Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime
Rational Review ^ | September 27, 2009 | J. Neil Schulman

Posted on 09/27/2009 5:04:44 AM PDT by J. Neil Schulman

The Ten Biggest Lies of My Lifetime
by J. Neil Schulman

This is my short list of “Big Lies” — propaganda which is promoted by major movements, and which denying often gets one tagged as a lunatic, denier, hatemonger, or simply irrelevant.

If you’re looking for me to put the Holocaust of European Jewry or Jihadis being responsible for 9/11 on this list, look elsewhere.

I’m 56 years old, born in April 1953. So I’m limiting myself to Big Lies present in my own lifetime.

Here we go, not in any chronological order.

1. The biggest threat to the human race today is man-caused global warming.

Every assumption behind this statement is either provably false or unproven. It’s uncertain whether the long-term climate trend is towards global warming rather than global cooling. It’s false that carbon dioxide and methane are the major “greenhouse gases.” (The major greenhouse gas is water vapor.) The most reliable climate-change models on planet earth don’t track with production of greenhouse gases as closely as they do with changes in solar radiation, and measurements of climate change on other planets in this solar system tend to match up with our own planet’s climate change. Industrial particulate air pollution reduces solar radiation so would produce global cooling rather than global warming. And the global warming crowd reveal themselves as a subset of the Zero Population Growth movement when they advocate not having children as a method of reducing global warming. Which brings us to Big Lie #2.

2. Human population growth must be curbed because it is increasing faster than the availability of resources needed to sustain itself.

No human being on planet earth is starving or sick because of the technological inability of the human race to feed, clothe, or treat most of their epidemic diseases. Third-world famines and epidemics of diseases no longer epidemic in the developed world are caused by warfare, theft of private property and relief supplies by warlords who sell them for personal luxuries and weapons, and anti-capitalistic policies which exterminate all attempts to invest or entrepreneur the creation of newly existing wealth. The assumption of a zero-sum game whereby one party’s gain is assumed to be stolen from another party is one major false premise underlying this cause of endless human tragedy; another is that technological advances caused by economic growth play no part in reducing demand on finite natural resources by multiplying the efficient use of these resources and creating artificial alternatives which also reduce demand on natural resources.

Nor is there any actual “limit to growth” when you bring in the virtually unlimited space, energy, and mineral resources available starting as close as earth’s own moon and asteroids in permanent earth-moon orbit, then expanding out to the entire solar system and eventually other solar systems. Star Trek got this, at least, right. The technology to harvest these resources is off the shelf and the cost would be less than what the United States has spent on the War in Iraq.

3. Abortion is murder.

The assumptions behind this statement require religious people to substitute the concept of eternal life with a secular biological one that defines life as mortal. The statement that a new human life begins with conception is biologically true but not true according to anyone who actually believes in the existence of an immortal soul. If one believes in an immortal soul then a new human life begins the first moment that an immortal soul exists within a human body. The Hebrews believed that the soul enters the body with its birth and first breath — thus the English word “inspiration” comes from roots meaning “intake of breath.” Christianity and modern Judaism often abandon the roots of their own religions and substitute the revisionist argument that the soul is present from the moment of conception — an absurd and actually horrible idea if you look at it from the point of view of an active conscious being imprisoned within a tiny cluster of cells.

Furthermore, the idea that an embryo or fetus has human rights can only go back to the beginnings of the concept of human rights with the English Leveller’s movement in the 17th century — a decidedly modernist development. Nowadays there are attempts to extend the idea of rights beyond the human species to all other living things (including microbes) and even to inanimate objects including the earth, itself. The self-named pro-life movement which attempts to extend human rights to the unborn use the same logic and arguments as the animal rights and Gaia-rights movements. Which brings us directly to #4.

4. Animals have the same fundamental rights as humans.

The concept of opposing cruelty to animals has morphed away from this noble and purely human esthetic concept into an attempt to make the idea of human rights absurd and deniable by forgetting their origins and meaning, debasing them like fiat money replaces mediums of exchange possessing intrinsic utility.

Rights are a moral concept, and morality is meaningless if split off from the concept of moral actors. Unless one is ready to accept dogs, cattle, and fish as having the mens rea to be held accountable for their actions, the concept of animal rights is an absurdity, and the animal rights movement is a criminal racket that relies on the empathy of human beings to attack the individual property rights and civil liberties of other human beings.

5. Disarmament promotes peace and security.

From disarming the airline passengers who flew on September 11, 2001 to the disarmament by both the Nazis and Soviet Union of the Estonians, there is no policy which has directly enabled more genocide, holocausts, and mass murders than reducing the general supply of weapons that can be used to resist and combat armed and aggressive statists, gangsters, terrorists, madmen, and free-lance predators than the unilateral disarmament of civilians and defense forces. I’m not even going to argue the point. I simply challenge anyone to study history, note how disarmament universally precedes mass violence, and challenge anyone disputing this statement to find me a counter-example where a disarmed population suffered less than the armed one which preceded it.

6. Police forces are necessary to prevent crime and keep the peace.

Going back to the prefects of ancient China and the Praetorian Guard of the Roman Empire, police forces have always been extensions of imperial power, providing despots internal domestic control while traditional military forces conquered and controlled foreigners.

The framers of the American system of government were well aware of the millennia-long history of police forces and rejected the concept in favor of civilian self-defense. Local criminals were to be apprehended by raising a “hue-and-cry” whereby the civilian population formed themselves into temporary law-enforcement units under the concept of “posse comitatus” (translation from Latin is “power of the county”) to arm themselves and bring suspected criminals to a magistrate for trial. How these posses functioned can be seen in western movies and TV shows, where an elected sheriff or U.S. marshal had no forces of their own to enforce law or keep the peace, but had to rely on deputizing the local population to maintain law and order. This reliance by government officials on civilians tended to act as a brake on criminal gangs taking over frontier towns, and also prevented organized criminal gangs such as the Black Hand from extending their reach beyond the borders of cities like Chicago and Kansas City, whose police forces were agents of the local power brokers.

Today’s police forces are better trained, more professional, and less reliant on direct bribery than earlier police forces, and in private life are often good neighbors, but when on duty they are still enforcers of political power who shake down the civilian population through draconian fines for parking and minor traffic infraction (for example, $100 fines for failing to feed a parking meter 25 cents), eminent domain abuses, asset forfeiture laws, and the unconstitutional war on the individual’s right to determine one’s own self-medication, mood alteration, and state of consciousness on private property.

Common myths about police are that they have a duty to protect you (they don’t; all states immunize police for failure to protect); that police will save you when you phone 911 (if you’re being held hostage by an armed criminal the police will set up a perimeter outside and not go in until it’s safe for themselves, no matter what’s being done to you by your captor); and that violent crime rates are lower the more police there are per population unit (the opposite is true; rural areas with fewer police per population unit commonly have a lower violent crime rate per population unit than urban areas with more police per population unit).

One can’t argue that increasing legal availability of civilian firearms automatically decreases violent crime (to do that one would have to explain how one city with identical laws to another city can have five times its sister city’s violent crime rate) but one can show that increasing the cop-to-criminal ratio is no more effective than increasing the civilian-gun-to-criminal ratio — and the latter is a whole lot cheaper and far less injurious to civil liberties.

7. Gay couples should be treated exactly the same as straight couples.

Beginning in the 1930’s, Alfred Kinsey’s groundbreaking studies of human sexuality showed human sexual behavior to be almost infinitely varied. I carefully say “sexual behavior” rather than “sex,” because only human acts which have the potential of reproduction actually qualify as “sex.” Perpetuation of the species demands that all other behavior be called something else. I favor the anthropological term “pair-bonding,” the sociological term “coupling,” and the informal terms “sex play” and “love play.”

Human beings who engage in same-sex coupling have the exact same rights as human beings who engage in opposite-sex coupling: the natural fruits of their coupling. Since biology requires opposite-sex coupling to produce offspring, same-sex coupling is naturally discriminated against for this purpose, and social institutions like monogamous heterosexual marriage that have evolved to protect and encourage the perpetuation of the human species must either reflect this biological reality in custom and language or devalue human reproduction. It’s obvious to me that the agenda to equate same-sex coupling with opposite-sex-coupling in movies, television, and other mass media is at least as much to discourage human population growth as it is to oppose the hateful bigotry against same-sex couples which results in denying same-sex couples the right to enjoy their lives together in a free and tolerant society.

I am not a partisan for monogamous heterosexual marriage. I’d be perfectly happy if marriage laws and customs were entirely divorced from both state and church. I have no personal objection to norming any and all partnering or group affiliation between or among consenting adults of any sexual persuasion. Gays have no more right to pride in their sexual lifestyle than a completely heterosexual degenerate like myself, who wants only adult women to do perverted things with me. We’re still hiding in the closet, thank you very much.

But to lie about biology, history, anthropology, sociology, and all other attempts to quantify and classify the human experience in order to promote a narrow and ephemeral minority political agenda is wrong and I will continue to expose these lies when they deny that social customs, language usage, and economic institutions should reflect the biological truth that making a baby requires at least one participant from each of the two sexes.

8. The Holocaust of European Jews is unique in human history.

I’m Jewish, and I can’t think of any idea quite as absurd to me as the idea that my kin are superior to the rest of the human species. That’s an ancient Jewish meme that got turned around by the Nazis, with devastating results just before I was born.

I’m not going to argue that Jews and Judaism haven’t made unique and valuable contributions to the human experience. That would be equally false and absurd. But it’s illogical to extrapolate from this that the Jewish contributions to human history are uniquely valuable. The Greeks contributed as much. So did the Chinese. So did the Arabs. So did the English. So did the Americans. The Irish. Can I stop now before this essay turns into a roster of the ethnicities seated in the United Nations?

Nor is the Jewish experience for being discriminated against, enslaved, and massacred unique. Blacks got it as bad. So did the Estonians, the Tutsis, the Kulaks, the Gypsies, the Pariahs, the Christians, the Irish, the English, the Armenians, the Native Americans, the Sicilians, the Cherokee – again, I’d find it hard to find an ethnic group that hasn’t had the crap kicked out of them one time or another.

Having the crap kicked out of your own kind is probably the one most common bond that each of us has with everyone else.

The maximum estimate for the extermination of European Jewry by the Nazis is six million. That’s dwarfed in the twentieth century alone by mega-exterminations in the Soviet Union and China, with seven-figure ethnic genocides in Armenia, Cambodia, and Rwanda trailing not far behind.

My people: Good job. You gave the world Torah and many more non-Jews than Jews follow its teachings — and that includes our historical enemies. But enough already with the chosen people crap. It’s gotten old and pisses off others, which makes it hard to have friends.

9. America is a Christian country.

This one won’t take very long to refute at all. Draw a Venn diagram. A big circle with the population of the United States. In that circle a smaller circle with Christians. Inside the big circle another circle with everyone else — Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccens, Odin-worshippers, atheists, agnostics, etc.

Doesn’t matter how large the circle containing Christians is. America is founded on the idea of individualism, not collectivism. That the majority should be able to impose its values on the minority is un-American even if it were down to half a billion Christians and a single non-believer. And Christians might consider that a turn of the wheel might make them a minority, and a record for tolerance might be useful when dealing with a new majority.

Your ancestors came here for freedom of worship. Honor them by extending the same freedom to everyone else. Keep your peanut butter away from my chocolate unless I specifically ask to make a Reese.

10. America is the last superpower and runs the world.

I’m not even sure I need to refute this one anymore, although it’s been the general assumption in most places for most of my life, both by Americans and foreigners.

By now it should be obvious this isn’t true.

Remember the Doolittle Raid in World War II? A few army planes stripped down to the bone manage to fly off an aircraft carrier and bomb Japan? It was mostly a symbolic attack because there were far too few planes to damage Japan’s war effort. But the reason for the raid was that America’s war “ally,” Josef Stalin, refused President Franklin Roosevelt permission to use Russian soil to launch a sustained bombing attack on Japan.

At the end of World War II when both the Nazis and Imperial Japan were defeated, and even though the United States had a monopoly on atomic bombs until 1949, the Soviet Union managed to occupy half of Europe and foment communist revolutions throughout the world creating a worldwide opposition to the power of the United States and its allies.

This standoff continued until the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, when there was a brief illusion that the United States was the last remaining superpower. But during that period, Cuba remained communist and though any agreement President Kennedy might have made with Premier Khrushchev would have died with the USSR, the United States made no attempt to take the island.

Nor did the United States have universal success in staving off communist coups in Central and South America … or even in its own universities.

If anyone thinks that situation fundamentally changed any time since the collapse of the Soviet Union, ask yourself how Turkey got away with telling the United States to piss off when President Bush wanted to invade Iraq via Turkey.

When the United States was most influential was not when the United States was most aggressive militarily but when its goods were most craved by foreigners: when a luxury car in Japan was not a Lexus but a Pontiac, when Russians drank Pepsi and the Chinese drank Coca Cola, when the gold standard of cigarettes was Old Gold and other American brands.

The United States was once the world’s shopping mall. Not anymore. Not for a long time. The path back to the glory days is when the American people get shut of the debt its government and corporations have run up in their name, and instead use their money to invent and make new things the rest of the world wants.

J. Neil Schulman is author of the classic novel of agorist revolution, Alongside Night, which can be downloaded free from, and writer/producer/directer of the comic thriller, Lady Magdalene’s ( Full bio information can be found on Facebook, LinkedIn, Wikipedia, IMDb,, and his personal website at

KEYWORDS: globalwarming; humanrights; libertarian; populationgrowth; propaganda
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 181-184 next last
To: J. Neil Schulman
"2. Human population growth must be curbed because it is increasing faster than the availability of resources needed to sustain itself."

Little known fact: "You can take all of the people on the face of planet earth and group them together tightly and they won't even cover a single state in the USA, including Rhode Island."

Look at a map of the USA and notice how small Rhode Island is in relation to the rest of the country.

Once you figure out that Humans are not that numerous when compared to the surface of the Earth their "over-population" argument goes right out the window.

81 posted on 09/27/2009 8:13:39 AM PDT by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the next one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel
My contention is that Nazi methods were remarkably inefficient.

Centralization does not equal efficiency. Sometimes it is less efficient, as in this case.

I've even heard idiots claim the Nazis shipped Jews to the camps to save on ammunition.

82 posted on 09/27/2009 8:13:45 AM PDT by Sherman Logan ("The price of freedom is the toleration of imperfections." Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

Is there anything I can say that would change your mind?


Then on what basis do you think I should be willing to change my considered opinion?

A murder is a murder. 10M murders is 10M murders. The specifics change from example to example, but the degree of wickedness involved doesn’t change much.

83 posted on 09/27/2009 8:16:22 AM PDT by Sherman Logan ("The price of freedom is the toleration of imperfections." Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

****The Nazis were vile beyond belief. Certainly some characteristics of their genocide were unique. They were different from those carried out by other peoples. That doesn’t make them worse than other atrocities of similar scale.****

The only real difference I see is that because of the way the German leaders set up their genocide of the Jews, they could continue to fool the populace that they were on moral high ground. The Mongrels had no such care in their society.

In a modern world where we live within a camera or a cell phone from each other in open societies, we suspect closed ones of nefarious practices. It routinely turns out we are right. When a supposedly open society devises a way to commit genocide while feeling good about itself, it creates a modern problem.

84 posted on 09/27/2009 8:22:31 AM PDT by ResponseAbility (Bureaucratic healthcare is bad medicine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

Sorry Sherman Logan. It has been my experience that some people believe what they want to believe.

Without knowing you, I will take it on face value that you are as well read on various aspects of genocide as I am, and have drawn different conclusions than I have, which you are not going to change.

85 posted on 09/27/2009 8:23:36 AM PDT by rlmorel (You cannot reap the benefits right now of the planning ahead you didn't do in the past.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: spodefly

LOL, I noticed that too.

86 posted on 09/27/2009 8:26:58 AM PDT by ResponseAbility (Bureaucratic healthcare is bad medicine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]


****If it wasn’t couldn’t kill it.****

So by extention, taking any action at all against it proves the actor knows it is alive. If it is not alive, then leave it alone.

87 posted on 09/27/2009 8:31:21 AM PDT by ResponseAbility (Bureaucratic healthcare is bad medicine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7

Technically, swinging an unbreathing baby’s body against a tree, vice one that is breathing, makes an enormous difference. One is not considered physically alive upon examination, while the other is considered a living human.

In the classic creationist vs seminal argument, either God creates the individual soul or the genetics are passed from generation to generation and the separate soul is created by its parents.

If it created by its parents and not by God, then it is accountable to its parents for its final destiny and not to God.

Which is it, is the soul created by Man or by God?

The more sound Catholic position would be the Creationist position, but when it became politically popular to adapt the seminal position to attempt to discourage abortion, the Catholic Church pronounced life began in the womb. There are links back to Augustine and Origen, but basically the issue boils down to ‘who started soul life’?

BTW, the issue isn’t as simple as stating, “science declares the beginning of human life to begin when...”. Science fails to recognize a trichotomous anthropology of man. Not only failing to discern between body and soul, but also failing to even identify the human spirit, which is included in the Christian concept of human life and the identification of a person. This is no small issue, because the lack of human spirit made holy by God makes all the difference between rotting in the lake of fire for all future eternity and being sanctified and residing with God in heaven for all future eternity.

88 posted on 09/27/2009 8:42:22 AM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: aruanan

You’ve said it better than I would have, I would only add the Reductio Ad Absurdum argument that you’re not human unless you take your first breath.

So a baby isn’t human until the umbilical is cut and gets a slap on it’s bottom if we use that criteria.

89 posted on 09/27/2009 8:44:19 AM PDT by Brett66 (Where government advances, and it advances relentlessly , freedom is imperiled -Janice Rogers Brown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Brett66
So a baby isn’t human until the umbilical is cut and gets a slap on it’s bottom if we use that criteria.

Yup, so before it breathes, instead of the spank, just shoot it in the head. Then cut the cord. Obama approved abortion.

90 posted on 09/27/2009 8:53:38 AM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (RATs, nothing more than bald haired hippies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: aruanan

The Luke 1:41 passage is a great read.

From it we see how the body may be effected by the Holy Spirit, although perhaps through a series of intermediary causes.

We see that Elizabeth was imbued with the Holy Spirit, so her soul was influenced by the Holy Spirit. We also see how there is an association of an external person(Mary), the observation of that person (by the soul of Elizabeth), and the movement of the body of the infant in the womb of Elizabeth.

So we observe the physical body of the infant in the womb, responding at least to the thinking of his mother, and possibly other direct causations between soul and spirit, but not necessarily.

If the infants neither yet have souls, then the mothers might be performing or manifesting relationships between their souls and the infants’ bodies, perhaps by the mothers’ soul, or their bodies or both.

Additionally, as the second Adam, it might be possible from this verse independent of others, to consider the infant Christ Jesus has body, soul and spirit, but Elizabeth’s infant was still only body, reacting to his mother’s bodily stimuli, initially generated by her soul.

The verse might also manifest that bodily formation responds to the presence of the Son in body as well.

91 posted on 09/27/2009 9:01:04 AM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

The statement made and presented as a fact is not factual.

The beginning of human life and personhood require definition. The Word of God provides definition as reminded to us by the author of the article.

92 posted on 09/27/2009 9:05:39 AM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
In all too many instances, it boils down to "not me, them!"

To their everlasting shame, unobservant, secular Jewish leftists are at the forefront of the worst offenders in the world today, as far as advocating the killing off of somebody else. Witness that kapo, George Soros.

Despite the intellectualizing bluff and bluster, that's all it is ... that limbic, instinctual "reptile mind" saying survive! They haven't evolved at all, and have no moral tradition to guide them, just an amoral political philosophy that has killed into the hundreds of millions over the past century, including six million of their own.

93 posted on 09/27/2009 9:08:10 AM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: J. Neil Schulman
Your ancestors came here for freedom of worship. Honor them by extending the same freedom to everyone else.

Strawman. No one is denying freedom or religion to anyone. No one except those who claim Christians are out to get people. As you just suggested they are.

94 posted on 09/27/2009 9:08:49 AM PDT by Brugmansian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr
The statement made and presented as a fact is not factual.

Tell it to the Founders.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident..."

Either you hold what they held or you don't.

The country is being destroyed primarily because too many these days in our country don't. They've removed themselves from the original "WE." I hold that truth to be self-evident as well.

95 posted on 09/27/2009 9:10:51 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (If you're not a Personhood Pro-Lifer, you're a holocaust enabler, either actively or passively.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
EV: "FACT: The human PERSON comes into physical existence at the moment of biological inception, when a human egg is fertilized and the first division of cells occurs. A unique individual with unique DNA."

The statement made and presented as a fact is not factual.

Tell it to the Founders. "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."

What historical record are we reading wherein the Founding Fathers define a human person's anthropology?

I can understand how somebody who has never had saving faith (I'm not referring to yourself) might be blinded to only think in soulish terms, thinking even more blindly that nothing exists in human perception other than the bodily senses and rationalism, but then again such was myself prior to having a regenerated human spirit, able to perceive thinks of the spirit and beyond that of only the body and soul.

The definition of a human person in Divine terms includes the body, soul, and spirit. The bodily portion of a person might come into physical form and begin some functioning at the point of conception, but that insufficiently defines human life. The human body by itself is not identical with human life. Human life by divine standards as originally made and created includes body, soul, and spirit. More accurately from Hebrew language, it is more than plant life, it includes a breath.

96 posted on 09/27/2009 9:40:02 AM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: J. Neil Schulman

If this man is going to convince me the he alone knows when the soul enters the body, I’m gonna need a miracle as proof.

97 posted on 09/27/2009 9:43:58 AM PDT by Republic of Texas (Socialism Always Fails)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr
The statement made and presented as a fact is not factual.

Indeed it is factual. No matter how many times you deny it. Every single person you've ever seen or known started in this world in exactly that way.

98 posted on 09/27/2009 9:51:29 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (If you're not a Personhood Pro-Lifer, you're a holocaust enabler, either actively or passively.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

“The guy is a libertarian so you can’t take him too seriously. Look at his home page.”

At your suggestion, I did. Thank you for looking him up and for the suggestion.

99 posted on 09/27/2009 10:23:55 AM PDT by RoadTest ( Confounded be all they that serve graven images, that boast themselves of idols - Psalm 97:12a)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
unfortunately, most of the local gentiles were willing and eager

Is that based on exit polls or what, how do you get to those high percentages and measurement of emotional state.

100 posted on 09/27/2009 10:41:06 AM PDT by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 181-184 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson