The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/m/mckinstry.colin/1996/stone.0896


From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Sun Aug  4 08:02:15 PDT 1996
Article: 38040 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!news.structured.net!news.uoregon.edu!hunter.premier.net!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!nntp.coast.net!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.bhp.com.au!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!waikato!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: "Ourobouros" 
Newsgroups: nz.politics,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: NATIONALISM, RACISM AND THE IMMIGRATION DEBATE: a Marxist view
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 20:17:15 +1200
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 380
Message-ID: <01bb8056.b7ba4000$4aa11dcb@peasant>
References: <4ts1sd$nkv@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aus4.max3.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1085



> <@student.canterbury.ac.nz> wrote in article
<4ts1sd$nkv@cantuc.canterbury.ac.nz>...
> 

> The following item appeared in issue no. 4 of "Red Letter", weekly 
> e-mail newsletter of the Canterbury University Marxist Society.  People 
> interested in receiving the newsletter can contact 
> misc5284@csc.canterbury.ac.nz
> 
No doubt the Marxist society gets beneficial coverage amongst liberals at
the 
Canterbury Campus, like it does at Auckland.

On the behalf of Phil Duncan please consider the reply (or perhaps relay
it
back to the communist):
> ................................................................
> NATIONALISM, RACISM AND THE IMMIGRATION DEBATE
> Phil Duncan looks at the current immigration controversy and why Winston

> Peters' Asian immigrant-bashing has found such a ready response.
> 
Pretty amazing considering the liberal and Jewish (B'nai B'rith, "The
Prejudice 
Book") indoctrination schemes.  Short-of-talent Street is failing you
reckon?
> 
>  The current debate on immigration has shown again the racist underbelly

> of New Zealand society.  

Stephen Judd and Michael Clark might disagree with Phil.  They seem to
have thought their arguments on racial integration was sound.

It's good to hear that racism is on the increase.

>The fact that the attack on Asian immigrants is 
> being led by one of the most respectable (and respected) politicians in 
> the country, Winston Peters, and that his and his party's popularity 
> have skyrocketed in the opinion polls, pushing Labour into third place, 
> shows that the real racist danger comes not from a handful of skinheads 
> but from within mainstream politics.
> Peters' success on the immigration issue has been made possible by some 
> factors which many of his opponents - on the left, as well as in 
> government circles - prefer to ignore, since they themselves have been 
> integral to creating these factors. 
>
Peter is an opportunist.  The National Front is annoyed with Winston for
jumping on one of their main issues.
 
> National and Labour hypocrisy
> Thus, while Prime Minister Jim Bolger attacks Peters as a racist, Bolger

> was a member of the Muldoon government which in 1976 launched mass dawn 
> raids against Pacific Islanders, picked people off the street, and 
> deported thousands of "overstayers".  In the early 1980s, Muldoon, with 
> the full support of Labour leader David Lange, deprived thousands of 
> Samoans of NZ citizenship.  

Do we really want Samoans here?  And if so, why?  Why can't they be
happy back in Samoa?  Surely they wouldn't get any racism back home?
Why do they want to live here where the 'evil white man' lives?

>Bolger, for all his attacks on Peters, is 
> totally in favour of racist controls, especially when applied to 
> poverty-stricken Pacific Islands exploited by NZ capitalism.  In fact, 
> in the midst of Bolgerıs denunciations of Peters, the governmentıs 
> immigration cops carried out a dawn raid on a Pacific Island community 
> house in Auckland, terrifying its inhabitants.  It is just that as 
> Bolger and other cabinet ministers trek around east Asia trying to 
> encourage Asian business to invest here and keep NZ capitalism afloat, 
> Peters' campaign is an embarassment.

Lets just throw away law and order like Phil suggests.  Phil is right
though
Bolger is a hypocrite.  

> Successive National and Labour governments have operated immigration 
> controls against Asians and Pacific Islanders for a hundred years.  Not 
> surprisingly then, present Labour leader Helen Clark, who also obviously

> views NZ First as a potential coalition partner after the next election,

> has been reluctant to criticise Peters.  

While I despise Helen Clark she isn't completely stupid.  One of Labour's
big voting pool is the RSA and they don't like Asians (remember the
nips' POW camps?).

>The Alliance, which shares much 
> of Peters' hostility to foreign economic activity here, has been in 
> danger of having its thunder stolen and has vigorously attacked Peters' 
> anti-Asian migrant campaign.  Yet the fact that NZ First's rise in the 
> opinion polls has been primarily at the expense of Labour and the 
> Alliance is evidence of the strength of reactionary nationalism within 
> the old form of social democratic politics which shaped both these 
> parties.
>
So much for socialism.
 
> Reactionary forms of nationalism
> Reactionary attitudes towards "foreigners" have been strengthened by 
> another political development of recent years, the rise of Maori 
> nationalism and the idea of a special status for Maori as "tangata 
> whenua".  This has served to strengthen the reactionary position that 
> some people should have more rights in this country than others, based 
> on supposed cultural identity and length of residence.  These are, of 
> course, the very arguments which are being used against Asian, Pacific 
> Island and other non-white immigrants

I would have assumed communists like yourself would be boot-licking
Maoris because they were sooooo oppressed by the 'evil white man.'

> Moreover, despite the left's uncomfortability with Peters playing the 
> race card, they themselves have been instrumental in setting up this 
> card in the first place.  Nationalistic "left" groups have for years 
> campaigned against "foreign" control, thereby promoting the idea that 
> power is somehow slipping out of the hands of ordinary NZers - when did 
> workers ever exercise real power in this country? - and into the 
> grasping claws of dreaded foreigners.  Our own capitalist class is 
> presented as preferable to other capitalists (especially ones who don't 
> look like us).  Nationalist "left" groups like CAFCA have even allied 
> with Peters and had him speaking on their platforms in recent years.
> All that this sort of campaigning has done is strengthen xenophobia and 
> anxiety among people in this country.  It has reinforced the racist 
> political consensus that foreigners are a problem.  This has extremely 
> dangerous consequences in conditions of ongoing slump, social breakdown,

> decay of public services, growing anxiety and frustration.  With most 
> people worse off than they were ten years ago in terms of jobs, real 
> wages, and access to health and education services, and yet still 
> accepting a capitalist framework, they will understandably focus their 
> anger on scapegoats and vulnerable targets.  Asians and other migrants 
> end up being blamed for health waiting lists, deteriorating education 
> services, high house prices and so on.
> There is an additional aspect to anti-Asian racism, which gives it a 
> particularly virulent side.  This aspect goes to the core of more 
> general ideas of white supremacy and fears of imperial decline.
>
Phil never went to school right?
 
Schools bow down to ethnic minorities as do governmental departments.
Peters wants votes and knows a good pool to tap.

Leftists aren't Nationalists.  Leftists swallow the myth that everybody is
equal, which is something communism also preaches.

What is wrong with White supremacy, is Phil bigoted?

> Immigration, nationalism and white supremacy
> When the (white) colonial powers enslaved much of the world, they 
> presented those they conquered as inherently inferior by dint of skin 
> colour.  White supremacy was a key product of, and legitimisation for, 
> imperialism.  One of the places where the white powers ran into 
> problems, however, was Japan.  For particular reasons, Japan was able to

> preserve its independence and emerge as an imperialist power in its own 
> right.  It became a significant challenge both to US and European 
> interests in Asia and the Pacific in the 1920s and 1930s and to their 
> notions of the inherent supremacy of whites.  The Japanese have never 
> been forgiven for disproving the idea that there is something superior 
> about white-skinned people.

What a load of bullshit.  The Government is continually fawning nips. 
Does
Phil remember the traitors who wanted to rename VJ day so nips wouldn't
be offended or does Phil suffer from intense memory loss?

The nips did well for themselves that is true.  I suppose however you'd
have liked them to continue their military expansionist policy? -- You do
realize that most contempory historians (as well as most modern
historians)
state that the 1930s nip government was akin to Fascism (Ooh! What a
dirty word).

> For a hundred years, the white New Zealand elite has vented its 
> supremacist bigotry upon Pacific Islanders and Asians.  Chinese 
> labourers here in the late 1800s/early 1900s were subjected to racist 
> immigration controls, paid subsistence wages and regulated in even the 
> most personal aspects of their lives by the state - usually with the 
> full support of much of the labour movement.  Chinese males, for 
> instance, were to be kept away from both Maori and pakeha women in order

> to preserve the "racial purity" of the white and Maori "races" and the 
> "moral purity" of the women.

Back when we didn't listen to the communist creed either.  

Weren't our ancestors that much smarter?

Wasn't the excuse for the Chinese/Maori miscegenation something to do
with the fear of the children being absolutely unstable and dangerous?

> Even in Samoa, the NZ colonial administration was concerned to prevent 
> Chinese men and Samoan women getting off together, at one point in the 
> 1920s going so far as to declare all Chinese-Samoan marriages null and 
> void and discussing wholesale repatriation of Chinese labourers.  

Good for them.

>This 
> racism was not confined to the Colonel Blimp imitators who served as NZ 
> administrators in Samoa; it was shared by militant Labour leader Harry 
> Holland, still a revered figure on much of the left in this country.
> For the past hundred years, the labour movement and the left have been 
> riddled with the disease of kiwi nationalism.  

Proof that the left has been riddled with "kiwi nationalism".  

>Their reactionary 
> campaigns for import controls and against foreign ownership cannot be 
> separated from the anti-Asian atmosphere in which they take place and 
> which they help strengthen.  Campaigns against Asian commodities and 
> Asian capital cannot be separated from campaigns against the people who 
> produce those commodities and that capital.  Meanwhile, of course, NZ 
> capitalism is left free to expand into Asia to take advantage of cheap 
> labour and raw materials, just like it has ripped off the Pacific 
> Islands for decades, with little comment from the "left".
> 
Could Phil please state these campaigns against Asian commodities?  NZ
big business appears to be boot-licking gooks.  It was big business that
wanted the cheap labour force from the Pacific Islanders in the first
place.  If it were not for big business Phil wouldn't have an argument. 
Is
(NZ) communism and big business aligned?


> Limited debate
> The reactionary nature of so much of the "left" thinking on these issues

> helps explain the limited nature of the public debate on the issue.  For

> instance, just about everyone agrees that immigration is a problem and 
> that some restrictions are needed.  But why?
> Firstly, New Zealand is hardly overcrowded.  Secondly, the increasingly 
> ethnically cosmopolitan nature of New Zealand has made it a far more 
> interesting place to live than it was in "the good old days", when it 
> existed as a dreary hole at the end of the world that thousands of 
> vibrant young people couldn't wait to escape.  

Got to admit it is more lively.  Back in the "good old days" getting
mugged
was a rarity.  Back in the "good old days" you didn't need so much
security.  Back in the "good old days" murder and rape/sodomy was 
extremely rare.  Back in the "good old days" we didn't have to admire the
high development of Polynesian art (tagging).  Back in the "good old
days" we rejected communism in our Universities.  Back in the "good
old days" liberals were ignored as they should be.  

These days you need to by hefty insurance, take self defence courses,
make use of a sander for your fence (in case you decide you really
don't like the cultural achievements of Polynesians on your fence) and
invest in a lot of cotten wool because communist and liberalist doctrines
in stupidity (everybody is equal, etc) are allowed to run rampant.

>Thirdly, in a world in 
> which capital is able to move around the globe to wherever production 
> costs are lowest and therefore profits can be maximised, why shouldn't 
> workers (or the middle class for that matter) move wherever they can 
> achieve the best price for their labour-power and where they can most 
> enjoy life?
> 
Because if all the workers decide to go to where they're paid the most 
the value of the workers goes down.  Did Phil sleep through basic
economics (supply and demand)?

> Oppose all NZ immigration controls!

Why?

> Immigration controls are racist, anti-working class measures.  

How are immigration controls "anti-working class measures"?  Surely it's
in their best interest to keep out degenerates that undercut their wages.
Remember in the "good old days" only the father needed to work to
provide for his family?

>They are 
> designed to keep the working class divided along national/ethnic lines 
> and to encourage workers to identify with their own capitalists against 
> foreigners.  

Proof.

>In New Zealand, immigration controls are part of the 
> nationalist ideology which coheres this society in the interests of the 
> ruling class.  Moreover, the fact that some - indeed, many - Asians, 
> Pacific Islanders and Africans are kept out by such controls reinforces 
> the idea that all non-kiwis are somehow questionable and only here on 
> sufferance.  Immigration controls, by discriminating over who can and 
> cannot work and live in this country legitimise discrimination against 
> migrants once they are here.  Hardest hit of all are Pacific Islanders, 
> thousands of whom live in constant dread of dawn raids by immigration 
> police.

Pity they're so rare otherwise Phil might have an argument.  Most of
these "thousands" probably laugh at the police anyway...the term
"racist" will still ruin any policeman's job in these stupid times.

> Marx used to argue that until British workers learned to solidarise with

> Irish republicans against the British ruling class, they would never 
> develop the political consciousness necessary to take on that ruling 
> class.  British workers would remain tied to their own rulers' 
> apron-strings on the key political questions.  

And?
Point being?
Is the ruling class evil now?
What does Phil think of Lenin -- wasn't he part of the ruling class?
If Phil doesn't like rulers why doesn't Phil become a hermit?

>For exactly the same 
> reasons, open immigration is a key demand to be fought for by people 
> serious about social change in New Zealand.  Workers who side with kiwi 
> nationalism against people from other countries are basically lining up 
> with their own exploiters; they will never be able to mount a serious 
> challenge to the NZ ruling class until they break with them on the 
> question of nationalism and all the issues, such as immigration and NZ 
> intervention abroad, which flow from it.
> In defending Asian, Pacific Island and all other immigrants, we can make

> no distinction between "legal" and "illegal"  immigrants.  The 
> "illegals" are, indeed, the people in the worst position and most 
> desperately in need of support.  There should be no restrictions on 
> entry and work in this country, and full rights should be accorded to 
> all.  

Who does Phil think is going to provide the entire backbone for all this? 
Air?  Surely
it can't be that evil ruling-class/white-man?

Who is going to provide all that work for them?  Surely not businesses or
government because they're part of the evil ruling class.

What will the migrants be paid in?  Air isn't very nourishing...who is
going
to provide jobs?  

>Defending migrants means declaring war on all immigration controls 
> and on the reactionary New Zealand nationalism which has been as much a 
> staple diet of the left as it has been of the traditional right in this 
> country.
> 
I suppose it does but why bother defending migrants?  Do they provide
resources that we need?
> ____________________________________
> Phil Duncan was an active campaigner against immigration raids on 
> Pacific Islanders in NZ and was later involved in Britain in the 
> Campaign Against Racist Laws which organised against immigration 
> controls there.  He is a member of the Canterbury University Marxist 
> Society.
> 
Phil Duncan needs to get a reality check.  He makes an ideal bleeding-
heart liberal (perhaps that is why he is a communist).

Trick question:  If the Jew Karl Marx installed his propaganda would he
be part of the ruling class Phil despises so much?
 
Basic Flaws:  From this article Phil suggests the Samoa is deficient.
Carely that is being racist.  As is Phil's stance on Asia.  Immigrants 
want to move where the grass is greener (otherwise why bother
moving?).  Therefore Phil is saying the NZ is superior to both
the Pacific Islands and Asia.  Would Phil please prove that he isn't
a hypocrite because he is saying this country the evil-white-man
made is better than that of Chinks and Wogs.

Phil hasn't realized such a system as supply and demand.  If there
are too many workers then workers aren't worth a lot.  If there isn't
a ruling class neither is there any jobs.  Leaders lead, followers
follow.  Most people would have realized this, but Phil is lacking.

For society to function scum most be limited.  Either we hang'em,
hide them away, or we keep the out.  

Ourobouros.




From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Sat Aug 10 18:49:40 PDT 1996
Article: 56358 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.total.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!n2ott.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!winternet.com!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!news.starnet.net!waikato!waikato!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: "Ourobouros" 
Newsgroups: alt.society.conservatism,alt.politics.usa.constitution,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,soc.culture.usa,alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.equality
Subject: Re: You Can _Never_ Have Too Much Diversity (ADV)
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 10:58:43 +1200
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <01bb8647.1c6fa760$5fa11dcb@peasant>
References: <31F2BDE2.447C@ix.netcom.com>  <4suib0$dfq@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com> <31F3D44B.6B72@scott.net> <31F51A9A.4C3B@vegas.infi.net> <4t4avt$29c@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com> <31F7043B.638@scott.net> <4u0d1g$18m@tor-nn1-hb0.netcom.ca> <4u5mqv$1dn@molokini.conterra.com> <32075B83.62E9@intersurf.com> <4u7sbv$j7c@molokini.conterra.com> <3207D2D9.73D7@intersurf.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aus25.max3.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1085
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.society.conservatism:49156 alt.politics.usa.constitution:80401 alt.politics.nationalism.white:27016 alt.revisionism:56358 alt.politics.white-power:38873 soc.culture.usa:90323 alt.conspiracy:76630 talk.politics.misc:427479



> evil Beavis  wrote in article
<3207D2D9.73D7@intersurf.com>...
> bob whitaker wrote:
> 
[snip]

> >     Note the only replies I have had this far are like
> > Kascieki, "My Mommy Professor says that's not true, you evil
> > thing!"
> >     To repeat, this sort ofself-contradiction  and political
> > Correctness go over big when they are protested from
> > contradiction under the uiniversity protection of Political
> > Correctness and Mommy Profesor, but this is the Internet.
> 
> I have not much use for Political Correctness either. I just don;t
> believe being racist, hypocritical, and hateful is any better. How about
> truthful and rational?
> 
I take it from this comment that you believe yourself to be truthful and
rational?

Could we please have evidence of you being rational, let alone truthful.

If you are not full of hate yourself, then why do you persist in your
emotional babble on apw-p and apnw?

Ourobouros

 


From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Wed Aug 14 10:31:07 PDT 1996
Article: 39432 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.infi.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!homer.alpha.net!news.jersey.net!news.win.bright.net!news.bright.net!chi-news.cic.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!news1.best.com!news.sgi.com!enews.sgi.com!news.uoregon.edu!waikato!waikato!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: "Ourobouros" 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism,alt.fan.ernst-zundel
Subject: Law abiding McVay.
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 12:03:54 +1200
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <01bb8974.151f3900$65a11dcb@peasant>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aus31.max3.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1085
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:39432 alt.revisionism:57285 alt.fan.ernst-zundel:2613


Ken McVay posted his approval of an attempt to exile Ernst Zundel a few
months ago.  His justification was that it was legal.  Therefore stating
his approval of being law-abiding.

In New Zealand we have a privacy act which basically means; unless I give
you permission you cannot publicize anything of mine (includes even the
name).  While it is legal in NZ to archive my posts (as you do), it is
illegal to have them open to the public unless I give you permission to do
so.  This applies to any New Zealander you have archived.  You do not have
my permission, therefore please remove any posts of mine on your Nizkor
site(s) from public view.  Unless you have any other New Zealander's
permission please do likewise.

While I personally don't care whether or not McVay actually complies (In
fact I'm sure the hypocrite and coward won't) this is a precedent.  If
McVay does not comply then we know that McVay has a double standard when
it comes to the law;  his justification of the attempt on Ernst Zundel is
a complete farce and he used the law to back up his own hatred of Zundel
rather than any logical argument.  In other words McVay wanted Zundel's
words censored.

To those rejects out there (to whom there are many) who will state that
this is NZ law and Canadian law, and therefore McVay has no complusion to
obey, please read his whole argument before telling us how stupid you
are.

Ourobouros.
 


From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Wed Aug 14 10:42:24 PDT 1996
Article: 2613 of alt.fan.ernst-zundel
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.infi.net!solaris.cc.vt.edu!homer.alpha.net!news.jersey.net!news.win.bright.net!news.bright.net!chi-news.cic.net!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!nntp04.primenet.com!news.shkoo.com!nntp.primenet.com!news1.best.com!news.sgi.com!enews.sgi.com!news.uoregon.edu!waikato!waikato!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: "Ourobouros" 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism,alt.fan.ernst-zundel
Subject: Law abiding McVay.
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 12:03:54 +1200
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <01bb8974.151f3900$65a11dcb@peasant>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aus31.max3.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1085
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:39432 alt.revisionism:57285 alt.fan.ernst-zundel:2613


Ken McVay posted his approval of an attempt to exile Ernst Zundel a few
months ago.  His justification was that it was legal.  Therefore stating
his approval of being law-abiding.

In New Zealand we have a privacy act which basically means; unless I give
you permission you cannot publicize anything of mine (includes even the
name).  While it is legal in NZ to archive my posts (as you do), it is
illegal to have them open to the public unless I give you permission to do
so.  This applies to any New Zealander you have archived.  You do not have
my permission, therefore please remove any posts of mine on your Nizkor
site(s) from public view.  Unless you have any other New Zealander's
permission please do likewise.

While I personally don't care whether or not McVay actually complies (In
fact I'm sure the hypocrite and coward won't) this is a precedent.  If
McVay does not comply then we know that McVay has a double standard when
it comes to the law;  his justification of the attempt on Ernst Zundel is
a complete farce and he used the law to back up his own hatred of Zundel
rather than any logical argument.  In other words McVay wanted Zundel's
words censored.

To those rejects out there (to whom there are many) who will state that
this is NZ law and Canadian law, and therefore McVay has no complusion to
obey, please read his whole argument before telling us how stupid you
are.

Ourobouros.
 


From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Wed Aug 14 13:57:36 PDT 1996
Article: 39442 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.internetMCI.com!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.erols.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!news.uoregon.edu!waikato!news.express.co.nz!waikato!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: "Ourobouros" 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: The liberal's premise:
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 10:04:13 +1200
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 105
Message-ID: <01bb8963.5c9bc2a0$7ca11dcb@peasant>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aus54.max3.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1085

The liberal's premise.

It may come as no surprise to those of us that have 
repeatly tried to argue with liberals to find that 
they are incredibly irrational and illogical.  In 
an attempt to rationale the liberal's irrationality 
here, in my view, is the basic flaws or premise of 
liberals:

1. They are intolerant of intolerance.
2. They hate hatred.
3. They are prejudiced against prejudice.
4. Freedom of speech is what they say it is and none 
other.
5. The only facts that are true is what they already 
believe, ie., stagnant in their believes.
6. All cultures are equal except the European culture 
which must be subservient to the other cultures 
(hypocrisy), ie., we must experience their cultures 
whether we want to or not.
7. They believe that cultural diversity is good yet 
they won't actually go live amongst the cultures they 
love, ie., they love Chinese food yet they will not 
live in China where they can get their favourite dish 
of cat, dog, and baby girl.  No, they have decided 
they want Chinese food to be available just down the 
road, and then they try and tell you that you're the 
one being selfish.
8. They say there is no White-man guilt trip, yet any 
liberal documentary on primitive races will portray 
the White man as an intruder who destroyed that 
race's way of life, ie., their race was perfect before 
the White man.
9. On one hand they preach sermons on peace but on the 
other hand they demonstrate it by being violent, eg., 
the recent post by the Australian who asked for 
information if any  racist appeared in West Australia.  
Another example are those anti-racist rallies.
10. They wholeheartedly believe in the UN Charter for 
aboriginal rights.  Part of the UN Charter states that 
racism (whether by race, gender, religion, or culture) 
is unscientific, which is an unscientific statement in 
itself.  

Another part of the UN Charter says that property and 
assets are to be respected of aborigines.  Liberals 
preach this non-stop of how White men are guilty of 
robbing the aborigines' lands off them (related to the 
liberal belief that there is no White man guilt trip).  
Please notice how liberals lack the backbone of leading 
by example.  Liberals like preaching it, yet they'd be 
among the last to give up their land and assets to 
aborigines.

NZ liberals like to preach the UN Charter for the Maori, 
yet the Maoris aren't the indigeousness population they 
like'd to claim, therefore Maoris don't have any rights 
under that UN Charter.
11. They preach that everybody is equal except for White supremacists
(black racists are okay) whom they call 
White trash.  Yet another example of hypocrisy.
12. Related to 11., everybody's view is to be accepted, 
except the views of White supremacists.  Yet more 
hypocrisy.
13. The common (liberal) slogan: "Girls can do 
anything."  This has some interesting connotations.  
First point; it implies that girls are lacking because 
they need to be told they can do anything. Secondly; 
how can girls be fathers?  Surely that goes against the 
UN Charter concerning gender racism being unscientific?  
Surely any conclusion from a biology book would tell us 
that boys and girls are not equal, just from a genetic 
point of view (XY vs. XX).  Surely that is science?
14. Some of them, like footboy, have decided that 
political correctness is not the perfect vehicle they 
once thought it to be, yet these same SNAW (sensitive 
new-age wimps) still hold every precept of political 
correctness dear (like racism).
15. "There is no difference between races."  Then they 
say "You're discriminating on the basis of skin 
colour."  Please spot the logical contradiction.
16. They label as White trash who live in trailer parks, 
yet they fully back programs like Affirmative Action or 
Equal Opportunities Employing (NZ) which implies that 
liberals believe White businessmen are racists.  Another 
logical contradiction? 

As you can see, liberals are full of logical 
contradictions, full of hypocrisy, and have trouble 
fathoming the implications of their popular slogans.  
It is small wonder why they are losing the respect of 
the mass, why they go emotional bleeding-heart rants, 
why they resort to emotion rather than logic (they only 
have logical contradictions), and why they are so much 
arguing against -- they never cease to amuse us White supremacists by
their stupidity.

One other thing, if they don't fear White supremacy, 
then why do they keep persisting in posting their crap 
here?

Ourobouros.





From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Thu Aug 15 07:50:35 PDT 1996
Article: 57498 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.teleport.com!news.serv.net!news.alt.net!news1.alt.net!news.u.washington.edu!news.uoregon.edu!waikato!waikato!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: "Ourobouros" 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism
Subject: Phoenicians and America
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 18:12:57 +1200
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <01bb8a70.cd8d9980$7aa11dcb@peasant>
NNTP-Posting-Host: aus52.max3.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1085
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:39546 alt.revisionism:57498

Once more light doeth shine through a delibrately veiled PC history.  The
following information is from an establishment book btw.  In the past I
have quoted Thor Heyerdahl and his statement of there being mummies of
Nordic Caucasians in Peru.  This piece of information comes from the area
we now call Parahaiba, Brazil.  Discovered last century (1874), and which
caused an immense stir then but has since being kept under wraps, is a
copy of a stone that was found bearing Phoenician inscriptions.  Published
in 1874 by the National Museum of Rio de Janeiro, the proposed translation
(by C.H. Gordon): 

"We are sons of Canaan from Sidon, the city of the king.  Commerce has
cast us on this distant shore, a land of mountains.  We set [sacrificed] a
youth for the exalted Gods and Goddesses in the nineteenth year of Hiram,
our mighty king.  We embarked from Ezion-geber into the Red Sea and
voyaged with ten ships.  We were at sea together for two years around the
land belonging to Ham [Africa] but were separated by a storm [lit. 'from
the hand of Baal'] and we were no longer with our companions.  So we have
come here, twelve men and three women, on a ... shore which I, the Admiral
control.  But auspiciously may the exalted gods and goddesses favour
us!"*

To be fair there is supposed to be a huge debate over whether this copy is
authentic (the rock from which it was copied is lost).  However, on page
571 of said book, it gives a world map with Phoenician routes on it.  This
map was produced by the author.  The Phoenician navigation routes cover
all the major land masses of the world, including Australia and New
Zealand.  Perhaps Moscati has realized the abundance of anomalies found
throughout the world, ie., containing Phoencian artifacts.  BTW, the cover
of said book has a sculpture of a Phoenician head with
blue eyes. 

Perhaps we can say that Whites were instrumental in yet more
civilizations?  

BTW, I have in the past already gone through this anyway.  Apart
>from  their own myths concerning Quetzecoatl & Co., we have the
Nordic type mummies in Peru.  Bit of a stumbling block for liberals and
communists that preach "we are all equal."

* S. Moscati, The Phoenicians, Milan, 1988, p.570.

Ourobouros.





From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Sat Aug 31 11:14:00 PDT 1996
Article: 28083 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.cloud9.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!act.news.telstra.net!nsw.news.telstra.net!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: "Ourobouros" 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.skinheads
Subject: Re: DUTY
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 16:13:55 +1200
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <01bb96f4.7ebfb460$81a11dcb@peasant>
References: <5008e1$k2k@freenet-news.carleton.ca> <502vdi$88g@molokini.conterra.com> <504a6t$j6m@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <506fq1$phm@molokini.conterra.com> <506ruc$5o1@scoop.eco.twg.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port891-auck.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1085
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:28083 alt.politics.white-power:41432 alt.skinheads:36285



> chall@eco.twg.com (Charles Don Hall) wrote in article
<506ruc$5o1@scoop.eco.twg.com>...
> In article <506fq1$phm@molokini.conterra.com>,
> bob whitaker   wrote:
> >Laura Finsten  wrote:
> >>bob whitaker  wrote:

[snip]

> >But the aim of a parent is to produce offspring that look like 
> >the parent.  Politically Correct types don't like that, but 
> >they control the universities, not reality.
> 
> You're silly.
> 
> The aim of a parent is to perpetuate his or her genes. Now, all of 
> the offspring have half of each parent's genes, regardless 
> of who the other parent is. So it doesn't matter what the other 
> parent "looks like". What's important is to choose a mate who 
> has healthy genes; genes that will help the offspring to survive.
> 
> If what mattered was what the offspring "looked like", then
> we'd all be marrying our siblings and first cousins.
> 
Could you explain the phenomenon where the parents (especially
the mother and grandmothers) go around saying "Doesn't he 
have 's eyes" or "He has your chin" with young 
babies?

Of course that doesn't happen (very often) with mongrel children
(how can it, who does it look like?).

Practically every father (except liberals/wimps) wants to have sons 
that duplicate his own life, e.g., be carpenters like him.

If choosing a mate was really about "healthy genes" could you
explain how rampant feminists get husbands (the non lesbian
ones)?  Or, perhaps how wimps/liberals/homophiles, that pass 
for men, get wives?  All of them have nothing but unhealthy
genes.
 
[philosophical lesson snipped]

Ourobouros.



From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Sat Aug 31 12:06:40 PDT 1996
Article: 41430 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!act.news.telstra.net!nsw.news.telstra.net!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: "Ourobouros" 
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.flame,alt.fan.ernst-zundel,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: Ken the Mc-a-voidly lie'n: Bully, Blowhard, Coward
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 16:01:49 +1200
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <01bb96f2.92889fe0$81a11dcb@peasant>
References: <4v9ejf$18j@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com> <32248DB5.562@gryn.org> <5042vo$ff2@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>  <507g0u$46i@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port891-auck.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1085
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.conspiracy:83416 alt.flame:24351 alt.fan.ernst-zundel:2783 alt.politics.white-power:41430



> kmcvay@nizkor.org (Ken McVay OBC) wrote in article
<507g0u$46i@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca>...
> In article , 
> schwartz@infinet.com wrote:

[snip]

> You misspelled "coward and hypocrite," Sara ... perhaps you
> have forgotten this this is the selfsame besotted, loudmouthed
> blowhard that tucked his tail firmly between his legs (there
> being little else there to impede this process) and bravely
> fled when offered a golden opportunity to back up his mouth
> with his chequebook.

[Ken's vain boasting snipped]

We could assume that you know a coward and a hypocrite when
you see one -- since you are the best example of one.  Still, it
does serve to illustrate another example of your hypocrisy; that 
being a hypocrite.  When are you going to answer my questions 
Mc-a-voidly?

Pot, kettle, black.

Ourobouros.




From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Sat Aug 31 12:06:41 PDT 1996
Article: 41432 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.cloud9.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!act.news.telstra.net!nsw.news.telstra.net!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: "Ourobouros" 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.skinheads
Subject: Re: DUTY
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 16:13:55 +1200
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <01bb96f4.7ebfb460$81a11dcb@peasant>
References: <5008e1$k2k@freenet-news.carleton.ca> <502vdi$88g@molokini.conterra.com> <504a6t$j6m@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <506fq1$phm@molokini.conterra.com> <506ruc$5o1@scoop.eco.twg.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port891-auck.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1085
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:28083 alt.politics.white-power:41432 alt.skinheads:36285



> chall@eco.twg.com (Charles Don Hall) wrote in article
<506ruc$5o1@scoop.eco.twg.com>...
> In article <506fq1$phm@molokini.conterra.com>,
> bob whitaker   wrote:
> >Laura Finsten  wrote:
> >>bob whitaker  wrote:

[snip]

> >But the aim of a parent is to produce offspring that look like 
> >the parent.  Politically Correct types don't like that, but 
> >they control the universities, not reality.
> 
> You're silly.
> 
> The aim of a parent is to perpetuate his or her genes. Now, all of 
> the offspring have half of each parent's genes, regardless 
> of who the other parent is. So it doesn't matter what the other 
> parent "looks like". What's important is to choose a mate who 
> has healthy genes; genes that will help the offspring to survive.
> 
> If what mattered was what the offspring "looked like", then
> we'd all be marrying our siblings and first cousins.
> 
Could you explain the phenomenon where the parents (especially
the mother and grandmothers) go around saying "Doesn't he 
have 's eyes" or "He has your chin" with young 
babies?

Of course that doesn't happen (very often) with mongrel children
(how can it, who does it look like?).

Practically every father (except liberals/wimps) wants to have sons 
that duplicate his own life, e.g., be carpenters like him.

If choosing a mate was really about "healthy genes" could you
explain how rampant feminists get husbands (the non lesbian
ones)?  Or, perhaps how wimps/liberals/homophiles, that pass 
for men, get wives?  All of them have nothing but unhealthy
genes.
 
[philosophical lesson snipped]

Ourobouros.



From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Sat Aug 31 12:12:30 PDT 1996
Article: 83416 of alt.conspiracy
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!act.news.telstra.net!nsw.news.telstra.net!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: "Ourobouros" 
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.flame,alt.fan.ernst-zundel,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: Ken the Mc-a-voidly lie'n: Bully, Blowhard, Coward
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 16:01:49 +1200
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <01bb96f2.92889fe0$81a11dcb@peasant>
References: <4v9ejf$18j@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com> <32248DB5.562@gryn.org> <5042vo$ff2@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>  <507g0u$46i@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port891-auck.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1085
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.conspiracy:83416 alt.flame:24351 alt.fan.ernst-zundel:2783 alt.politics.white-power:41430



> kmcvay@nizkor.org (Ken McVay OBC) wrote in article
<507g0u$46i@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca>...
> In article , 
> schwartz@infinet.com wrote:

[snip]

> You misspelled "coward and hypocrite," Sara ... perhaps you
> have forgotten this this is the selfsame besotted, loudmouthed
> blowhard that tucked his tail firmly between his legs (there
> being little else there to impede this process) and bravely
> fled when offered a golden opportunity to back up his mouth
> with his chequebook.

[Ken's vain boasting snipped]

We could assume that you know a coward and a hypocrite when
you see one -- since you are the best example of one.  Still, it
does serve to illustrate another example of your hypocrisy; that 
being a hypocrite.  When are you going to answer my questions 
Mc-a-voidly?

Pot, kettle, black.

Ourobouros.




From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Sat Aug 31 12:21:46 PDT 1996
Article: 36285 of alt.skinheads
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.cloud9.net!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!act.news.telstra.net!nsw.news.telstra.net!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: "Ourobouros" 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.skinheads
Subject: Re: DUTY
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 16:13:55 +1200
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <01bb96f4.7ebfb460$81a11dcb@peasant>
References: <5008e1$k2k@freenet-news.carleton.ca> <502vdi$88g@molokini.conterra.com> <504a6t$j6m@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <506fq1$phm@molokini.conterra.com> <506ruc$5o1@scoop.eco.twg.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port891-auck.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1085
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:28083 alt.politics.white-power:41432 alt.skinheads:36285



> chall@eco.twg.com (Charles Don Hall) wrote in article
<506ruc$5o1@scoop.eco.twg.com>...
> In article <506fq1$phm@molokini.conterra.com>,
> bob whitaker   wrote:
> >Laura Finsten  wrote:
> >>bob whitaker  wrote:

[snip]

> >But the aim of a parent is to produce offspring that look like 
> >the parent.  Politically Correct types don't like that, but 
> >they control the universities, not reality.
> 
> You're silly.
> 
> The aim of a parent is to perpetuate his or her genes. Now, all of 
> the offspring have half of each parent's genes, regardless 
> of who the other parent is. So it doesn't matter what the other 
> parent "looks like". What's important is to choose a mate who 
> has healthy genes; genes that will help the offspring to survive.
> 
> If what mattered was what the offspring "looked like", then
> we'd all be marrying our siblings and first cousins.
> 
Could you explain the phenomenon where the parents (especially
the mother and grandmothers) go around saying "Doesn't he 
have 's eyes" or "He has your chin" with young 
babies?

Of course that doesn't happen (very often) with mongrel children
(how can it, who does it look like?).

Practically every father (except liberals/wimps) wants to have sons 
that duplicate his own life, e.g., be carpenters like him.

If choosing a mate was really about "healthy genes" could you
explain how rampant feminists get husbands (the non lesbian
ones)?  Or, perhaps how wimps/liberals/homophiles, that pass 
for men, get wives?  All of them have nothing but unhealthy
genes.
 
[philosophical lesson snipped]

Ourobouros.



From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Sat Aug 31 12:24:28 PDT 1996
Article: 2783 of alt.fan.ernst-zundel
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!nntp04.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!act.news.telstra.net!nsw.news.telstra.net!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: "Ourobouros" 
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.flame,alt.fan.ernst-zundel,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: Ken the Mc-a-voidly lie'n: Bully, Blowhard, Coward
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 16:01:49 +1200
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <01bb96f2.92889fe0$81a11dcb@peasant>
References: <4v9ejf$18j@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com> <32248DB5.562@gryn.org> <5042vo$ff2@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>  <507g0u$46i@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port891-auck.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1085
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.conspiracy:83416 alt.flame:24351 alt.fan.ernst-zundel:2783 alt.politics.white-power:41430



> kmcvay@nizkor.org (Ken McVay OBC) wrote in article
<507g0u$46i@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca>...
> In article , 
> schwartz@infinet.com wrote:

[snip]

> You misspelled "coward and hypocrite," Sara ... perhaps you
> have forgotten this this is the selfsame besotted, loudmouthed
> blowhard that tucked his tail firmly between his legs (there
> being little else there to impede this process) and bravely
> fled when offered a golden opportunity to back up his mouth
> with his chequebook.

[Ken's vain boasting snipped]

We could assume that you know a coward and a hypocrite when
you see one -- since you are the best example of one.  Still, it
does serve to illustrate another example of your hypocrisy; that 
being a hypocrite.  When are you going to answer my questions 
Mc-a-voidly?

Pot, kettle, black.

Ourobouros.





Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.