dummett can stuff his Dictum up his .... :twisted:

"Wrecked him? damned near killed him!"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 15, 2012 11:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 1:22 pm
Posts: 9134
Location: Supreme Court of clerks
Occupation: Petite treason procurer
Quote:
The dispositive issue in this case is who the arbiter of presidential qualifications is. The answer is irrefutable: not Plaintiffs.

=D>

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image

ASSUME ANYTHING WRITTEN HERE WILL END UP ON TAITZ'S SITE AND FACEBOOK. AND JEROME CORSI WILL POST SCREENSHOTS TO WND. AND WILL BE FILED BY A BIRTHER AS AN EXHIBIT IN FEDERAL COURT. NOW HAVE FUN!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2012 4:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23530
Docket Update...

2012-05-18 - LLF (DUMMETT) - PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO FILE A SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS

Quote:
Grounds for this motion are that Plaintiffs have become aware of relevant precedent that was not previously disclosed to the Court; that the Defendants’ consolidated reply raised arguments not previously raised by the Defendants or the Plaintiffs; and that Defendants’ consolidated reply misrepresents relevant authority.
:roll:

Competitive Standing... and other stuff.

_________________
Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.
John Adams


ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2012 5:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23530
Holding in WKA is really dicta and dicta in Minor is really holding. :roll:

Quote:
The Hollander Court relied upon WKA to
establish that all people born in the United States are citizens. It then cited dicta
from Schneider v. Rusk
for its conclusion that such a citizen is “thus eligible for the
presidency.” Id., citing 377 U.S. 163, 165, (1964). It explicitly identified the
Schneider citation as dicta. Id.


All of the referenced courts failed to recognize that the term “citizen”
includes all types of citizens, and the term “natural born citizen” is a specific and
legally distinct term which is different from the very broad term “citizen.” “Natural
born citizen” is a subset of the much-broader category “citizen.” These courts
essentially took dicta loosely discussing a broad category, and incorrectly assumed
that the discussion applies to all members of the category.
Concluding that every
person born in the United States is an Article II-natural born citizen simply because
the WKA Court concluded that people born in the United States are citizens is
analogous to concluding that all buildings must be green because green buildings
are buildings. A member of the group does not define the group.

The non-binding precedent disclosed here does nothing to change the fact
that the Supreme Court’s holding in Minor v. Happersett, defining the Article II
term “natural born citizen,”was part of that Court’s holding and is therefore
binding precedent.
See 88 U.S. 162, 167 (1874). :^o


I mean, really, does he expect the court to buy that bullshit? ](*,)

_________________
Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.
John Adams


ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2012 5:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:38 am
Posts: 2530
Such an argument deserves sanctions...

_________________
- Credimus quod credere volumus -


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2012 5:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 3285
Location: Kailua, HI (home) Honolulu, HI (work)
Occupation: Development Director for The Arc in Hawaii (non-profit supporting adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities)
Regarding competitive standing:

Defendants' MTD was filed March 1 and the Consolidated Reply in Support of the MTD was filed May 15. Regarding competitive standing, the Consolidated Reply notes that Dumbit is (if at all) a candidate for the Republican nomination and therefore is not engaged in an election contest with President Obama.


Plaintiffs requested to file a supplemental response on May 18. Among their arguments is the statement that Dumbit is a write-in candidate for the general election in TN, and provide as an exhibit his Certificate of Write-in Candidacy, dated May 15.


IANAL question: In the middle of a legal action, can one side simply change the facts on the ground and still be able to proceed in the original action, as opposed to having to re-file?

_________________
"This leap...is where counsel entered the thicket of legal frivolity."
Judge Clay D. Land - Oct. 13, 2009


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2012 5:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:27 pm
Posts: 7262
Location: Intersection of Godwin Dr. and Poe Blvd.
Occupation: Personal security.
Quote:
...Concluding that every
person born in the United States is an Article II-natural born citizen simply because
the WKA Court concluded that people born in the United States are citizens is
analogous to concluding that all buildings must be green because green buildings
are buildings. A member of the group does not define the group.

You're effin' kidding me.

This from the very guy who claims "A child born in the land of citizen parents is a natural born citizen" (a building that is green is a building) means the same as "a natural born citizen is a child born in the land of citizen parents" (all buildings are green).

](*,) ](*,) ](*,) #-o

_________________
ImageImageImageImage
"You unlock this door with the key of imagination. Beyond it is another dimension - a dimension of unsound mind, a dimension of unreality, a dimension of really, really bad law. You've just crossed over into the Orly Zone." -- Geritol

ZOOM IN, BABY. IT'S ALL WRONG.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2012 6:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Posts: 19904
Location: FEMA Camp 17 -- Malibu (Hey! You! Get off the lawn!)
Occupation: Schadenfreude artist.
Well, Verbie, it appears that Du-May has answered the question in your sig. The color of batshit is green.

_________________
When there are a finite number of ways to screw something up, Orly Taitz will find an infinite number of ways to do so. (The Sternsig Rule.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2012 6:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:05 pm
Posts: 753
Um, isn't Van Irion the one specifically arguing that a member of the group DOES define the group? Anyone arguing that Minor defines NBC and that the clear phrase regarding other possible NBCs that need not be addressed in the case is irrelevant is flat-out arguing that by giving one member of the group the Court was defining the entire group.

_________________
The One, the Only, Sterngard...Orly Taitz: She never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 18, 2012 11:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 1:08 pm
Posts: 565
Location: Betwixt the Big and Black Cypress Bayous.
Occupation: Disabled. Krebb's disease.
realist wrote:
Docket Update...

2012-05-18 - LLF (DUMMETT) - PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO FILE A SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS

Quote:
Grounds for this motion are that Plaintiffs have become aware of relevant precedent that was not previously disclosed to the Court; that the Defendants’ consolidated reply raised arguments not previously raised by the Defendants or the Plaintiffs; and that Defendants’ consolidated reply misrepresents relevant authority.
:roll:

Competitive Standing... and other stuff.


Van Irion and DuMmett are being creative. Page 12 shows a Certificate of Write-In Candidacy which isn't applicable to the office of President. Dummett didn't have any delegates listed for the Republican Primary or for the Democratic Conventions. Other methods to get on the ballot are unworthy of discussion. ;)

Presidential elections are unique due to the Electoral College and getting listed as a Write In candidate doesn't give a candidate any method of being elected as President under Tennessee's laws.

You aren't competing when you don't know how to win the game.

_________________
IANALBIRTFb

ImageImageImage I, for one, have no problem being led by a 3500 year old Pharaoh who was trained by space aliens on a distant star.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2012 2:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 10:42 pm
Posts: 3367
Location: The 808
Occupation: World-class procrastinator and perpetual late-bloomer.
Tomtech wrote:
You aren't competing when you don't know how to win the game work the turnstile to get into the stadium.


FIFY

_________________
"If it was a legitimately stolen election, Romney's body would have had ways of shutting that down. Also, if a usurpation happens, even in that horrible situation of a stolen election, it was God's will." -A Legal Lohengrin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 19, 2012 11:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:41 pm
Posts: 2097
June bug wrote:
Regarding competitive standing:

Defendants' MTD was filed March 1 and the Consolidated Reply in Support of the MTD was filed May 15. Regarding competitive standing, the Consolidated Reply notes that Dumbit is (if at all) a candidate for the Republican nomination and therefore is not engaged in an election contest with President Obama.


Plaintiffs requested to file a supplemental response on May 18. Among their arguments is the statement that Dumbit is a write-in candidate for the general election in TN, and provide as an exhibit his Certificate of Write-in Candidacy, dated May 15.


IANAL question: In the middle of a legal action, can one side simply change the facts on the ground and still be able to proceed in the original action, as opposed to having to re-file?


Furthermore, the "Certificate of Write-in Candidacy" only has Dummett's part filled out. The part that should be filled out by the election official is blank--no signature, no date.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2012 9:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23530
Docket Update....

Quote:
U.S. District Court
Western District of Tennessee (Memphis)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:12-cv-02143-STA-cgc

Liberty Legal Foundation et al v. National Democratic Party of the USA, Inc. et al
Assigned to: Judge S. Thomas Anderson
Referred to: Magistrate Judge Charmiane G. Claxton
Cause: 28:1331 Fed. Question

Date Filed: 02/23/2012
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 370 Fraud or Truth-In-Lending
Jurisdiction: Federal Question




05/18/2012 24 MOTION for Leave to File Supplemental Response in Opposition; Proposed Order Submitted by All Plaintiffs. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Proposed Supplemental Response in Opposition, # 2 Exhibit Dummett Write-In Certificate, # 3 Exhibit TNDP Bylaws, # 4 Appendix Tisdale v. Obama)(Irion, Van) (Entered: 05/18/2012)

05/25/2012 25 MOTION for Sanctions Consolidated With Memorandum in Support by Chip Forrester, Tennessee Democratic Party. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Additional Cases)(Stranch, J.) (Entered: 05/25/2012)

05/25/2012 26 NOTICE by Chip Forrester, Tennessee Democratic Party re 25 MOTION for Sanctions Consolidated With Memorandum in Support of Filing of Declaration (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit - Declaration of Benjamin A. Gastel)(Stranch, J.) (Entered: 05/25/2012)



Quote:
As Plaintiffs should have determined from a reasonable investigation, the NDC USA is not a party in interest to this lawsuit because this entity has never been associated with the Democratic Party of the TNDP. The NDC USA is apparently a mere sham organization, possibly organized by the Shelby County Republican Party, in order to use, without authorization and in bad faith, the name “National Democratic Party,” possibly for nefarious purposes like this lawsuit. As Plaintiffs should have learned through an investigation of the available public records held and posted on the Tennessee Secretary of State’s website, other active names for the NDC USA include the “Shelby County Republican Party, Inc.” See Gastel Decl. at Ex. C. A reasonable person would have taken this to mean that the NDC USA had no relationship with the TNDP or the National Democratic Party. Moreover, the Tennessee Secretary of State’s website shows that the NDC USA’s principal place of business is in Memphis (Gastel Decl., Ex. C) and Plaintiffs are obviously aware that the TNDP is based in Nashville (Declaration of Chip Forrester As Plaintiffs should have determined from a reasonable investigation, the NDC USA is not a party in interest to this lawsuit because this entity has never been associated with the Democratic Party of the TNDP. The NDC USA is apparently a mere sham organization, possibly organized by the Shelby County Republican Party, in order to use, without authorization and in bad faith, the name “National Democratic Party,” possibly for nefarious purposes like this lawsuit. As Plaintiffs should have learned through an investigation of the available public records held and posted on the Tennessee Secretary of State’s website, other active names for the NDC USA include the “Shelby County Republican Party, Inc.” See Gastel Decl. at Ex. C. A reasonable person would have taken this to mean that the NDC USA had no relationship with the TNDP or the National Democratic Party. Moreover, the Tennessee Secretary of State’s website shows that the NDC USA’s principal place of business is in Memphis (Gastel Decl., Ex. C) and Plaintiffs are obviously aware that the TNDP is based in Nashville (Declaration of Chip Forrester ¶ 3).
8.


Sorry for the delay in linking. Real life/real work to do. ;)

_________________
Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.
John Adams


ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2012 3:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23530
Docket Update...

Quote:
U.S. District Court
Western District of Tennessee (Memphis)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:12-cv-02143-STA-cgc

Liberty Legal Foundation et al v. National Democratic Party of the USA, Inc. et al
Assigned to: Judge S. Thomas Anderson
Referred to: Magistrate Judge Charmiane G. Claxton
Cause: 28:1331 Fed. Question

Date Filed: 02/23/2012
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 370 Fraud or Truth-In-Lending
Jurisdiction: Federal Question


05/25/2012 25 MOTION for Sanctions Consolidated With Memorandum in Support by Chip Forrester, Tennessee Democratic Party. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Additional Cases)(Stranch, J.) (Entered: 05/25/2012)

05/25/2012 26 NOTICE by Chip Forrester, Tennessee Democratic Party re 25 MOTION for Sanctions Consolidated With Memorandum in Support of Filing of Declaration (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit - Declaration of Benjamin A. Gastel)(Stranch, J.) (Entered: 05/25/2012)

06/01/2012 27 ORDER granting 22 Motion for Leave to File Consolidated Reply. Signed by Judge S. Thomas Anderson on 5/1/12. (Anderson, S.) (Entered: 06/01/2012)


_________________
Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.
John Adams


ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 03, 2012 10:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 7766
Location: USA
Occupation: Amateur radio host trying to figure out how to lower myself to shameless begging and stupid petition filing. It might be a good way to make a living. ;)
I posted the citation of Kerchner v Obama in the motion by the TNDP for sanctions at Mario's blog and he is in a snit because I said that the citation said Apuzzo was sanctioned by Third Circuit when he brought the appeal. I had honestly forgotten that the Third Circuit chose not to impose monetary sanctions after Apuzzo appropriate grovelled in a long brief claiming he diligently researched standing. Regardless of the discharge of the OSC the court never modified the finding that the case was frivolous. Mario claims he showed that it was not in his response but he did not convince the court. If you want to see the level of discourse there by his readers this is the thread.

I suppose my question is when a court issues an OSC for damages isn't that in itself a sanction whether or not they choose to impose optional monetary penalties?

_________________
The O-bot prayer:

Grant me the superior wit and biting sarcasm to mock the Birthers whose minds I cannot change
The superior facts, law, and reason to change the minds of the Birthers whom I can
And the wisdom to team up at Politijab The Fogbow with those who share my addiction and know the difference


- Allison 2/16/2009


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 03, 2012 11:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Posts: 19904
Location: FEMA Camp 17 -- Malibu (Hey! You! Get off the lawn!)
Occupation: Schadenfreude artist.
Apuzzo was admonished by the Court of Appeals, and a monetary sanction was going to be imposed. Apuzzo's bloviating response caused the court to back down on the sanctions, but the admonishment stood.

I also see that Apuzzo has Tracey Fair's skill in ferreting out members of TFB.

He's still an arrogant, ignorant buffoon. A perfect lawyer for Charles Kerchner.

_________________
When there are a finite number of ways to screw something up, Orly Taitz will find an infinite number of ways to do so. (The Sternsig Rule.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 4:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23530
Docket Update...

Quote:
U.S. District Court
DISTRICT OF ARIZONA (Phoenix Division)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:11-cv-02089-SRB

Liberty Legal Foundation et al v. National Democratic Party of the USA Incorporated et al
Assigned to: Judge Susan R Bolton
Cause: 28:2201 Declaratory Judgment

Date Filed: 10/25/2011
Jury Demand: Plaintiff
Nature of Suit: 360 Personal Injury: Other
Jurisdiction: Federal Question



06/07/2012 38 NOTICE re Supplemental Authority by Liberty Legal Foundation . (Attachments: # 1 Supplement)(Irion, Van) (Entered: 06/07/2012)



But, sez Aryan, it doesn't really count here.

_________________
Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.
John Adams


ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 1:01 am
Posts: 18524
Location: Planet Earth (most the time)
Occupation: I'm not at liberty to say. In other words, I'd tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.
I hope they sanction his ass on the 24th Day of Sivan, or any other day.

_________________
Yes We Can! ~ Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm
Posts: 10644
mimi wrote:
I hope they sanction his ass on the 24th Day of Sivan, or any other day.


:lol: I don't know what Sivan means, and I don't care, but it reads very Satanic to me!

_________________
"All this talk about blowjobs makes me want to SUE SOMEBODY"-- Sterngard Friegen (quoting Thomas Jefferson)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 10:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 1:37 am
Posts: 565
TexasFilly wrote:
mimi wrote:
I hope they sanction his ass on the 24th Day of Sivan, or any other day.


:lol: I don't know what Sivan means, and I don't care, but it reads very Satanic to me!

My guess is that he got a calandar of Israeli model Sivan Krispin. Google at your own risk!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 10:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Posts: 10980
Location: Stalag 13 Okanagan, WA 98840
Occupation: Drone Maintenance Officer - FAA Licensed and Certified "We Fix Drones©" Call (206) 622-0460 to schedule routine maintenance or repair.
Nothing sez nutter better than Sivan on an American Court case.

_________________
Image ImageImage

You can follow the action, which gets you good pictures.
You can follow your instincts, which'll probably get you in trouble.

Or... you can follow the money...
which nine times out of ten will get you closer to the truth.
"The Two Jakes"


Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 11:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 3:55 pm
Posts: 2357
SueDB wrote:
Nothing sez nutter better than Sivan on an American Court case.

It's a Hebrew month. Could Von Aryan be a British-Israelite?

Quote:
‘The Jews are not the whole of God’s people Israel, as so many imagine, but only a small part of the chosen race – at the most two tribes out of twelve… and British-Israelites maintain that the Anglo-Saxon race embody, and are, the ten-tribed kingdom of Israel’ (Dixon, 1915: 16, emphasis in original).


Or Mormon ?

:-k

_________________
"Let me tell you, I'm a really smart guy."

― Donald Trump


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 11:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:41 pm
Posts: 2097
Meh. Most birfers use the "Barry Soetoro" nonsense to signal to the court that they are lunatics. Aryan uses the Hebrew calendar instead.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 404 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 17  Next   

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
View new posts | View active topics



Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group