Neither Would Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton

20 Aug

Race hustlers of the world UNITE!  You have nothing to lose but your personal dignity!

Received by email:



Posted by on August 20, 2013 in Government as Gangsters, Lies, Political, Race, Values


Tags: , , ,

17 responses to “Neither Would Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton

  1. Yartap

    August 20, 2013 at 1:34 PM


    It is the national news media (the 4th branch of gov-co.) that give race hustlers their platform by their race-baiting.

  2. pentale

    August 20, 2013 at 2:18 PM

    YES, but no one ever ask: Who is really behind the mass Media It certainly it is not the government, since it is from the. Media all talking points are laid out.

    • Yartap

      August 20, 2013 at 9:53 PM

      The corporations own all 4 branches.

  3. w[H]oly1

    August 20, 2013 at 2:57 PM

    j. jackson and his more contemporary copy-cat, a. sharpton are nothing more than race-baiting biz shake-down artists, which, among other things such as lobbying and Mad Av slick promoting, jack the price(s) for the “goods/services”, the majority of which we really don’t “need”.

  4. Nemry

    August 20, 2013 at 6:09 PM

    First, You have to have three things to be in the service: A sense of Honor, A sense of Duty, and a sense of Fidelity. None of these things can be ascribed to martin, or any others of that ilk.

    • Yartap

      August 20, 2013 at 9:54 PM

      Are you really talking about servicemen and women, or are you talking about whistle blowers?

      • Yartap

        August 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM

        Is this the sense of fidelity (blind faithfulness and loyalty) you are speaking of:

        In Alexander Haig’s presence, Henry Kissinger referred pointedly to military men as “dumb, stupid animals to be used” as pawns for foreign policy.

    • Julie

      August 21, 2013 at 3:43 PM

      Actually dear, probably more than half of those seving in the military are there to avoid jail-time. They are given the choice between prison and serving. They serve their sentences by serving in the military.

      • Nemry

        August 21, 2013 at 7:48 PM

        The Army addresses this issue in the Army Recruiting Regulation, Army Regulation 601-210, paragraph 4-8b: “Applicant who, as a condition for any civil conviction or adverse disposition or any other reason through a civil or criminal court, is ordered or subjected to a sentence that implies or imposes enlistment into the Armed Forces of the United States is not eligible for enlistment..”

        The Air Force Recruiting Regulation, AETCI 36-2002, table 1-1, lines 7 and 8, makes an applicant ineligible for enlistment if they are “released from restraint, or civil suit, or charges on the condition of entering military service, if the restraint, civil suit, or criminal charges would be reinstated if the applicant does not enter military service.”

        The Marine Corps Recruiting Regulation, MCO P1100.72B, Chapter 3, Section 2, Part H, Paragraph 12 states: “Applicants may not enlist as an alternative to criminal prosecution, indictment, incarceration, parole, probation, or other punitive sentence. They are ineligible for enlistment until the original assigned sentence would have been completed.”

        In the Coast Guard, enlistment prohibition is contained in the Coast Guard Recruiting Manual, M1100.2D, Table 2-A.

        Interestingly, the Navy Recruiting Manual, COMNAVCRUITCOMINST 1130.8F, does not appear to contain any provisions which would make such applicants ineligible for enlistment. However, I’ve been informed by several Navy recruiters that the Navy will not accept applicants for service, as an alternative to criminal prosecution or other punitive sentence.

        So, it would appear that the old idea of join up or prison is still out there, but miitary regulations forbid it. However, I am sure the TSA or other alphabet agencies have no trouble with he idea.

      • Julie

        August 22, 2013 at 7:12 AM

        Thank you for that information, Nemry. I was not aware of this. However, I do know of 2 people, who within the last 4 years have joined the Army on this basis. It may be that their sentences wouldn’t have been re-imposed upon them if they didn’t join. This is really good to know. Thanks again.

      • nemry

        August 22, 2013 at 6:56 PM

        You are welcome.

      • Yartap

        August 23, 2013 at 12:20 PM


        Once upon a time, you would be right about criminals joining the military to avoid jail. This happened in my family with my twin uncles. This forced court ordered enrollment save my uncles and made great men out of them. And they served and retired from the military. But why the change in military policy?

        Answer: To place America’s best and finest in harms way, and leave the misfits to harm America. Think about it.

  5. Jetlag

    August 20, 2013 at 7:30 PM

    Neither would most Americans.

    The names of those who have made the ultimate sacrifice over there aren’t exactly household words.

    The media has more important things to concern itself with, like beating the drum of social unrest in America over ethnically divisive incidents that no one would otherwise care about.

  6. nemry

    August 21, 2013 at 5:15 AM


    I was referring to military Personnel. Each of them Officer and Enlisted alike willingly take an Oath (or Affirmation) upon entering the service.

    The definition of fidelity I refer to is: Honesty; veracity; adherence to truth; as the fidelity of a witness.This definition is drawn from the 1828 edition of Websters Dictionary.

    I regard h. Kissinger as a traitor to America, as I regard everyone that violates the oath of office to which they accept posting.

    I do not believe in the unthinking, blind following of ANYONE, or any ideal, nor would I ask any one else to do so.

    • Yartap

      August 23, 2013 at 12:46 PM


      OK – I accept your definition of fidelity. Now, when are military Personnel going to open their eyes? When will they KEEP their oath to protect and defend the Constitution? Just saying, “I was following orders.” will not protect them from the crimes committed by past and present administrations. When will they say, “Enough!”?

      I agree with you that Kissinger is a traitor. But, how much of his words are true? Think about it.

      • nemry

        August 23, 2013 at 5:50 PM

        My dear Yartap,

        Alas, I have no solid answer for you. I do know that EVERY active duty/reserve person I have the chance to converse with, gets the same questions from me.

        I ask them to recall their oath of enlistment, then answer the question of whom they serve. Is it the president, or the Constitution, and thus the people. I tell them I don’t want an answer. I want them to think about it, and to discuss it with their fellow troopers. Perhaps by asking, I can plant a seed of doubt and make them all determine just where their loyalties lay.

        I can only hope that some of the SENIOR Officers will stand up for their oaths, and do what is right.

      • Yartap

        August 23, 2013 at 7:42 PM


        My hat’s off to you. That is a great tactic! Keep it up!

        Thanks! Yartap


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s