The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: people/m/mckinstry.colin/1997/ourobouros.0197


From Ourobouros Wed Jan  1 06:48:45 PST 1997
Article: 90346 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!news-dc.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-lond.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.censorship,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: The Great Debate
Date: 30 Dec 1996 11:52:26 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 243
Message-ID: <5a96hq$h3r@lex.zippo.com>
References: <199612120033.QAA01666@mailmasher.com> <5972s1$p2f@lex.zippo.com> <59ad1g$a11@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <59aubi$4n2@lex.zippo.com> <59cf44$sld@access5.digex.net> <59clb5$a6m@lex.zippo.com> <32bf0bb9.6132738@news.inetport.com> <59he0v$c4t@lex.zippo.com> <32cd7e68.13999668@news.inetport.com> <59k2ge$sgv@lex.zippo.com> <32d5b9d3.24925804@news.inetport.com> <59ldr6$i82@lex.zippo.com> <32bfd3b9.17062439@news.inetport.com> <59msh5$kne@lex.zippo.com> <32c7faf2.4464317@news.inetport.com> <59pau3$689@lex.zippo.com> <32c79b3a.10354852@news.inetport.com> <59ujsv$jdv@lex.zippo.com> <32c7e42c.3007432@news.inetport.com> <5a1brn$486@lex.zippo.com> <32cc4796.10695902@news.inetport.com> <5a49fg$a41@lex.zippo.com> <32c7fa43.501586@news.inetport.com> <5a74hd$m5t@lex.zippo.com> <32c7cf6b.1946820@news.inetport.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port855-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:90346 alt.censorship:113668 alt.politics.nationalism.white:41645 alt.politics.white-power:54282

In article <32c7cf6b.1946820@news.inetport.com>, mcurtis@inetport.com says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>
>>In article <32c7fa43.501586@news.inetport.com>, mcurtis@inetport.com says...
>>>
>
>[snip]
>
>Ourobouros makes a telling admission:
>>>>>>Amusing, alas I must decline, as I wouldn't know how many books I have read on
>>>>>>the topic, and unless the various books interest me, I don't take notes.
>>>>>
>
>Mike Curtis writes:
>>>>>I asked for titles. I'm not surprised that you decline, however. Most
>>>>>deniers do.
>>>>>
>
>Ourobouros makes an important admission:
>>>>As I said before, the holocaust is not my forte.  I have read enough to be
>>>>relatively proficient, but that is all -- it doesn't particularly interest me.
>>>
>
>Mike Curtis writes:
>>>Then why the devil are you asking _me_ to prove anything to you? If it
>>>doesn't interest you, then why are you here?
>>>
>>To test your knowledge and limits.
>
>Based on your admitted limited knowledge?
>
I don't see anything wrong with asking questions, do you?  Afterall, you are
supposedly a scholar on the Holocaust, getting answers should be a relatively
easy task.

>>  BTW, this conversation was not originally
>>on the holocaust.
>>
>
>I see no one else participating at this moment.
>
I tend to be a hammer.

>[snip]
>
>>>>>Ourobouros requested proof of:
>>>>>>>>6 Million Jews, gas chambers, gas wagons, etc., etc.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Mike Curtis responds:
>>>>>>>12 million victims is the closer number for the Holocaust. The Jews
>>>>>>>are the significant portion of the 12 million. I MUST therefore assume
>>>>>>>that you have no problems with the portion of the Holocaust for the
>>>>>>>Sinti and Roma, Homosexuals, mentally retarded, those with congenital
>>>>>>>diseases, and Seventh Day Adventists. You then have no problem with
>>>>>>>the way _they_ were killed. You must not have much problem with the
>>>>>>>history of the T4 program. I can assume that you have no problems with
>>>>>>>this. This means that you accept the phenol injections and the gas
>>>>>>>chambers used in the hospitals and sanitariums that were on German
>>>>>>>soil. All this doesn't involve the Jews or the other stuff. Can we
>>>>>>>assume that you accept this portion of the holocaust?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>
>Mike Curtis writes:
>>>>>Then Ourobouros disingenuously reads the whole passage. I think Laura
>>>>>Finstein responded well to the distortion of my words that Ourobouros
>>>>>presents below so I'll let that dog sleep.
>>>>
>
>Ourobouros admits he has been caught misreading the English language:
>>>>I decided to play with your loose words.
>>>>
>>>
>
>Mike Curtis writes:
>>>That is dishonest. 
>>>
>
>Ourobouros fiddles with the English language:
>>Perhaps, but probably not.
>
>The above are the kind of posts that would come from a scoundrel.
>
Ha!
>
>Mike Curtis writes:
>>>How would you have the foggiest idea since: "As I said before, the
>>>holocaust is not my forte.  I have read enough to be relatively
>>>proficient, but that is all -- it doesn't particularly interest me."
>>>I have some doubt as to your proficiency. Most all the books I have
>>>discuss the other 6 million.
>>>
>>>_The Racial State_ by Burleigh and Wipperman
>>>_The Nazi Doctors_ by Richard Lifton 
>>>_The War Against the Jews_ by Lucy Dawidowicz
>>>
>>I take it that since you said most that two of the above books mention people
>>other than Jews in concentration camps and the one left over does not?
>>
>
>All three mention people other than Jews in the concentration camps.
>
Sorry, I misunderstood, I thought you were stating the above were the (only)
books you have read on the holocaust.

>>It is also interesting to note that not all the books you have read mention the 
>>other 6 million, therefore we have established that certain books on the 
>>holocaust mention the Jews solely.
>>
>
>These are the posts of a scoundrel who refuses to read what is written
>to him. These are the words of a dishonest individual who has no
>compunction to distort the words those present to him. What faith can
>we have in the historical presentations made by this individual from
>New Zealand?
>
Absolute rubbish.  You asserted most books on the holocaust you have read
mention the other 6 million, therefore it stands to reason that some of the
books you have read, don't.

>>>>  William Marks makes a peculiar comment in one of his interwar books which
>>>>he comments he does not understand why Germany didn't make more use of the Jews
>>>>for work because they were putting them to death, no mention of anybody else.
>>>
>>>The Jews were the majority killed and a very productive 1% of the
>>>population. Before 1933, as Sarah Gordon make clear, they made up a
>>>tax base higher in proportion to their 1% of the population. They had
>>>more income and therefore contributed more in taxes. There is nothing
>>>much to understand other than the fact that German anti-Semitism was
>>>more important. 
>>>
>>Strange, I remember one book I read on Nazi Germany was that the average income
>>of a Jew was less than that of the average German (pre-Nazi government).
>
>What book?
>
In the dim past unfortunately, therefore I don't remember the title.

>>  If
>>this were true then Jews would have paid less than their 1% of the population.
>
>This isn't born out by German records. See the Sarah Gordon book.
>
Perhaps.

>>The book was trying to state that the Nazis had absolutely no basis for their
>>anti-semitism (sic) because the Jews were not the rich sector of society.  
>>
>
>The Germans had no basis for their anti-Semitism no matter what the
>case this unnamed book presents.
>
Curious, I may take you up on this at some stage.

>[snip]
>
>>Perhaps the holocaust is full of contradictory material then?
>>
>
>What historical event isn't?
>
Explain.

>>>>One of my lecturers on the interwar period, only mentions the Jews in connection
>>>>with the concentration camps and the list continues.  You talk rot.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I don't care what you think, but since there was a gyspy camp at
>>>Auschwitz, I'm not sure who should be more on the defensive. I suggest
>>>you. The Blockältesten, etc., were rarely Jewish but made up of Poles,
>>>Germans, and other nationalities. You appear to have done very little
>>>reading, if any on the holocaust and the various death and
>>>extermination camps.
>>>
>>I am commenting on the popular "mythology" and the books concerning it.  Ask
>>Jo Bloggs on the street about the holocaust, guess which people he will mention?
>>Which do you think he'll know about; the Gypsies and Poles or the Jews?
>>
>
>Since the Jews made up almost 50% of the total number, it is
>understandable why people think of the Jews.
>
No, it does not.  Most of the vulgar are only aware of the Jews in concert with
the holocaust, peoples like Gypsies and Poles are unheard of.

>>>>>[snip]
>>>>>
>>>>>>As for your hospitals and whatnot, let me guess, you mean those *evil* but
>>>>>>unproven experiments on Jews and other miscreants?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>No. I mean the T4 program that you obviously know nothing about. 
>>>>>
>>>>Then enlighten me.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I'll put a thread together and title it T4. Look for it.
>>>
>>I rarely read alt.revisionism.
>>
>
>Then you obviously have no interest in learning anything. This has
>been apparent all along this thread.
>
?

>>That is incorrect, you failed to perceive the point I was making.
>>
>
>I'm off this maeerry-go-round.
>
>>>>>>To my mind (I have even taken his course) this belief is ludicrous, but he
>>>>>>nevertheless offers "evidence" to support his beliefs.  What I am getting at is
>>>>>>the evidence of historians is inconsistent and watery.
>>>>>
>>>>>Such as?
>>>>>
>>>>I couldn't really say actually, nothing he has offered as proof for his views
>>>>backs him up.
>>>>
>>>
>>>You said he offers evidence to support his beliefs and yet you do not
>>>know what that is?
>>>
>>Typically any single word in quotations means it is suspect or dubious.  Please
>>note the form I used.
>>
>
>This is specious.
>
?

>>I was referring to you and your earlier comment about what constitutes 
>>evidence.
>>
>
>This individual appears to be a typical waste of valuable time.
>
Uh huh.  Sounds more like a dodge.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Wed Jan  1 06:48:46 PST 1997
Article: 90347 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!news-dc.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-lond.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-paris.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!howland.erols.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Nazi Atrocities?
Date: 30 Dec 1996 12:14:17 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <5a97qp$i1l@lex.zippo.com>
References: <594sos$s6k$1@uhura.phoenix.net> <5a02jd$lo@lex.zippo.com>  <5a4733$944@lex.zippo.com> <5a7utc$op0@access2.digex.net> <5a89av$6dg@explorer2.clark.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port861-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <5a89av$6dg@explorer2.clark.net>, karlpov@explorer2.clark.net says...
>
>mstein@access2.digex.net (Michael P. Stein) writes:
>
>>    The very amusing thing is many of the same people who accept the Book
>>of Joshua as proof of the genocidal deeds of the ancient Israelites deny
>>that the Nazis committed genocidal mass murder against the Jews.  (They
>>don't talk much about the Gypsies; it makes it hard to maintain the
>>"Jewish hoax" story.)  The deniers demand physical evidence, and explain
>>that all confessions were the result of torture.  Those confessions which
>>cannot be explained away in this manner are declared to be the result of
>>false boasting or mental illness.
>
>>    Yet for some reason Ouroboros's skepticism goes out the window when
>>discussing the Book of Joshua.  How very strange. 
>
>What's stranger is that while dumping on contemporary Jews for
>genocide in Joshua and the crucifixion of Jesus of Galilee, they
>deny that those Jews are any relation to the folks in the Bible.
>They also are upset that Jews have such long, unforgiving memories
>that they still go after old Nazis for the misdeeds of half a
>century ago....

If the Jews want to be identified with the Hebrews of old then I'll happily
comply.

It is quite curious that the Egyptians have met a brick wall with Jews 
concerning Jewish war atrocities (20 year problem), but the Jews can somehow
keep going for half a century, is there any hypocrisy?

Could you please keep to the original newsgroups? I was only reading a.r to see
if Mike Curtis had published his T4 post.

Ourobouros.



From Ourobouros Wed Jan  1 15:20:10 PST 1997
Article: 41712 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!noc.van.hookup.net!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,talk.environment
Subject: Re: Nova: Indians Exterminated Mammoth, Horse, etc.
Date: 1 Jan 1997 10:40:05 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <5aeb25$lmv@lex.zippo.com>
References: <01bbec8e$1c6df520$f4cdaec7@default> <599ug2$ivg@lex.zippo.com>  <59asja$407@lex.zippo.com> <59c291$1rs@news1.ucsd.edu> <59c60o$2tk@lex.zippo.com>  <59f58e$rh3@lex.zippo.com>  <5a3v8k$4sl@lex.zippo.com>  <5a9s8o$48i@lex.zippo.com> <5abc3q$bg3@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5abtsa$rbl@lex.zippo.com> <5adqji$bs3@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port937-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.rush-limbaugh:125016 alt.politics.nationalism.white:41712 alt.politics.white-power:54325 talk.environment:48613

In article <5adqji$bs3@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>>In article <5abc3q$bg3@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura says...
>
>[...]
>
>>>Do you have any idea how many different native groups existed in North America
>>>in 1600?  How many of these did John Smith directly observe?  How frequently
>>>did he observe their behaviours?  Did you know that at the moment of European
>>>colonisation, the indigeneous systems in many parts of the North America,
>>>but especially along the eastern seaboard, were radically transformed because
>>>of epidemic disease?
>
>>>This single quotation provides some support for your case, Sr. Comecola, but
>>>it is not an adequate empirical basis for the sort of sweeping generalisation
>>>you are endeavoring to make.
>
>>"Sr. Comecola"?
>
>>I understand your points above.  Captain John Smith only really investigated
>>(dwelt/researched) the NA Indians around his locality (Jamestown).  But, on
>>saying this, do you have any (early colonial and anthropological literature)
>>that goes against Captain John Smith's journals?
>
>What exactly do you mean by "early...anthropological literature"?  You 
>realise,  of course, that most of what was written about native people 
>in the colonial era and 19th century was concerned with depicting them 
>in such a way to legitimate taking their land and destroying whatever
>vestiges of social institutions remained after decades or centuries of
>displacement, disease and, in some cases, out and out slaughter.  (If you
>think that Europeans have never engaged in genocide, Sr. Comecola, I
>recommend to you that read what the British did to the Beothuk Indians
>of Newfoundland.)
>
Mr. Braun asserted that early colonial and anthropological literature supported
his one-eyed belief that the NA Indian was an innate conservationist.  What you
have written above undermines Mr. Braun's narrow reality even more -- that
being the early ... literature supporting his beliefs.

Since when did this conversation enter into the battle of what the Europeans
did?  We are talking about what the NA Indians did concerning their status with
nature.

Who or what is Sr. Comecola?

>I would recommend that you begin with the multivolume series "The Handbook
>of North American Indians", published by the Smithsonian Institution.
>
And when was that published? -- we are talking about early ... literature you
know.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Wed Jan  1 19:33:42 PST 1997
Article: 90448 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!noc.van.hookup.net!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!voskovec.radio.cz!news.apfel.de!fu-berlin.de!main.Germany.EU.net!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.censorship,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: The Great Debate
Date: 1 Jan 1997 11:24:09 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 291
Message-ID: <5aedkp$n4f@lex.zippo.com>
References: <199612120033.QAA01666@mailmasher.com> <5972s1$p2f@lex.zippo.com> <59ad1g$a11@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <59aubi$4n2@lex.zippo.com> <59cf44$sld@access5.digex.net> <59clb5$a6m@lex.zippo.com> <32bf0bb9.6132738@news.inetport.com> <59he0v$c4t@lex.zippo.com> <32cd7e68.13999668@news.inetport.com> <59k2ge$sgv@lex.zippo.com> <32d5b9d3.24925804@news.inetport.com> <59ldr6$i82@lex.zippo.com> <32bfd3b9.17062439@news.inetport.com> <59msh5$kne@lex.zippo.com> <32c7faf2.4464317@news.inetport.com> <59pau3$689@lex.zippo.com> <32c79b3a.10354852@news.inetport.com> <59ujsv$jdv@lex.zippo.com> <32c7e42c.3007432@news.inetport.com> <5a1brn$486@lex.zippo.com> <32cc4796.10695902@news.inetport.com> <5a49fg$a41@lex.zippo.com> <32c7fa43.501586@news.inetport.com> <5a74hd$m5t@lex.zippo.com> <32c7cf6b.1946820@news.inetport.com> <5a96hq$h3r@lex.zippo.com> <32d28d2e.6591010@news.inetport.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port937-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:90448 alt.censorship:113728 alt.politics.nationalism.white:41732 alt.politics.white-power:54344

In article <32d28d2e.6591010@news.inetport.com>, mcurtis@inetport.com says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>
>I'm going to snip this thing down so it is not so tedious. This
>individual admits to not having much interest or real knowledge
>concerning the Holocaust. So:
>
>Mike Curtis writes:
>>>>>Then why the devil are you asking _me_ to prove anything to you? If it
>>>>>doesn't interest you, then why are you here?
>>>>>
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>>>>To test your knowledge and limits.
>>>
>
>Mike Curtis responds:
>>>Based on your admitted limited knowledge?
>>>
>
>Ourobouros says:
>>I don't see anything wrong with asking questions, do you?  Afterall, you are
>>supposedly a scholar on the Holocaust, getting answers should be a relatively
>>easy task.
>>
>
>Let's be clear. The Holocaust is an historical hobby for me that has
>become of increasing interest because of this conference. My primary
>interest in history is American Colonial New England and the Early
>Republic up through the Constitutional period. I'm well versed on the
>antebellum period in the United States also. So I understand very well
>the history of slavery. Since I choose to be so open here, and this is
>not strickly for your benefit, I find that because of my historical
>background I can approach the history of the Holocaust with a
>professional approach. Hopefully, showing deniers the complexities
>involved in substantiating an historical event and how the historical
>method works.
>
But you are already biased.

>[snip]
>
>>>
>Ourobouros requested proof of:
>>>>>>>>>>6 Million Jews, gas chambers, gas wagons, etc., etc.
>>>>>>>>>Mike Curtis responds:
>>>>>>>>>12 million victims is the closer number for the Holocaust. The Jews
>>>>>>>>>are the significant portion of the 12 million. I MUST therefore assume
>>>>>>>>>that you have no problems with the portion of the Holocaust for the
>>>>>>>>>Sinti and Roma, Homosexuals, mentally retarded, those with congenital
>>>>>>>>>diseases, and Seventh Day Adventists. You then have no problem with
>>>>>>>>>the way _they_ were killed. You must not have much problem with the
>>>>>>>>>history of the T4 program. I can assume that you have no problems with
>>>>>>>>>this. This means that you accept the phenol injections and the gas
>>>>>>>>>chambers used in the hospitals and sanitariums that were on German
>>>>>>>>>soil. All this doesn't involve the Jews or the other stuff. Can we
>>>>>>>>>assume that you accept this portion of the holocaust?
>
>[snipped myself]
>
>Ourobouros admits he has been caught misreading the English language:
>>>>>>I decided to play with your loose words.
>
>Mike Curtis writes:
>>>>>That is dishonest. 
>
>Ourobouros fiddles with the English language:
>>>>Perhaps, but probably not.
>
>Mike Curtis writes:
>>>The above are the kind of posts that would come from a scoundrel.
>
>Ourobouros must agree:
>>Ha!
>
Er no, I was amused by your choice of words.  Playing with someone's loose
words is not necessarily in itself the work of a scoundrel, though I will admit
it can be.  What you witnessed was yet another tactic I have picked up from 
your comrades, notably Jeffrey G. Brown.

>Mike Curtis writes:
>>>>>How would you have the foggiest idea since: "As I said before, the
>>>>>holocaust is not my forte.  I have read enough to be relatively
>>>>>proficient, but that is all -- it doesn't particularly interest me."
>>>>>I have some doubt as to your proficiency. Most all the books I have
>>>>>discuss the other 6 million.
>>>>>
>>>>>_The Racial State_ by Burleigh and Wipperman
>>>>>_The Nazi Doctors_ by Richard Lifton 
>>>>>_The War Against the Jews_ by Lucy Dawidowicz
>>>>>
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>>>>I take it that since you said most that two of the above books mention people
>>>>other than Jews in concentration camps and the one left over does not?
>>>>
>>>
>
>Mike Curtis writes:
>>>All three mention people other than Jews in the concentration camps.
>>>
>
>Ourobouros explains:
>>Sorry, I misunderstood, I thought you were stating the above were the (only)
>>books you have read on the holocaust.
>>
>
>No, I have a meager 300 volume library on the Holocaust alone. I could
>make quite a large list of the books that meet the criteria described
>above.
>
Another McVay claim about 300 books.  Is there some special numeralogical
significance with 300 books with true believers or something?

>Ourobouros wrote:
>>>>It is also interesting to note that not all the books you have read mention the 
>>>>other 6 million, therefore we have established that certain books on the 
>>>>holocaust mention the Jews solely.
>>>>
>>>
>
>Mike Curtis realizes:
>>>These are the posts of a scoundrel who refuses to read what is written
>>>to him. These are the words of a dishonest individual who has no
>>>compunction to distort the words those present to him. What faith can
>>>we have in the historical presentations made by this individual from
>>>New Zealand?
>>>
>
>Ourobouros attempts a defense:
>>Absolute rubbish.  You asserted most books on the holocaust you have read
>>mention the other 6 million, therefore it stands to reason that some of the
>>books you have read, don't.
>>
>
>So what if _some_ do not. One cannot always tell by the title as is
>shown by the Dawidowicz book above. Some volumes are specific to the
>50% of the victims. This is true of books about women, slavery,
>Egyptians, Romans, Christians, Moslems, Mormons, and other SUBJECTS.
>These books will list in their bibliographies references to the other
>books that cover other subjects. And yes most books do mention the
>other 6 million while some others do not. IOW, it is not a black and
>white issue for those who sudy historical events for they tend to read
>everything in their specialties. 
>
In connection with the holocaust; do these books (on Jews only) specify that
they are only talking about Jews (only) from the cover?  Typically when a
historical book is concerned with women only they include in the title the
specification of women, eg., _Women in Ancient Egypt_ by B. Watterson.

I would also ask why Jo Blogg has only heard of Jews in connection with the
holocaust, especially since the books on the holocaust mention other groups of
people...do you understand the point I am trying to raise?

>[snipped a failed attempt to get a title of a book]
>
>Ourobouros writes:
>>>>The book was trying to state that the Nazis had absolutely no basis for their
>>>>anti-semitism (sic) because the Jews were not the rich sector of society.  
>
>Mike Curtis counters:
>>>The Germans had no basis for their anti-Semitism no matter what the
>>>case this unnamed book presents.
>
>Ourobouros writes:
>>Curious, I may take you up on this at some stage.
>
>This suggests that you see validity in anti-Semitism.
>
Yes I do.

To put it in a nutshell: why have the Jews always been despised?  Have our
ancestors *always* been wrong?  Jews have done nothing to promote the image of
them being despised throughout the last 2,000 years, that they have *always*
been innocent?

>>>[snip]
>
>>>>Perhaps the holocaust is full of contradictory material then?
>
>>>What historical event isn't?
>
>>Explain.
>
>Briefly. The Alamo battle of 1836 has been a subject of recent
>controversy in Texas. Several things are becoming clearer as
>additional research continues. It is possible that the capacity of the
>Mexican army under Santa Anna was not as large as earlier history
>claimed. It is being substantiated that Davy Crockett may have died by
>firing squad after surrender. The streets in front of the Alamo are
>being searched for gold. It is a possibility that the men who stayed
>there stayed to fight for money rather than fight for Texas. The
>position was not valuable to General Houston and he had ordered the
>Alamo abandoned. But it wasn't. Santa Anna deviated to the Alamo to
>fight for a relatively unimportant area. In the end it took on a
>different hue. Despite all this contradictory material to the original
>history of the battle, no one says that the battle didn't happen.
>
>Were the Earps criminals or true upholders of the law prior to the
>gunfight at the OK Corral? If they were evil, does this change the
>fact that the gunfight happened? Because the gunfight did not take
>place in the OK Corral, does that mean it didn't happen? Because
>witnesses saw variations on the 30 second gunfight does that mean that
>Frank McClaury (sp?) was any less dead?
>
Curious choice of words.  Nice emotive words to try and validate the true
believers position on the holocaust I must add.

You have made a sweeping generalisation concerning that all history is subject
to contradictory material, substantiate that claim.

>Mike Curtis writes:
>>>Since the Jews made up almost 50% of the total number, it is
>>>understandable why people think of the Jews.
>>>
>
>Ourobouros writes:
>>No, it does not.  Most of the vulgar are only aware of the Jews in concert with
>>the holocaust, peoples like Gypsies and Poles are unheard of.
>>
>
>The vulgar? You weren't even aware of the T4 program! Are you placing
>yourself among the vulgar then? And yes it is typical of today's
>knowledge that some things slip through the cracks. None of it is
>intentional. Most historions try to tell complete stories. Most folks
>today are not interested in history because they find it boring. The
>way it is taught is boring. This is sad. So now you know of the
>Gypsies who were the Sinti and Roma. You know of the homosexuals. You
>know of the mentally ill. You now know of the T4 program by name. So I
>suggest that you go out and read about it. You also might read of the
>Christian protestors who were thrown into concentration camps while
>you are at it.
>
Before this conversation got started I knew about the other people.  I must say
I first learnt there were other people aside from Jews from a Jehovah Witness 
doorknocker.  Do you know the JWs are right because they were persecuted by
evil Natsees?  I believe I was 16 or 17 at the time this occurred, AND, 
supposedly I had learnt about WWII in social studies in Third form 
(age 13-14 to determine US equilavent grade system).

I find the holocaust boring (and WWII) because it is thrashed to death.  I
absolutely hate hearing the same thing over and over and over again, in fact it
tends to make me highly suspicious.

>Additionally, most folks do not know that Blacks owned slaves in South
>Carolina during that particular era in American History.
>
I knew this one too.  To admit Blacks owned slaves would destroy the myth of
the evil white man, so it tends to be hushed up.

>[snip]
>
>Mike curtis offers:
>>>>>I'll put a thread together and title it T4. Look for it.
>>>>>
>
>Ourobouros rejects:
>>>>I rarely read alt.revisionism.
>>>>
>>>
>
>Mike Curtis accepts the rejection:
>>>Then you obviously have no interest in learning anything. This has
>>>been apparent all along this thread.
>>>
>
>Ourobouros writes:
>>?
>>
>
>Mike Curtis:
>It sounded like a rejection of the offer.
>
Cross post or make it bold in alt.revisionism.  I am not interested in sifting
through every Mike Curtis post to try and find some obscurely named post.

>[snip]
>
>Ourobouros writes:
>>Uh huh.  Sounds more like a dodge.
>
>I do not dodge issues. I expect others to deal honestly with the
>subjects at hand.
>
Then you must despise your comrades.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Thu Jan  2 14:50:10 PST 1997
Article: 41890 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!nic.win.hookup.net!noc.van.hookup.net!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.discrimination,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.immigration,alt.skinheads,alt.conspiracy,alt.religion.islam
Subject: Re: Thomas Jefferson and miscegenation (was Re: More Facts Proving the Non-Existence of a "Pure White Race"
Date: 2 Jan 1997 12:09:40 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <5ah4m4$657@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <59ukbl$jgn@lex.zippo.com>  <5a3udu$4d4@lex.zippo.com>  <5a95a5$g7t@lex.zippo.com>  <5ac21t$12m@lex.zippo.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port912-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.discrimination:59653 alt.politics.white-power:54472 alt.politics.nationalism.white:41890 alt.skinheads:47457 alt.conspiracy:127347 alt.religion.islam:37850

In article , holman@elo.helsinki.fi says...
>
>In article <5ac21t$12m@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros wrote:
>
>> Nothing wrong so far, except for "we" -- you are not of royal personage.
>
>See our new year's address to the newsgroup.
>
Yes, more waffling.  It doesn't substantiate your claim.
>> 
>> >*Eugene the Curly-headed*   You have seen our picture and know that what
>> >is left of our hair is curly.
>> >
>> No problem.
>> 
>> >*King of alt.politics.white-power*   Self-appointed as most truly
>> >effective kings are, we, modestly, suggest that our participation in this
>> >newsgroup has, at least, raised the level of discussion from what it was
>> >when Les Griswold was village elder.
>> >
>> Big problem, you are no king, and most (effective or not) kings are not self 
>> appointed.
>
>See our address to the newsgroup for an explanation of our philosophy. We
>proclaimed ourselves king here last year and have received volumes of
>e-mail hailing and praising our unprecedentedly audacious but long
>sought-for action. We have been and continue to be the functioning king of
>this newsgroup and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it.
>
I could try your comrades' tactic of boring you to death.
>> 
>> >*Protector of our Aryan heritage*    We are aware of the contributions
>> >which the historical Aryans have made to world civilization and, having
>> >benefited immensely from them, we do our best to protect this heritage.
>> >The concept of zero immediately springs to mind.
>> >
>> You seem rather to be trying to destroy it.  The Aryans were very racially
>> minded, and you want Blacks to be fully accepted into Western civilisations.
>
>The most important element of our Aryan heritage is the concept of zero -
>one which we enters our mind every day when tuning into this newsgroup ;-)
>
That would be obvious; that nothing enters your mind.
>
>> >
>> >Maybe so, but you seem now to grudgingly agree with us that race mixing,
>> >at least with respect to the American South, was a common occurrence. We
>> >hope that you see that one of the traditions which White American males
>> >fought so gallantly to defend in the American Civil War was free and
>> >unrestricted sexual access to Black females.
>> >
>> I doubt it was common.
>
>How else do you explain the relatively fair complexions and obviously
>mixed race characteristics of Colin Powell, Bill Cosby, Tina Turner,
>Michael Jackson [even before surgery], Danzell Washington, Thurgood
>Marshall, Martin Luther King, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, Alvin
>Poussaint, Thomas Sowell and numerous other prominent and not so prominent
>African-Americans?
>
I was referring to mixed Negroes moving into White society through 
miscegenation.  Apart from possibly recent immigrants, the Negro in America
would not be pure.

Ourobouros.



From Ourobouros Thu Jan  2 17:02:29 PST 1997
Article: 41905 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!aurora.cs.athabascau.ca!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!news.bc.net!info.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,talk.environment
Subject: Re: Nova: Indians Exterminated Mammoth, Horse, etc.
Date: 2 Jan 1997 11:54:06 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 84
Message-ID: <5ah3ou$5cr@lex.zippo.com>
References: <59asja$407@lex.zippo.com> <59c291$1rs@news1.ucsd.edu> <59c60o$2tk@lex.zippo.com>  <59f58e$rh3@lex.zippo.com>  <5a3v8k$4sl@lex.zippo.com>  <5a9s8o$48i@lex.zippo.com> <5abc3q$bg3@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5abtsa$rbl@lex.zippo.com> <5adqji$bs3@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5aeb25$lmv@lex.zippo.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port912-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.rush-limbaugh:125156 alt.politics.nationalism.white:41905 alt.politics.white-power:54486 talk.environment:48784

In article , Laura says...
>
>On 1 Jan 1997 Ourobouros@.MISSING-HOST-NAME. wrote:
>
>> In article <5adqji$bs3@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura says...
>[...]
>
>> >>>This single quotation provides some support for your case, Sr. Comecola, but
>> >>>it is not an adequate empirical basis for the sort of sweeping generalisation
>> >>>you are endeavoring to make.
>
>> >>I understand your points above.  Captain John Smith only really investigated
>> >>(dwelt/researched) the NA Indians around his locality (Jamestown).  But, on
>> >>saying this, do you have any (early colonial and anthropological literature)
>> >>that goes against Captain John Smith's journals?
>
>> >What exactly do you mean by "early...anthropological literature"?  You 
>> >realise,  of course, that most of what was written about native people 
>> >in the colonial era and 19th century was concerned with depicting them 
>> >in such a way to legitimate taking their land and destroying whatever
>> >vestiges of social institutions remained after decades or centuries of
>> >displacement, disease and, in some cases, out and out slaughter.  (If you
>> >think that Europeans have never engaged in genocide, Sr. Comecola, I
>> >recommend to you that read what the British did to the Beothuk Indians
>> >of Newfoundland.)
>
>> Mr. Braun asserted that early colonial and anthropological literature supported
>> his one-eyed belief that the NA Indian was an innate conservationist.  What you
>> have written above undermines Mr. Braun's narrow reality even more -- that
>> being the early ... literature supporting his beliefs.
>
>My name is not Braun.  I am not reiterating or elaborating on what Mr. Braun
>may or may not have written, I am responding to what you have written.  Since
>the discipline of anthropology emerged some centuries *after* the 
>colonisation of North America, there is and can be no "early anthropological
>literature" based on ethnographic observation which bears on this issue.
>
*Sigh*

I forget that with you I must dot my i's and cross my t's.  Yes, officially,
because Captain John Smith and others didn't have a magic piece of paper they
were not anthropologists, even though what they wrote would qualify as
cultural anthropology or ethnology, but alas, they failed to have that magic
piece of paper, so I suppose you can just right them off as no nothing 
nobodies -- afterall, they don't fit your pet theories.

>> Since when did this conversation enter into the battle of what the Europeans
>> did?  We are talking about what the NA Indians did concerning their status with
>> nature.
>
>What the Europeans did is absolutely relevant to understanding the 
>context and, hence, the motives and reliability, of first hand accounts 
>such as the one you cited.
>
No, it is not.  Whether Europeans who butchering or being butchered by NA
Indians is not relevant, except to apologists who justify their pet theories
with the evil white man propaganda.

>> Who or what is Sr. Comecola?
>
>My translation of your name for yourself, Colin, is it?
>
Who?

You still haven't explained Sr. Comecola.

>> >I would recommend that you begin with the multivolume series "The Handbook
>> >of North American Indians", published by the Smithsonian Institution.
>> >
>> And when was that published? -- we are talking about early ... literature you
>> know.
>
>Do you remember Franz Boas?  Do you remember when he established the 
>department of anthropology at Columbia University?  Do you know enough 
>North American history to know that by time anthropologists were doing 
>ethnographic research on this continent, that native societies had 
>already been radically transformed and marginalised?  Many of the 
>articles in the Handbook volumes are based on ethnohistorical research.  
>The dates for the volumes' publication varies, but most came out in the 
>1980s.

Captain John Smith wrote in the 1600s, not in the 1980s.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Thu Jan  2 17:02:31 PST 1997
Article: 41906 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!aurora.cs.athabascau.ca!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!news.bc.net!info.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,talk.environment
Subject: Re: Nova: Indians Exterminated Mammoth, Horse, etc.
Date: 2 Jan 1997 12:23:40 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 200
Message-ID: <5ah5gc$6ke@lex.zippo.com>
References: <59asja$407@lex.zippo.com> <59c291$1rs@news1.ucsd.edu> <59c60o$2tk@lex.zippo.com>  <59f58e$rh3@lex.zippo.com>  <5a3v8k$4sl@lex.zippo.com>  <5a9s8o$48i@lex.zippo.com>  <5abveg$sd0@lex.zippo.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port912-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.rush-limbaugh:125157 alt.politics.nationalism.white:41906 alt.politics.white-power:54487 talk.environment:48785

In article , "D. says...
>
>> 
>snip of old stuff. 
>
>Ouzo unfurls his true colors--see below.
>
>
>> >Item: The tribes between the Rockies and Cascades regularly burned the
>> >lower elevation forests, producing open stands that eased travel, hunting,
>> >and increased the availability of edible plants. Europeans arrived; they 
>> >overgrazed this area with sheep and cattle, an area which never had
>> >buffalo.  The ecosystems had not developed with intensive grazing. From
>> >early in this century on, the damage has been readily apparent: the
>> >perennial native grasses have mostly died out, which used to carry light,
>> >frequent fires, some of which the Natives set, and some of which were
>> >caused by lightning.  The bare earth became a ready seedbed for a dense
>> >understory of trees, which developed unimpeded because of the absence of
>> >fire. However, these forests have become inflamable since about WWII, due
>> >to the change in structure. What bark beetle or intense crown fires, more
>> >widespread than before, have not removed from the larger diameter classes, 
>> >logging has.  This entire region is now covered by overly dense, slow
>> >growing, beetle and crown fire prone forest. We did it. There are a few
>> >areas which resemble the old forests---these retained the
>> >frequent fire regime, by accident or design. 
>> >
>> This does not prove that the NA Indians were innately conservationists.
>
>It is good empirical evidence, though. For 15,000 years, I guess the
>Native tribes accidently managed to preserve eosystem functioning and
>biodiversity by accident. Sure, coulda happened.
>
Did you remember the beginnings of this thread?  They did not preserve
ecosystem functioning and biodiversity.

>> 
>> >Item:  The Columbia River basin once had salmon runs in the tens of
>> >millions, and now has a few million, and many fewer stocks. Dams were the
>> >main culprit.
>> >
>> This does not prove that the NA Indians were innately conservationists.
>
>Ibid.
>
v.supr.

>> >Item: Native religions all offered respect for the animals, plants, water,
>> >rocks etc.; there is no parallel in European religion. In fact, just the
>> >opposite is the case.
>> >
>> Define respect.
>
>I would have to go to the original literature for quotations; no time
>right now.  As I understand it, it means mindfullness of all things, and
>attention to a sense of ballance and sustainability over the long term
>(the seven generation outlook). Humans are part of nature. 
>
Then your definition of respect is wrong.  They worshipped nature, but they
did not respect it as you are trying to assert.

>> >These are simple, well founded areas of knowledge, and not some kind of
>> >mythological romantic bubble, or whatever you call it. Of course, one
>> >could argue that had the Natives developed an industrial economy, they
>> >would have followed the same course we did.  I don't think so. To do
>> >this, they would have had to toss 15,000 years of hands-on knowledge and
>> >religous and philosophical belief.  That some tribes currently
>> >"appear" to use resoures and consume products as we do does not prove
>> >much.  First, Natives still retain much of their culture, which is amazing
>> >given our efforts to stamp it out.  Second, what is now observed is
>> >activity by the remnants of tribes, who have been pushed onto scraps of
>> >former territory, and are desperate for a livlihood.  Third, there is
>> >division among tribal members between the "old ways", and melding with the
>> >dominant culture; this is strong evidence for the fact that the old ways,
>> >including views on the place of humans in the world, are still around,
>> >even in the face of other opportunities.  Fourth, you apparently believe
>> >that if a Native buys a pick-up, or takes a job in a lumber mill, he has
>> >decided to chuck his culture. This assessment is a bit arrogant on your
>> >part.  
>> >
>> Please prove number four.
>
>No comment on first, the retention of their culture, second, the desperate
>position they have been put in, third, the current diverging views over
>living more by the old ways, or the majority view ?  Prove number four?
>No, I can't prove an inference. You can support or refute it.
>
IOW, you freely stereotype people and are therefore bigotted.

>> >Some questions.
>> >
>> >Have you ever attended a pow wow, and observed the dancing? Have
>> >you ever actually talked to a native person about his life? I doubt it.
>> >Do you view Natives who have "modernized" (basically all in the US) as
>> >being either hypocrites, in still retaining their cultural beliefs, or 
>> >as people without their old beliefs? Why should the two be mutually
>> >exclusive? Do you believe they are, because you hate the idea of
>> >sustainable development, held by many people (you call them
>> >environmantalists), and so need to denigrate the foundations of the idea,
>> >as found in historic or surviving Native cultural beliefs and practices?
>> >
>> I have never attended a pow wow (I live in New Zealand).  I have talked to a
>> NA Indian about her life, one of her beliefs was that all people should be put
>> to death at the age of sixty, she had other similar beliefs as well.  Pass on
>> your third and fourth question, as they are hardly relevant.  I don't denigrate
>> their native and original culture at all.  I would say they have evolved their
>> beliefs to make them more open to hand-outs and charities and etc.
>
>"Proof" by anecdote and supposition? Won't wash. 
>
?
You asked personal questions and then assert the above -- do always have this
much trouble arguing?

>> >This of course, is not the only foundation for sustainable development;
>> >this concept also is based on the ecological and biological literature,
>> >as well the belief that western culture is on a trajectory of
>> >increasing consumption, and degrading environmental quality. This last bit
>> >is certainly a value judgement (not all of us look forward to living in
>> >lunar or Martian colonies), but it can be scientifically quantified with
>> >testable hypotheses. 
>> >
>> Please prove the NA Indians kept this mythological view in modern literature.
>
>You obviously haven't kept up with modern literature.  Go to a library.  I
>have a dozen books at home written by Natives, which espouse a
>Nature-reverent world-view, for want of a better phrase. I'll post some
>references when I get around to it. These people to not speak for
>everyone, though. What, exactly, is "this mythological world-view"? 
>BTW, I don't neccessarily agree with all their views; my point is that
>these views exist.
>
Modern literature, which includes such propaganda pieces as _Dances with Wolves_
is almost always political correct.

>> >> Captain John Smith bursts your idealistic bubble because he undermines your 
>> >> belief that the north American Indian believed in preserving biological 
>> >> diversity and ecosystem functioning.  His journal's are part of the early 
>> >> colonial and anthropological literature.  That, I am afraid, is a fact, and what
>> >> you wrote is not.
>> >
>> >The empirical evidence for this not being the case was in the state of
>> >North America when we happened across it, and in the anthropological
>> >literature written since that time.  Somehow you ignore all tyhis in order
>> >to make a propaganda point, on how whites "romanticise Indians" if they
>> >happen to mention aspects of thie culture. What is your point, anyway? To
>> >attempt to negate 15,000 years of Native culture by saying that it didn't
>> >exist? (I'm not convinced)  To attempt to discredit people who find some
>> >value in the Native world view, in the context of sustainable living? (I'm
>> >not convinced either).  To display your milimeter deep scholarship,
>> >"proving" that "Indians" (all?) were just as rapacious and short-sighted
>> >as the Europeans? (I am entirely convinced of this).
>> >
>> The point of it all, is that the NA Indian isn't what he is cracked up to be. 
>> As Rad pointed out earlier; the NA Indian wiped a horse, a camel and three
>> varieties of ground sloths (plus probably more species).  
>
>Hmm. I think I have wasted my time. Rad is a white supremacist neo-nazi
>wacko, who also is startlingly ignorant. That you refer to him to support
>your views tells me that you apparently have other agendas,
>besides attempting to say that Native culture is a white romantic
>construct.
>
It seems that you have already prejudged the circumstances, if Rad is a white
supremacist Neo Nazi then he his is wacko and is startingly ignorant.  All Rad
did was paraphrase one documentary, but because it came from Rad's mouth your
prejudices have already decided that it must be wrong.

>> >		Dave Braun
>> >
>> >> 
>> >> Quoth he:
>> >> 
>> >> "the Turkies, and other Beasts and Fowle, will exceedingly increase if we beat
>> >> the Salvages out of the Country, for all times of the yeere they never spare 
>> >> Male or Female, old nor young, eggs nor birds, fat or leane, in season nor out
>> >> of season with them all is one."
>> >>           -- Capt. John Smith (of Pocahontas fame).
>> >
>> >
>> >And? Usually when one is making such sweeping indictments as yours, one
>> >relies on more than one source, and also validates historical writings
>> >with contemporary ones which viewed the same events. You fail on both
>> >counts.
>> >
>> You asserted that early colonial and anthropological literature supports your
>> idealogy of NA Indians, I, on the other hand, only need to demonstrate one 
>> piece of literature to disprove *YOUR* sweeping statement.
>
>Logic does not compute. As I said before, and which you snipped, arguing
>from historic literature requires a depth and breadth of sources, which
>also act as checks of accuracy. One quotation disproves my generalization,
>based on what is the accepted school of thought based on much scholarship?
>No, I don't think so. And as I said, I don't bother going to the trouble
>of debating neonazis and their sympathisers. I don't care if you feel
>slighted. I won't debate further. "rad" is a piece of shit, and now you
>have stepped in it.  
>
Take a course in logic, you will be surprised.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Fri Jan  3 07:42:01 PST 1997
Article: 90719 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.win.hookup.net!hookup!news-dc.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-stock.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-hk.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!newsgate.cuhk.edu.hk!news.glink.net.hk!uunet!in1.uu.net!199.94.215.18!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: T4 for Ourobouros
Date: 2 Jan 1997 15:44:17 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <5ahh8h$do3@lex.zippo.com>
References: <32cc08d8.1346069@news.zilker.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port855-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <32cc08d8.1346069@news.zilker.net>, mike@aimetering.com says...
>
>Ourobouros wanted something on the T4. I found these URLs and they
>pretty much use the source material I would use to introduce the Nazi
>T4 program to Ourobouros. In order to save typing I offer Ourobouros
>this selection. I hope he/she reads these and learns where the initial
>killing of the Holocaust began.
>
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/14f13.01
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/14f13.02
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/euthanasia.01
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/euthanasia.02
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/euthanasia.03
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/euthanasia.04

Of this section only .../euthanasia.04 offers anything really credible.  I
would need a verifiable source for the questionaire concerning the state of
the non-mentally ill (Jews, Negros and half-breeds).  I don't doubt that there
was a program for the mentally ill, which may have been sterilisation rather
than death -- a continuance of the eugenic programs of the 1920s.

Of course the questionaire in question may have been purely schematic rather
than the full story as well.  

>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/14f13.03
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/14f13.04
>
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/hadamar.01
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/brack.001
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/brack.002
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/program.04
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/program.08
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/program.09
>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/program.011

Was Brack tortured, like Hoess?

Most of the rest lead into the legendary concentration camps who could cremate
people at rates beyond rational explanation.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Sat Jan  4 01:21:35 PST 1997
Article: 90906 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.censorship,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: The Great Debate
Date: 3 Jan 1997 14:34:10 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 292
Message-ID: <5ak1h2$dv0@lex.zippo.com>
References: <199612120033.QAA01666@mailmasher.com> <5972s1$p2f@lex.zippo.com> <59ad1g$a11@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <59aubi$4n2@lex.zippo.com> <59cf44$sld@access5.digex.net> <59clb5$a6m@lex.zippo.com> <32bf0bb9.6132738@news.inetport.com> <59he0v$c4t@lex.zippo.com> <32cd7e68.13999668@news.inetport.com> <59k2ge$sgv@lex.zippo.com> <32d5b9d3.24925804@news.inetport.com> <59ldr6$i82@lex.zippo.com> <32bfd3b9.17062439@news.inetport.com> <59msh5$kne@lex.zippo.com> <32c7faf2.4464317@news.inetport.com> <59pau3$689@lex.zippo.com> <32c79b3a.10354852@news.inetport.com> <59ujsv$jdv@lex.zippo.com> <32c7e42c.3007432@news.inetport.com> <5a1brn$486@lex.zippo.com> <32cc4796.10695902@news.inetport.com> <5a49fg$a41@lex.zippo.com> <32c7fa43.501586@news.inetport.com> <5a74hd$m5t@lex.zippo.com> <32c7cf6b.1946820@news.inetport.com> <5a96hq$h3r@lex.zippo.com> <32d28d2e.6591010@news.inetport.com> <5aedkp$n4f@lex.zippo.com> <32cd45fb.799313@news.inetport.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port873-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:90906 alt.censorship:113916 alt.politics.nationalism.white:42130 alt.politics.white-power:54665

In article <32cd45fb.799313@news.inetport.com>, mcurtis@inetport.com says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>
[snip]

>>>Ourobouros requested proof of:
>>>>>>>>>>>>6 Million Jews, gas chambers, gas wagons, etc., etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>Mike Curtis responds:
>>>>>>>>>>>12 million victims is the closer number for the Holocaust. The Jews
>>>>>>>>>>>are the significant portion of the 12 million. I MUST therefore assume
>>>>>>>>>>>that you have no problems with the portion of the Holocaust for the
>>>>>>>>>>>Sinti and Roma, Homosexuals, mentally retarded, those with congenital
>>>>>>>>>>>diseases, and Seventh Day Adventists. You then have no problem with
>>>>>>>>>>>the way _they_ were killed. You must not have much problem with the
>>>>>>>>>>>history of the T4 program. I can assume that you have no problems with
>>>>>>>>>>>this. This means that you accept the phenol injections and the gas
>>>>>>>>>>>chambers used in the hospitals and sanitariums that were on German
>>>>>>>>>>>soil. All this doesn't involve the Jews or the other stuff. Can we
>>>>>>>>>>>assume that you accept this portion of the holocaust?
>>>
>>>[snipped myself]
>>>
>>>Ourobouros admits he has been caught misreading the English language:
>>>>>>>>I decided to play with your loose words.
>>>
>>>Mike Curtis writes:
>>>>>>>That is dishonest. 
>>>
>>>Ourobouros fiddles with the English language:
>>>>>>Perhaps, but probably not.
>>>
>>>Mike Curtis writes:
>>>>>The above are the kind of posts that would come from a scoundrel.
>>>
>>>Ourobouros must agree:
>>>>Ha!
>>>
>
>Ourobouros can't seem :
>>Er no, I was amused by your choice of words.  Playing with someone's loose
>>words is not necessarily in itself the work of a scoundrel,
>
>This faulty argument suggests that I was not exact in my statements
>above. I think an average reader can readily understand what I was
>saying. The fact that this individual sees a need to distort what is
>right before him presents a laughable picture of Ourobouros'
>techniques.
>
More emotive and untrue words.

>> though I will admit
>>it can be.  What you witnessed was yet another tactic I have picked up from 
>>your comrades, notably Jeffrey G. Brown.
>>
>
>I do not know Mr. Brown. Whether he is a comrade or not, I do not
>know. He hasn't informed me. I speak for myself.
>
While he has been more quiet of recent he is quite vocal on these newsgroups.
Read him for yourself.  While you claim to speak for yourself your comrades
often decide results without you which can and will be used in the future.  I
do not know you dislikes or likes and I will treat you the same as your comrades
treat me, unless you speak out against it.  Since you have voiced your
displeasure over such treatment I will try in the future to avoid this type of
tactic against you.

[snip]

>Mike Curtis writes:
>>>So what if _some_ do not. One cannot always tell by the title as is
>>>shown by the Dawidowicz book above. Some volumes are specific to the
>>>50% of the victims. This is true of books about women, slavery,
>>>Egyptians, Romans, Christians, Moslems, Mormons, and other SUBJECTS.
>>>These books will list in their bibliographies references to the other
>>>books that cover other subjects. And yes most books do mention the
>>>other 6 million while some others do not. IOW, it is not a black and
>>>white issue for those who sudy historical events for they tend to read
>>>everything in their specialties. 
>>>
>>In connection with the holocaust; do these books (on Jews only) specify that
>>they are only talking about Jews (only) from the cover?
>
>The question confuses me. Some books discuss all 12 million even
>though they have Jews in the title. Some do not. One has to read the
>books or look in the index. One might have to read the dust jacket
>flap. There is nothing wrong with specialized histories.
>
I believe I qualified the first part with the following:
>>  Typically when a
>>historical book is concerned with women only they include in the title the
>>specification of women, eg., _Women in Ancient Egypt_ by B. Watterson.
>>
>
>I'll bet they talk about the men in ancient Egypt and their
>relationships with the men.the Holocaust started out with the murder
>of people who were not Jewish. This is why you should educate yourself
>about the T4 program.
>
Yes they do, but you miss the point.  The focus of the book is on women.  With
the holocaust story it would be hard to write a book without mentioning Nazi
Germany, wouldn't it?

>>I would also ask why Jo Blogg has only heard of Jews in connection with the
>>holocaust, especially since the books on the holocaust mention other groups of
>>people...do you understand the point I am trying to raise?
>>
>
>Of course, but Jo Blogg has only a cursory interest. Should  Blogg's
>interest increase then their will be a flooding of new information and
>knowledge. It takes a desire to go beyond newspaper and magazine
>articles. It takes a desire to go beyond the denial web sites to get
>more information. It will not take very long to discover that there
>were others besides Jews. I think your claim is unfounded and it an
>opinion from one who is not totally informed. The ignorance one has
>about historical events are the fault of the individual and not the
>society the individual lives in. The information is readily available.
>
What I am asking is why Jo Blogg only knows about Jews in concert with the
holocaust.  If the literature on the holocaust so freely mentions these other
misfits then why does Jo Blogg only know about Jews?

>Mike Curtis surmises:
>>>This suggests that you see validity in anti-Semitism.
>>>
>
>Ourobouros says:
>>Yes I do.
>>
>>To put it in a nutshell: why have the Jews always been despised?
>
>They haven't and they are not generally despised at all.
>
I quantified this with the 2,000 years, and yes, they have always been despised.
Wherever they have been there is a curse and a proverb about them.

>>  Have our
>>ancestors *always* been wrong?
>
>Our? Please do not lump my ancenstors with yours.
>
So you have no European origins?

>>  Jews have done nothing to promote the image of
>>them being despised throughout the last 2,000 years, that they have *always*
>>been innocent?
>>
>
>No group of people in the world is innocent.
>
A start at least.

>>>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>>>>Perhaps the holocaust is full of contradictory material then?
>>>
>>>>>What historical event isn't?
>>>
>>>>Explain.
>>>
>>>Briefly. The Alamo battle of 1836 has been a subject of recent
>>>controversy in Texas. Several things are becoming clearer as
>>>additional research continues. It is possible that the capacity of the
>>>Mexican army under Santa Anna was not as large as earlier history
>>>claimed. It is being substantiated that Davy Crockett may have died by
>>>firing squad after surrender. The streets in front of the Alamo are
>>>being searched for gold. It is a possibility that the men who stayed
>>>there stayed to fight for money rather than fight for Texas. The
>>>position was not valuable to General Houston and he had ordered the
>>>Alamo abandoned. But it wasn't. Santa Anna deviated to the Alamo to
>>>fight for a relatively unimportant area. In the end it took on a
>>>different hue. Despite all this contradictory material to the original
>>>history of the battle, no one says that the battle didn't happen.
>>>
>>>Were the Earps criminals or true upholders of the law prior to the
>>>gunfight at the OK Corral? If they were evil, does this change the
>>>fact that the gunfight happened? Because the gunfight did not take
>>>place in the OK Corral, does that mean it didn't happen? Because
>>>witnesses saw variations on the 30 second gunfight does that mean that
>>>Frank McClaury (sp?) was any less dead?
>>>
>
>It seems that Ourobouros is bind:
>>Curious choice of words.  Nice emotive words to try and validate the true
>>believers position on the holocaust I must add.
>>
>
>The historical events above contain contradictions. Do any of these
>contradictions make any of those events fictional? Of course they do
>not.
>
>Now he becomes silly:
>>You have made a sweeping generalisation concerning that all history is subject
>>to contradictory material, substantiate that claim.
>>
>
>What do you think I did with the historical events above? You aren't
>really that obtuse are you? I will not discuss the whole of world
>history with you. The examples above were more than satisfactory and I
>suspect that you realize this. 
>
I am both a cynic and a skeptic.  The examples you offered had conflicting
witness stories, yes?  Yet we know they happened, yes?  The holocaust has
conflicting and unbelievable witness stories, yes?  Conclusion: you are trying
to prove the holocaust story by inference to these other events.  I am neither
blind or being silly, but logical.

Not all of history has contradictory material.  We know Alaric sacked Rome, this
is not contradictory, for example.

>Ourobouros writes:
>>>>No, it does not.  Most of the vulgar are only aware of the Jews in concert with
>>>>the holocaust, peoples like Gypsies and Poles are unheard of.
>>>>
>>>
>
>Mike Curtis writes:
>>>The vulgar? You weren't even aware of the T4 program! Are you placing
>>>yourself among the vulgar then? And yes it is typical of today's
>>>knowledge that some things slip through the cracks. None of it is
>>>intentional. Most historions try to tell complete stories. Most folks
>>>today are not interested in history because they find it boring. The
>>>way it is taught is boring. This is sad. So now you know of the
>>>Gypsies who were the Sinti and Roma. You know of the homosexuals. You
>>>know of the mentally ill. You now know of the T4 program by name. So I
>>>suggest that you go out and read about it. You also might read of the
>>>Christian protestors who were thrown into concentration camps while
>>>you are at it.
>>>
>
>Ourobouros writes:
>>Before this conversation got started I knew about the other people.
>
>Mike Curtis dislikes being played with:
>Then you desire to be completely dishonest from the get go with your
>correspondents?
>
When have I ever gave you the slightest hint that I didn't know other groups 
had supposedly perished alongside Jewry?

>Ourobouros writes:
>>  I must say
>>I first learnt there were other people aside from Jews from a Jehovah Witness 
>>doorknocker.  Do you know the JWs are right because they were persecuted by
>>evil Natsees?  I believe I was 16 or 17 at the time this occurred, AND, 
>>supposedly I had learnt about WWII in social studies in Third form 
>>(age 13-14 to determine US equilavent grade system).
>>
>
>Then your pretense of ignorance above was done in order to waste my
>time? This is the methods you use to impress others with your
>positions? 
>
I am interested in the why and how.  You have been strangely quiet about why
the Jews are only known to the great mass of people concerning the holocaust.
Why is it so?

>Ourobouros writes:
>>I find the holocaust boring (and WWII) because it is thrashed to death.  I
>>absolutely hate hearing the same thing over and over and over again, in fact it
>>tends to make me highly suspicious.
>>
>
>Then why are you here? there is a cure for this boredom afterall,
>isn't there?
>
Arguing is another ballgame.  I absolutely love arguing :-)

>>>Additionally, most folks do not know that Blacks owned slaves in South
>>>Carolina during that particular era in American History.
>>>
>>I knew this one too.  To admit Blacks owned slaves would destroy the myth of
>>the evil white man, so it tends to be hushed up.
>>
>
>Hardly, hushed up since it is mentioned (sometimes at length)  in most
>all the books on slavery and is the topic of a couple of scholarly
>works. Ignorance is the fault of the individual. 
>
Hardly, it is pushed onto the individual never to question the pillars of
propaganda.  Why does the average individual not know about Black slave owners?

>Ourobouros writes:
>>Then you must despise your comrades.
>>
>
>I speak for myself. I can't control them and they can't control me. It
>is after all a free country.
>
For now.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Sat Jan  4 01:24:36 PST 1997
Article: 54658 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,talk.environment
Subject: Re: Nova: Indians Exterminated Mammoth, Horse, etc.
Date: 3 Jan 1997 14:53:12 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 114
Message-ID: <5ak2ko$ejg@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <59f58e$rh3@lex.zippo.com>  <5a3v8k$4sl@lex.zippo.com>  <5a9s8o$48i@lex.zippo.com> <5abc3q$bg3@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5abtsa$rbl@lex.zippo.com> <5adqji$bs3@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5aeb25$lmv@lex.zippo.com>  <5ah3ou$5cr@lex.zippo.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port873-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:42122 alt.politics.white-power:54658 talk.environment:48949

In article , Laura says...
>
>On 2 Jan 1997 Ourobouros@.MISSING-HOST-NAME. wrote:
>
>> In article , Laura says...
>
>> >On 1 Jan 1997 Ourobouros@.MISSING-HOST-NAME. wrote:
>
>> >> In article <5adqji$bs3@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura says...
>
>[...]
>
>> *Sigh*
>
>> I forget that with you I must dot my i's and cross my t's.  Yes, officially,
>> because Captain John Smith and others didn't have a magic piece of paper they
>> were not anthropologists, even though what they wrote would qualify as
>> cultural anthropology or ethnology, but alas, they failed to have that magic
>> piece of paper, so I suppose you can just right them off as no nothing 
>> nobodies -- afterall, they don't fit your pet theories.
>
>Not at all, Colin.  Because the observations of early settlers involved 
>subjects who are of anthropological interest does not make the observers 
>themselves anthropologists.  Anthropologists are people who are trained 
>in the methods and theory of anthropology.  The discipline is defined by 
>more than the scope of its subject matter.
>
Who is Colin?  And before you get into the habit please stop calling something
I am not, nor am I Sr. Comecola, twinkletoes or whatever other name your
fetishes make up.

Yet you admit that anthropologists use the recordings of people like Capt. John
Smith for their own work (I somehow doubt they'd use Capt. John Smith because
is doesn't fulfil PC terminology.)  While that doesn't make him an official
anthropologist (no magic piece of paper), he did do what (field) anthropologists
like doing, recording.

>> >> Since when did this conversation enter into the battle of what the Europeans
>> >> did?  We are talking about what the NA Indians did concerning their status with
>> >> nature.
>
>> >What the Europeans did is absolutely relevant to understanding the 
>> >context and, hence, the motives and reliability, of first hand accounts 
>> >such as the one you cited.
>
>> No, it is not.  Whether Europeans who butchering or being butchered by NA
>> Indians is not relevant, except to apologists who justify their pet theories
>> with the evil white man propaganda.
>
>Excuse me, but are you not one of the people here who is constantly 
>harping about how "politically correct" people are blinded by their 
>political ideologies, and how this colours their perceptions?  Are you 
>about to now try to argue that this only began in the last decade or two 
>when the phrase "politically correct" became popular?  Dehumanising 
>rhetoric is always a part of conquest and colonisation, Sr. Comecola.
>
I would argue that the strength of this one with nature BS started with the
1960s, the ultimate beginnings of PCness or rather universal stupidity.  On
saying this, however, the one with nature BS started before the 1960s, as the
Website _American Renaissance_ mentions Mark Twain and his arguments against 
the beginnings of the noble savage myth of the NA Indian. 

Would it surprise you to learn that when the European rediscovered America that
they were already dehumanised, but were later humanised by a papal bull?  That
your theory is wrong?

>> >> Who or what is Sr. Comecola?
>	
>> >My translation of your name for yourself, Colin, is it?
>
>> Who?
>
>Colin.
>
While I know that people like yourself have a fetish at connecting certain 
posters together, I have not really witnessed a "Colin" on apw-p.  What are you
trying to say?  That you're loopy?

>> You still haven't explained Sr. Comecola.
>
>No, I haven't, have I.  Guess you'll have to figure out what language it 
>is and look it up in a dictionary.
>
Which Romance language is it?

>> >> >I would recommend that you begin with the multivolume series "The Handbook
>> >> >of North American Indians", published by the Smithsonian Institution.
>
>> >> And when was that published? -- we are talking about early ... literature you
>> >> know.
>
>> >Do you remember Franz Boas?  Do you remember when he established the 
>> >department of anthropology at Columbia University?  Do you know enough 
>> >North American history to know that by time anthropologists were doing 
>> >ethnographic research on this continent, that native societies had 
>> >already been radically transformed and marginalised?  Many of the 
>> >articles in the Handbook volumes are based on ethnohistorical research.  
>> >The dates for the volumes' publication varies, but most came out in the 
>> >1980s.
>
>> Captain John Smith wrote in the 1600s, not in the 1980s.
>
>Ethnohistory is the interpretation of documents like Smith's by 
>anthropologists, using anthropological and historical methods, and 
>anthropological concepts.  Just like history is the interpretation of 
>documents like census records by historians using historical methods and 
>concepts.  Smith was no more an anthropologist (or ethnohistorian) than 
>someone taking a census in 1580 in Mexico was a historian.
>
Which means todays PC anthropologists and/or apologist can ignore him, because
he doesn't fit their beautifully designed propaganda artworks.

Ourobouros.



From Ourobouros Sat Jan  4 12:44:27 PST 1997
Article: 54721 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!swrinde!news.sgi.com!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.discrimination,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.immigration,alt.skinheads,alt.conspiracy,alt.california,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Cure for AIDS
Date: 4 Jan 1997 00:06:09 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <5al31h$44c@lex.zippo.com>
References: <5a6hmt$prt$1@news01a.micron.net> <5abhkp$8om@news.usaor.net> <5addtq$i57@reader.seed.net.tw> <5afg9o$jgv@cletus.bright.net> <32CB5A93.2E7D@rocks.net> <32CBD6F3.2392@phoenix.net> <5agvpi$hcm@news.cheetah.net> <32CC1E79.7748@phoenix.net> <32CD3800.CE7@prodigy.net>  <32cdb358.42750534@news.atlcom.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port833-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.clinton:349725 alt.discrimination:59788 alt.politics.white-power:54721 alt.politics.nationalism.white:42208 alt.skinheads:47751 alt.conspiracy:128155 alt.california:29727 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:432841

In article <32cdb358.42750534@news.atlcom.net>, dckom@atlcom.net says...
>
>
>>Why is it that whenever someone finds homosexuality Disgusting they are
>>"insecure about their sexuality"? or a homophobe? is it that you FEAR
>>their way of thinking?
>
>Yo Trio,
>
>People are free to be disgusted by anything they wish to be disgusted by.
>The real curiousity is why people who claim to find homosexuality revolting
>spend so much time and energy talking about it.
>
Oh, and how would you know?

The cure for AIDS is quite simple, something invented a long time ago in
fact, it is called quarantine.

>Yrs for Mental Hygiene,
>Weisse Rosen
>>
>
>"If History teaches us anything, 
>it is that figures lie and liars figure."

So we expect you to become quite famous then?

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Sun Jan  5 01:45:49 PST 1997
Article: 91052 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!eru.mt.luth.se!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: T4 for Ourobouros
Date: 4 Jan 1997 13:12:46 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 82
Message-ID: <5amh4e$am9@lex.zippo.com>
References: <32cc08d8.1346069@news.zilker.net> <5ahh8h$do3@lex.zippo.com> <32d26c0a.3545399@news.inetport.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port827-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <32d26c0a.3545399@news.inetport.com>, mcurtis@inetport.com says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>
>>In article <32cc08d8.1346069@news.zilker.net>, mike@aimetering.com says...
>>>
>>>Ourobouros wanted something on the T4. I found these URLs and they
>>>pretty much use the source material I would use to introduce the Nazi
>>>T4 program to Ourobouros. In order to save typing I offer Ourobouros
>>>this selection. I hope he/she reads these and learns where the initial
>>>killing of the Holocaust began.
>>>
>>>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/14f13.01
>>>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/14f13.02
>>>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/euthanasia.01
>>>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/euthanasia.02
>>>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/euthanasia.03
>>>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/euthanasia.04
>>
>>Of this section only .../euthanasia.04 offers anything really credible. 
>
>Here is an individual who admits ignorance on the Holocaust and yet
>has the ability to decide credibility. It is quite obvious that
>anything remotely suggesting understanding is impossible in the
>prejudiced. To admit understanding or acceptence would be much like
>losing face for the denier and anti-Semite. This is one reason why
>discussions aimed at changing their minds in any manner is mostly
>futile. For those new to this group, this is why all the URLs are
>really for you.
>
Heh, I know who uses primary sources and who doesn't.  The specified file
is the one who uses (perhaps) primary source material, McVay/Nizkor's 
scribbles do not -- the specified file is not written by McVay/Nizkor, btw.

You said yourself that you were here to propound the historical methodology,
and it is you who seems quite ignorant of it.

>> I
>>would need a verifiable source for the questionaire concerning the state of
>>the non-mentally ill (Jews, Negros and half-breeds).  I don't doubt that there
>>was a program for the mentally ill, which may have been sterilisation rather
>>than death -- a continuance of the eugenic programs of the 1920s.
>>
>
>Then you are on a research quest. Enjoy.
>
Then it appears you do not have the necessary knowledge to back yourself up.

>>Of course the questionaire in question may have been purely schematic rather
>>than the full story as well.  
>>
>>>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/14f13.03
>>>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/14f13.04
>>>
>>>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/hadamar.01
>>>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/brack.001
>>>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/brack.002
>>>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/program.04
>>>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/program.08
>>>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/program.09
>>>http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?places/germany/euthanasia/program.011
>>
>>Was Brack tortured, like Hoess?
>>
>
>You tell me. You claim to be the expert now.
>
When?

>>Most of the rest lead into the legendary concentration camps who could cremate
>>people at rates beyond rational explanation.
>>
>
>T4 lead the doctors involved in that program into the concentration
>camps. That IS the correlation. That is why T4 is a part of Holocaust
>history. I guess you guys can start denying that program now too.
>
I can assert that you obviously don't know much about the T4 program, and
since you are a holocaust expert and historian, perhaps I could conclude 
that the T4 program has nothing to do with it.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Sun Jan  5 01:45:51 PST 1997
Article: 91053 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!eru.mt.luth.se!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.censorship,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: The Great Debate
Date: 4 Jan 1997 14:04:22 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <5amk56$ce9@lex.zippo.com>
References: <199612120033.QAA01666@mailmasher.com> <+gmAtnANipzyEw8n@bebbo.demon.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port827-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:91053 alt.censorship:113976 alt.politics.nationalism.white:42288 alt.politics.white-power:54777

In article <+gmAtnANipzyEw8n@bebbo.demon.co.uk>, Dene says...
>
>Ourobouros  wrote:
>>In article <32cd45fb.799313@news.inetport.com>, mcurtis@inetport.com says...
>>>Of course, but Jo Blogg has only a cursory interest. Should  Blogg's
>>>interest increase then their will be a flooding of new information and
>>>knowledge. It takes a desire to go beyond newspaper and magazine
>>>articles. It takes a desire to go beyond the denial web sites to get
>>>more information. It will not take very long to discover that there
>>>were others besides Jews. I think your claim is unfounded and it an
>>>opinion from one who is not totally informed. The ignorance one has
>>>about historical events are the fault of the individual and not the
>>>society the individual lives in. The information is readily available.
>>>
>>What I am asking is why Jo Blogg only knows about Jews in concert with the
>>holocaust.  If the literature on the holocaust so freely mentions these other
>>misfits then why does Jo Blogg only know about Jews?
>>
>[snips]
>>>Then your pretense of ignorance above was done in order to waste my
>>>time? This is the methods you use to impress others with your
>>>positions? 
>>>
>>I am interested in the why and how.  You have been strangely quiet about why
>>the Jews are only known to the great mass of people concerning the holocaust.
>>Why is it so?
>
>A good thing might be for you to desist from asking a loaded question,
>and first provide grounds for accepting that the "great mass of people"
>do in fact only know about Jews as victims of the Nazi holocaust.
>
I doubt if any empirical evidence has been done on the subject, but I challenge
you to ask Jo Blogg on the street about who died in the holocaust.  I can
almost guarantee 9 out of 10 responses you will receive the word Jews or
equivalent.  Also ask them about how many British, French, Yankees, Russians,
Poles and Jews died in the war, I can almost guarantee that the only one they
will know are the alleged (and popular) number Jews.  Why is this so?

Do you know how many British died during the war without consulting a book?

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Sun Jan  5 12:44:47 PST 1997
Article: 54785 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.mag-net.com!aurora.cs.athabascau.ca!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!news.bc.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!worldnet.att.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,talk.environment
Subject: Re: Nova: Indians Exterminated Mammoth, Horse, etc.
Date: 4 Jan 1997 12:51:34 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 172
Message-ID: <5amfsm$a4f@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <5a3v8k$4sl@lex.zippo.com>  <5a9s8o$48i@lex.zippo.com> <5abc3q$bg3@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5abtsa$rbl@lex.zippo.com> <5adqji$bs3@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5aeb25$lmv@lex.zippo.com>  <5ah3ou$5cr@lex.zippo.com>  <5ak2ko$ejg@lex.zippo.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port827-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:42301 alt.politics.white-power:54785 talk.environment:49121

In article , Laura says...
>
>On 3 Jan 1997 Ourobouros@.MISSING-HOST-NAME. wrote:
>
>> In article , Laura says...
>
>[...]
>
>> >> *Sigh*
>> >
>
>> >> because Captain John Smith and others didn't have a magic piece of paper they
>> >> were not anthropologists, even though what they wrote would qualify as
>> >> cultural anthropology or ethnology, but alas, they failed to have that magic
>> >> piece of paper, so I suppose you can just right them off as no nothing 
>> >> nobodies -- afterall, they don't fit your pet theories.
>
>> >Not at all, Colin.  Because the observations of early settlers involved 
>> >subjects who are of anthropological interest does not make the observers 
>> >themselves anthropologists.  Anthropologists are people who are trained 
>> >in the methods and theory of anthropology.  The discipline is defined by 
>> >more than the scope of its subject matter.
>
>> Who is Colin?  And before you get into the habit please stop calling something
>> I am not, nor am I Sr. Comecola, twinkletoes or whatever other name your
>> fetishes make up.
>
>If you believe so sincerely that one should never call another except by 
>the name they themselves prefer, then why do you not extend the same 
>courtesy to others, Mr. McKinstry?  "Sr. Comecola" is in fact the name 
>you choose to go by to mask your true identity, but merely translated 
>into another language.
>
Comecola is Ourobouros?

Have you started another name: re Mr. McKinstry?

If you care to review the times I have called you *Finstein* you will also
note it was reasonably brief, that I decided calling you that was pointless.

>> Yet you admit that anthropologists use the recordings of people like Capt. John
>> Smith for their own work (I somehow doubt they'd use Capt. John Smith because
>> is doesn't fulfil PC terminology.)  While that doesn't make him an official
>> anthropologist (no magic piece of paper), he did do what (field) anthropologists
>> like doing, recording.
>
>But anthropologists do more than merely record blindly that which they 
>see.  There is thing called "methodology", you know.  Had Smith been an 
>anthropologist he would have thought about the particular circumstances 
>in which the activities he was observing took place.  He was no more an 
>anthropologist than I would be an astronomer if I decided to go outside 
>and gaze and the stars and write about them.
>
His records are sources for later anthropologists, hence his works can be
classified as an anthropological source.  Yes or no?
>[..]
>
>> >> >What the Europeans did is absolutely relevant to understanding the 
>> >> >context and, hence, the motives and reliability, of first hand accounts 
>> >> >such as the one you cited.
>
>> >> No, it is not.  Whether Europeans who butchering or being butchered by NA
>> >> Indians is not relevant, except to apologists who justify their pet theories
>> >> with the evil white man propaganda.
>
>> >Excuse me, but are you not one of the people here who is constantly 
>> >harping about how "politically correct" people are blinded by their 
>> >political ideologies, and how this colours their perceptions?  Are you 
>> >about to now try to argue that this only began in the last decade or two 
>> >when the phrase "politically correct" became popular?  Dehumanising 
>> >rhetoric is always a part of conquest and colonisation, Sr. Comecola.
>
>> I would argue that the strength of this one with nature BS started with the
>> 1960s, the ultimate beginnings of PCness or rather universal stupidity.  On
>> saying this, however, the one with nature BS started before the 1960s, as the
>> Website _American Renaissance_ mentions Mark Twain and his arguments against 
>> the beginnings of the noble savage myth of the NA Indian. 
>
>And I would argue that every era has its "politically correct" ideology, 
>even though it only came to be called that very recently.  The prevailing 
>ideology in early colonial times is rather like your present one, Colin.  
>I guess you're just a good colonialist at heart.
>
What has this got to do with the price of fish?

>> Would it surprise you to learn that when the European rediscovered America that
>> they were already dehumanised, but were later humanised by a papal bull?  That
>> your theory is wrong?
>
>Are you saying that Smith was Catholic?  Are you aware that many of the 
>earliest settlers in North America were not?  A papal decree would not 
>have affected their beliefs.  The need for land, however, did.
>
Er no, I was referring to the first set of rediscoverers.  The American
Indian was not perceived to have come from Noah and therefore not human.  A
papal bull (the reformation of 1517 hadn't arrived) was needed to secure
the American Indian as a human being.

>
>[...]
>
>> >Colin.
>
>> While I know that people like yourself have a fetish at connecting certain 
>> posters together, I have not really witnessed a "Colin" on apw-p.  What are you
>> trying to say?  That you're loopy?
>
>He disappeared not long before you made your appearance, no?  It's odd, 
>isn't it, that you claim to have been posting in the white-power 
>newsgroups for some time, and yet your userid only appeared in March or 
>so of 1996.
>
That is incorrect, I have been posting here since late November or early
December 1995.  When did this "Colin" disappear? If memory serves me 
correct, there was no common user called "Colin" anywhere during the time
of late 1995 to March 1996.  According to your theories I should have met
this person.  I also checked Dejanews for a "Colin" and I discovered two
results of relative interest, a Colin Cooper who renounced his membership
to the National Alliance, via Milton Kliem, and a posting to a Colin Jordan
website.  Which am I supposed to be?  Colin Cooper or Colin Jordan?

>> >> You still haven't explained Sr. Comecola.
>
>> >No, I haven't, have I.  Guess you'll have to figure out what language it 
>> >is and look it up in a dictionary.
>
>> Which Romance language is it?
>
>The same one that word "comprehende" belongs to???
>
Why the question marks?

>> >> >> >I would recommend that you begin with the multivolume series "The Handbook
>> >> >> >of North American Indians", published by the Smithsonian Institution.
>
>> >> >> And when was that published? -- we are talking about early ... literature you
>> >> >> know.
>
>
>[...]
>> >> >already been radically transformed and marginalised?  Many of the 
>> >> >articles in the Handbook volumes are based on ethnohistorical research.  
>> >> >The dates for the volumes' publication varies, but most came out in the 
>> >> >1980s.
>
>> >> Captain John Smith wrote in the 1600s, not in the 1980s.
>
>> >Ethnohistory is the interpretation of documents like Smith's by 
>> >anthropologists, using anthropological and historical methods, and 
>> >anthropological concepts.  Just like history is the interpretation of 
>> >documents like census records by historians using historical methods and 
>> >concepts.  Smith was no more an anthropologist (or ethnohistorian) than 
>> >someone taking a census in 1580 in Mexico was a historian.
>
>> Which means todays PC anthropologists and/or apologist can ignore him, because
>> he doesn't fit their beautifully designed propaganda artworks.
>
>Do you know for a fact that ethnohistorians have ignored his writing?  Or 
>are you merely making this up?  I am not familiar with the ethnohistory 
>of the eastern US, but I know that ethnohistorians of southern Ontario 
>and of Mexico use every available scrap of written documentation.  In 
>southern Ontario, the journals of Champlain and Cartier, the Jesuit 
>relations, and all very early documents are central to ethnohistorical 
>studies of the early contact/conquest period.  So before you dismiss work 
>with which you apparently have zero familiarity, Colin, you ought to lift 
>a finger to be sure you aren't making yet more a fool of yourself.

You will notice that I used a subjunctive in my writings (can).  Please be
more careful.

Ourobouros or Colin Cooper or Colin Jordan or ..., perhaps I'll even be Les 
Griswold tomorrow.


From Ourobouros Mon Jan  6 06:52:18 PST 1997
Article: 91384 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.win.hookup.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!eru.mt.luth.se!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!dciteleport.com!worldnet.att.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.censorship,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: The Great Debate
Date: 5 Jan 1997 12:00:56 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <5ap19o$coq@lex.zippo.com>
References: <199612120033.QAA01666@mailmasher.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port903-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:91384 alt.censorship:114042 alt.politics.nationalism.white:42445 alt.politics.white-power:54902

In article , Dene says...
>
>Ourobouros  wrote:
>>In article <+gmAtnANipzyEw8n@bebbo.demon.co.uk>, Dene says...
>>>
>>>Ourobouros  wrote:
>>>>In article <32cd45fb.799313@news.inetport.com>, mcurtis@inetport.com says...
>>>>>Of course, but Jo Blogg has only a cursory interest. Should  Blogg's
>>>>>interest increase then their will be a flooding of new information and
>>>>>knowledge. It takes a desire to go beyond newspaper and magazine
>>>>>articles. It takes a desire to go beyond the denial web sites to get
>>>>>more information. It will not take very long to discover that there
>>>>>were others besides Jews. I think your claim is unfounded and it an
>>>>>opinion from one who is not totally informed. The ignorance one has
>>>>>about historical events are the fault of the individual and not the
>>>>>society the individual lives in. The information is readily available.
>>>>>
>>>>What I am asking is why Jo Blogg only knows about Jews in concert with the
>>>>holocaust.  If the literature on the holocaust so freely mentions these other
>>>>misfits then why does Jo Blogg only know about Jews?
>>>>
>>>[snips]
>>>>>Then your pretense of ignorance above was done in order to waste my
>>>>>time? This is the methods you use to impress others with your
>>>>>positions? 
>>>>>
>>>>I am interested in the why and how.  You have been strangely quiet about why
>>>>the Jews are only known to the great mass of people concerning the holocaust.
>>>>Why is it so?
>>>
>>>A good thing might be for you to desist from asking a loaded question,
>>>and first provide grounds for accepting that the "great mass of people"
>>>do in fact only know about Jews as victims of the Nazi holocaust.
>>>
>>I doubt if any empirical evidence has been done on the subject, but I challenge
>>you to ask Jo Blogg on the street about who died in the holocaust.  I can
>>almost guarantee 9 out of 10 responses you will receive the word Jews or
>>equivalent.
>
>That of course is an admission that your loaded question is not grounded
>on any evidence, only that you think you can almost guarantee something
>for which you are unaware of any empirical evidence. I do admit that it
>is a reasonable supposition that many people associate the Holocaust
>primarily with Jews, but this is somewhat different to your assertion.
>
I believe this example is sound in my supposition, and only the pedantic would
require "evidence."

>>  Also ask them about how many British, French, Yankees, Russians,
>>Poles and Jews died in the war, I can almost guarantee that the only one they
>>will know are the alleged (and popular) number Jews.  Why is this so?
>
>I don't know why, if true, this is so.
>
Have you heard of thw word "propaganda"?

>>Do you know how many British died during the war without consulting a book?
>
>No.
>
Interesting, but I can almost guarantee you knew how many Jews died before you
ever thought about studying it.  Why?

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Mon Jan  6 07:26:38 PST 1997
Article: 54900 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.win.hookup.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!eru.mt.luth.se!newsfeed.luth.se!news.luth.se!erix.ericsson.se!eua.ericsson.se!news.algonet.se!hammer.uoregon.edu!news-xfer.netaxs.com!feed1.news.erols.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,talk.environment
Subject: Re: Nova: Indians Exterminated Mammoth, Horse, etc.
Date: 5 Jan 1997 21:35:40 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 163
Message-ID: <5aq2vc$1vn@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <5a3v8k$4sl@lex.zippo.com>  <5a9s8o$48i@lex.zippo.com> <5abc3q$bg3@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5abtsa$rbl@lex.zippo.com> <5adqji$bs3@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5aeb25$lmv@lex.zippo.com>  <5ah3ou$5cr@lex.zippo.com>  <5ak2ko$ejg@lex.zippo.com>  <5amfsm$a4f@lex.zippo.com> <5apoca$6g5@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port877-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:42443 alt.politics.white-power:54900 talk.environment:49234

In article <5apoca$6g5@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>>In article , Laura says...
>>>
>>>On 3 Jan 1997 Ourobouros@.MISSING-HOST-NAME. wrote:
>
>
>[...]
>
>
>>>> Who is Colin?  And before you get into the habit please stop calling something
>>>> I am not, nor am I Sr. Comecola, twinkletoes or whatever other name your
>>>> fetishes make up.
> 
>>>If you believe so sincerely that one should never call another except by 
>>>the name they themselves prefer, then why do you not extend the same 
>>>courtesy to others, Mr. McKinstry?  "Sr. Comecola" is in fact the name 
>>>you choose to go by to mask your true identity, but merely translated 
>>>into another language.
> 
>>Comecola is Ourobouros?
>
>Or a carbonated beverage, perhaps.
>
So Comecola is just an imaginary name, much like your arguments?
 
>>Have you started another name: re Mr. McKinstry?
>
>>If you care to review the times I have called you *Finstein* you will also
>>note it was reasonably brief, that I decided calling you that was pointless.
>
>Is this too much for you?
>
?

>>>> Yet you admit that anthropologists use the recordings of people like Capt. John
>>>> Smith for their own work (I somehow doubt they'd use Capt. John Smith because
>>>> is doesn't fulfil PC terminology.)  While that doesn't make him an official
>>>> anthropologist (no magic piece of paper), he did do what (field) anthropologists
>>>> like doing, recording.
>
>>>But anthropologists do more than merely record blindly that which they 
>>>see.  There is thing called "methodology", you know.  Had Smith been an 
>>>anthropologist he would have thought about the particular circumstances 
>>>in which the activities he was observing took place.  He was no more an 
>>>anthropologist than I would be an astronomer if I decided to go outside 
>>>and gaze and the stars and write about them.
>
>>His records are sources for later anthropologists, hence his works can be
>>classified as an anthropological source.  Yes or no?
>
>Classifying his works as an anthropological source is not the same as
>classifying him as an anthropologist.
>
Would the first man to study anthropology be considered an athropologists or
his descendents?

>[...]
>
>>>And I would argue that every era has its "politically correct" ideology, 
>>>even though it only came to be called that very recently.  The prevailing 
>>>ideology in early colonial times is rather like your present one, Colin.  
>>>I guess you're just a good colonialist at heart.
>
>>What has this got to do with the price of fish?
>
>It suggests that the price of fish is not independent of surrounding
>circumstances.  Just like attitudes towards those being displaced and having
>their land taken away from them cannot be independent of those historical
>facts and colonial acts, Colin.
>
>[...]
>
>>>> While I know that people like yourself have a fetish at connecting certain 
>>>> posters together, I have not really witnessed a "Colin" on apw-p.  What are you
>>>> trying to say?  That you're loopy?
>
>>>He disappeared not long before you made your appearance, no?  It's odd, 
>>>isn't it, that you claim to have been posting in the white-power 
>>>newsgroups for some time, and yet your userid only appeared in March or 
>>>so of 1996.
>
>Ah, you're correct, Nizkor only started archiving your current userid in March
>of 1996.  I was reading some posts by a fellow named Colin McKinstry, also
>a New Zealander, also with a penchant for ancient Egypt and, astonishingly,
>an apparent B.Sc. with a grasp of written English as appallingly poor as yours.
>He stopped posting right around the time you began.  Too bad, you've missed
>out on a kindred spirit, or do you know Colin McKinstry?  He may even be at
>your University.  You appear to have an awful lot in common.
>
It seems you have already decided who I am.  I will have to notify my parents
that they got my name wrong on my birth certificate.

What was his major?

We know New Zealand has a small population, but, believe it or not, there are
more than two people living here.

Was this person even racialist?

>>That is incorrect, I have been posting here since late November or early
>>December 1995.  When did this "Colin" disappear? If memory serves me 
>>correct, there was no common user called "Colin" anywhere during the time
>>of late 1995 to March 1996.  According to your theories I should have met
>>this person.  I also checked Dejanews for a "Colin" and I discovered two
>>results of relative interest, a Colin Cooper who renounced his membership
>>to the National Alliance, via Milton Kliem, and a posting to a Colin Jordan
>>website.  Which am I supposed to be?  Colin Cooper or Colin Jordan?
>
>>>> >> You still haven't explained Sr. Comecola.
>
>>>> >No, I haven't, have I.  Guess you'll have to figure out what language it 
>>>> >is and look it up in a dictionary.
>
>>>> Which Romance language is it?
>
>>>The same one that word "comprehende" belongs to???
>
>>Why the question marks?
>
>Well, I don't know what language "comprehende" belongs to.  It isn't French or
>Spanish, I'm pretty sure it isn't Italian.  Is it Portuguese?  You use it,
>after all.
>
>Strange, that.  Colin McKinstry used to use "comprehend" in much the same way.
>
Idiomatic speech most likely.

>[...]
>
>>>> >Ethnohistory is the interpretation of documents like Smith's by 
>>>> >anthropologists, using anthropological and historical methods, and 
>>>> >anthropological concepts.  Just like history is the interpretation of 
>>>> >documents like census records by historians using historical methods and 
>>>> >concepts.  Smith was no more an anthropologist (or ethnohistorian) than 
>>>> >someone taking a census in 1580 in Mexico was a historian.
>
>>>> Which means todays PC anthropologists and/or apologist can ignore him, because
>>>> he doesn't fit their beautifully designed propaganda artworks.
>
>>>Do you know for a fact that ethnohistorians have ignored his writing?  Or 
>>>are you merely making this up?  I am not familiar with the ethnohistory 
>>>of the eastern US, but I know that ethnohistorians of southern Ontario 
>>>and of Mexico use every available scrap of written documentation.  In 
>>>southern Ontario, the journals of Champlain and Cartier, the Jesuit 
>>>relations, and all very early documents are central to ethnohistorical 
>>>studies of the early contact/conquest period.  So before you dismiss work 
>>>with which you apparently have zero familiarity, Colin, you ought to lift 
>>>a finger to be sure you aren't making yet more a fool of yourself.
>
>>You will notice that I used a subjunctive in my writings (can).  Please be
>>more careful.
>
>That was not clear from the context, Colin.  If they have not, what is the
>big deal?
>
Well, apparently I have appallingly poor English skills, like some other New
Zealander, so you tell me.

Your knee-jerk reaction has been interesting.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Mon Jan  6 21:33:50 PST 1997
Article: 54959 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-hub.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-ana-7.sprintlink.net!news.fibr.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!dciteleport.com!feed1.news.erols.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.discrimination,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.immigration,alt.skinheads,alt.conspiracy,alt.california,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Cure for AIDS
Date: 5 Jan 1997 11:51:33 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <5ap0o5$cbg@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <32cdb358.42750534@news.atlcom.net> <5al31h$44c@lex.zippo.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port922-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.clinton:350568 alt.discrimination:59902 alt.politics.white-power:54959 alt.politics.nationalism.white:42512 alt.skinheads:48058 alt.conspiracy:129050 alt.california:29772 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:433780

In article , teddybur@netcom.com says...
>
>In article <5al31h$44c@lex.zippo.com> Ourobouros writes:
>>In article <32cdb358.42750534@news.atlcom.net>, dckom@atlcom.net says...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Why is it that whenever someone finds homosexuality Disgusting they are
>>>>"insecure about their sexuality"? or a homophobe? is it that you FEAR
>>>>their way of thinking?
>>>
>>>Yo Trio,
>>>
>>>People are free to be disgusted by anything they wish to be disgusted by.
>>>The real curiousity is why people who claim to find homosexuality revolting
>>>spend so much time and energy talking about it.
>>>
>>Oh, and how would you know?
>>
>>The cure for AIDS is quite simple, something invented a long time ago in
>>fact, it is called quarantine.
>>
>
>Oh, so very ignorant one, explain how a quarantine will cure
>anything???
>
If everybody with AIDS and HIV were quarantined would there be any more of the
disease?

>It might limit the spread of HIV to others but it will not cure
>anything.
>
It won't cure anybody, but it would cure society -- simply not having it.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Wed Jan  8 05:51:18 PST 1997
Article: 55112 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news-out.internetmci.com!pull-feed.internetmci.com!news-out.internetmci.com!dciteleport.com!worldnet.att.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: A eighth question for the proponents of a white nation
Date: 7 Jan 1997 11:31:56 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <5au8bc$a35@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <5ap26m$d7u@lex.zippo.com> <852626946snz@augur.demon.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port867-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <852626946snz@augur.demon.co.uk>, Caesar@augur.demon.co.uk says...
>
>In article <5ap26m$d7u@lex.zippo.com> Ourobouros  writes:
>
>> In article , Caesar@augur.demon.co.uk
>>  says...
>> >
>> >8.
>> >Would you allow those with Native American ancestery to
>> >remain in your "white nation"?
>> >
>> No.
>
>Why not?
>
>They were in America first.
>
1. You have assumed that it will definitely be in America.

2. Should hunter-gatherers get presidence over how land is divided or not?

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Wed Jan  8 16:18:41 PST 1997
Article: 91778 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.win.hookup.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!thor.atcon.com!eru.mt.luth.se!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.censorship,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: The Great Debate
Date: 7 Jan 1997 15:31:58 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <5aumde$i8m@lex.zippo.com>
References: <199612120033.QAA01666@mailmasher.com>  <5au9li$aoc@lex.zippo.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port853-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:91778 alt.censorship:114184 alt.politics.nationalism.white:42724 alt.politics.white-power:55138

In article , jeff_brown@pol.com says...
>
>In article <5au9li$aoc@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros wrote:
>
>>In article , Dene says...
>>>
>>>Ourobouros  wrote:
>
>>> [...deletia...]
>
>>>>I believe this example is sound in my supposition, and only the pedantic
>>>>would require "evidence."
>>>
>>>Ah, I see, so anybody who isn't prepared to take your assertion at face
>>>value and would like some evidence is pedantic? Why do you think this,
>>>is there something special about you that we should accept whatever you
>>>tell us?
>>>
>>I am quite sick of prattling idiots asking for evidence to things 
>>quite obvious.
>
>A remarkable coincidence, as there must be many reasonable folks who have
>grown quite sick of prattling racists answering every request for evidence
>by attacking the person who asked for the evidence. It's amazing what
>excuses prattling racists fall back on when they can't argue.
>
>Notice, by the way, that this tactic serves (albeit poorly) as a
>distraction from the fact that no evidence has yet been offered for the
>original allegation made by this particular prattling racist. Neither has
>he informed us why he should be exempted from any requirement to provide
>evidence for his prattlings.
>
I haven't been asked for any evidence, therefore your whole argument is 
worthless.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Wed Jan  8 16:18:42 PST 1997
Article: 91840 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!clicnet!news.clic.net!wesley.videotron.net!news-penn.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!hammer.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.censorship,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: The Great Debate
Date: 7 Jan 1997 11:54:26 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 95
Message-ID: <5au9li$aoc@lex.zippo.com>
References: <199612120033.QAA01666@mailmasher.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port888-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:91840 alt.censorship:114191 alt.politics.nationalism.white:42745 alt.politics.white-power:55155

In article , Dene says...
>
>Ourobouros  wrote:
>>In article , Dene says...
>>>
>>>Ourobouros  wrote:
>>>>In article <+gmAtnANipzyEw8n@bebbo.demon.co.uk>, Dene says...
>>>>>
>>>>>Ourobouros  wrote:
>>>>>>In article <32cd45fb.799313@news.inetport.com>, mcurtis@inetport.com says...
>>>>>>>Of course, but Jo Blogg has only a cursory interest. Should  Blogg's
>>>>>>>interest increase then their will be a flooding of new information and
>>>>>>>knowledge. It takes a desire to go beyond newspaper and magazine
>>>>>>>articles. It takes a desire to go beyond the denial web sites to get
>>>>>>>more information. It will not take very long to discover that there
>>>>>>>were others besides Jews. I think your claim is unfounded and it an
>>>>>>>opinion from one who is not totally informed. The ignorance one has
>>>>>>>about historical events are the fault of the individual and not the
>>>>>>>society the individual lives in. The information is readily available.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>What I am asking is why Jo Blogg only knows about Jews in concert with the
>>>>>>holocaust.  If the literature on the holocaust so freely mentions these 
>>other
>>>>>>misfits then why does Jo Blogg only know about Jews?
>>>>>>
>>>>>[snips]
>>>>>>>Then your pretense of ignorance above was done in order to waste my
>>>>>>>time? This is the methods you use to impress others with your
>>>>>>>positions? 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>I am interested in the why and how.  You have been strangely quiet about why
>>>>>>the Jews are only known to the great mass of people concerning the 
>>holocaust.
>>>>>>Why is it so?
>>>>>
>>>>>A good thing might be for you to desist from asking a loaded question,
>>>>>and first provide grounds for accepting that the "great mass of people"
>>>>>do in fact only know about Jews as victims of the Nazi holocaust.
>>>>>
>>>>I doubt if any empirical evidence has been done on the subject, but I 
>>challenge
>>>>you to ask Jo Blogg on the street about who died in the holocaust.  I can
>>>>almost guarantee 9 out of 10 responses you will receive the word Jews or
>>>>equivalent.
>>>
>>>That of course is an admission that your loaded question is not grounded
>>>on any evidence, only that you think you can almost guarantee something
>>>for which you are unaware of any empirical evidence. I do admit that it
>>>is a reasonable supposition that many people associate the Holocaust
>>>primarily with Jews, but this is somewhat different to your assertion.
>>>
>>I believe this example is sound in my supposition, and only the pedantic would
>>require "evidence."
>
>Ah, I see, so anybody who isn't prepared to take your assertion at face
>value and would like some evidence is pedantic? Why do you think this,
>is there something special about you that we should accept whatever you
>tell us?
>
I am quite sick of prattling idiots asking for evidence to things quite obvious.

>>>>  Also ask them about how many British, French, Yankees, Russians,
>>>>Poles and Jews died in the war, I can almost guarantee that the only one they
>>>>will know are the alleged (and popular) number Jews.  Why is this so?
>>>
>>>I don't know why, if true, this is so.
>>>
>>Have you heard of thw word "propaganda"?
>
>Certainly the Holocaust is well seated in the public conciousness, but
>then again we all know that British/French/Americans/Russians etc died
>in the war.
>
Which is more elaborated?  I can guarantee you that the Holocaust is repeated
more often in New Zealand than the NZers interned at the Japanese POW camps.
In fact the internment is rarely mentioned, and they were full of atrocities
that are practically never mentioned.  

>>>>Do you know how many British died during the war without consulting a book?
>>>
>>>No.
>>>
>>Interesting, but I can almost guarantee you knew how many Jews died before you
>>ever thought about studying it.  Why?
>
>I don't know, but I suppose the Holocaust death toll is just fairly well
>known.
>
Do you know how many Gypsies died in the propagated Holocaust without consulting
a book?  If on the chance you do know, did you know before you started studying
the Holocaust?

Ourobouros.




From Ourobouros Fri Jan 10 16:00:33 PST 1997
Article: 92071 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: ATTN: Mr. K. McVay
Date: 9 Jan 1997 23:29:07 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <5b4r43$43u@lex.zippo.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port883-auck.ihug.co.nz

Would you please remove all of my posts off your site?

Your cooperation would be appreciated.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Sat Jan 11 08:48:55 PST 1997
Article: 55408 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.nap.net!news.enteract.com!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: An eleventh question for proponents of a white nation
Date: 10 Jan 1997 19:38:24 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <5b71vg$pei@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <5ap2hs$dbp@lex.zippo.com> <32e0896b.25548850@news.atlcom.net> <5asn7i$1rn@lex.zippo.com> <32dec8eb.43585711@news.atlcom.net> <5b4okt$312@lex.zippo.com> <5b6bgq$auj@orion.cybercom.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port885-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <5b6bgq$auj@orion.cybercom.net>, amatthews@cybercom.net says...
>
>In article <5b4okt$312@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros wrote:
>>In article <32dec8eb.43585711@news.atlcom.net>, dckom@atlcom.net says...
>>>
>>>On 6 Jan 1997 21:33:38 -0800 c.e., Ourobouros wrote :
>>>>In article <32e0896b.25548850@news.atlcom.net>, dckom@atlcom.net says...
>>>>>
>>>>>On 5 Jan 1997 12:22:20 -0800 c.e., Ourobouros wrote :
>>>>>>In article , Caesar@augur.demon.co.uk
>> says...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>11.
>>>>>>>Would you allow free speech in your "white nation"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Define what you mean by free speech.
>>>>>
>>>>>The freedom to have newspapers and magazines published, the right to hold
>>>>>public political meetings,the right to buy air-time on radio and
>>>>>television, the right to disagree  with the government to the point of
>>>>>calling for rebellion. 
>>>>>
>>>>Concerning the latter point, if the government is breaking the law or to the
>>>>point of treating its people as the enemy (by disarming them) then I agree. 
>> If
>>>>freedom of speech is encouraging others to break the legitimate law then no.
>>>
>>>A nice dodge. Would I as an anti-rascist "white" boy, be allowed the same
>>>rights in your proposed homeland, as, say, Dr. Pierce has now? 
>>>
>>If you decide to promote and encourage others towards the breakdown of the 
>>nation then you will be hung as a traitor to the nation.  Does that answer 
>>your question?  
>
>Yep, now we can add anti-free-speech to the list of your cowardly views, 
>Ol-bore-us.
>
Tell me, O' vacant minded one, does the US government permit you to publicly
threaten the life of Bill Clinton?

>>No society can permit the growth  of traitors or the 
>>internal enemy and survive. 
>
>Any nation that doesn't allow free speech doesn't deserve to survive.
>
Tell me, O' vacant minded one, does the US government permit you to publicly
declare terrorist action on the US?

>>If you decide that our nation is where you want to be, and are law-abiding
>>then you will have the same rights as Dr. Pierce.  
>
>In other words, tow the Nazi line or else.
>
I am not a Natsee, O' vacant minded one.

>Ol' Burro's ass is become more transparent every day.
>
I must applaud you on your high intellectual capacity in a discussion.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Sat Jan 11 08:48:56 PST 1997
Article: 55413 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news2.bayou.com!news.intersurf.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: White folks too dumb for freedom of religion. Was Re: A tweleveth question for the proponents of a white nation
Date: 10 Jan 1997 19:39:19 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <5b7217$pet@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <5ap2lm$dcl@lex.zippo.com> <852626912snz@augur.demon.co.uk> <5aun01$iem@lex.zippo.com> <5b0vq8$j15@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5b204f$21h@lex.zippo.com> <32d83590.5857956@news.atlcom.net> <5b3koc$cdj@lex.zippo.com> <32ddc55f.42677940@news.atlcom.net> <5b4neg$27r@lex.zippo.com> <5b62g6$rg7@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port885-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <5b62g6$rg7@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>*My* 
>>politics involve making society more mature, ie., each member is 
>>responsible for his own actions
>[...]
>
>But of course in your politics, membership in society itself is not
>based on each individual's actions, but instead on the colour of their
>skin.  More mature, indeed.
>
Show me a society that is successful via multi-culturalism.

If you can't then my politics is more mature than yours, because it doesn't
live in fairyland.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Sat Jan 11 12:06:15 PST 1997
Article: 55416 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.emf.net!overload.lbl.gov!agate!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: A tweleveth question for the proponents of a white nation
Date: 10 Jan 1997 10:35:27 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 108
Message-ID: <5b625f$7g9@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <5ap2lm$dcl@lex.zippo.com> <852626912snz@augur.demon.co.uk> <5aun01$iem@lex.zippo.com> <5b0vq8$j15@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5b204f$21h@lex.zippo.com> <5b36l0$es@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5b3orj$ekh@lex.zippo.com> <5b5g6q$q9t@news1.ucsd.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port888-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <5b5g6q$q9t@news1.ucsd.edu>, fledgist@weber.ucsd.edu says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>: In article <5b36l0$es@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura says...
>: >
>: >Ourobouros wrote:
>: >
>: >[...]
>: >
>: >>As usual, Colleen, you don't understand the reply.  If an enigmatic figure rose
>: >>to the occasion, and he had the will and determination to have an official
>: >>religion then he would install an official religion, if not then not.  
>: >
>: >>Does Colleen understand now?
>: >
>: >So you are saying that what religion(s) would be permissible are entirely
>: >up to the dictator's whims.  So you are saying that there may or may not
>: >be religious freedom.  Which means that there isn't.  And you moan about
>: >people being told what they "must believe" in the era of political
>: >correctness!!!!
>: >
>: I'm being bluntly honest.  It wouldn't matter whether it were a racial
>: regime or not, concerning religion.
>
>: Religion and law making are so intertwined it isn't funny.  Btw, just 
>: because there is an official religion doesn't necessarily mean a lack of
>: religious freedom.  Both Canada and the U.S.A are officially (protestant)
>: Christian nations, whether you like it or lump it, and yet there is 
>
>
>Would you cite the official documents which declare Canada and the
>United States to be '(protestant) Christian nations'.  Nothing in
>either the United States Constitution nor the Canadian Constitution
>Act declares any religion or sect to have official status.
>
Curious, how would you describe the primary religion of the U.S. or Canada,
or are you simply stirring shit?

>You really don't understand what 'official' means.
>
Uh huh.
>
>
>: religious freedom.  Under Elizabeth I the official religion was proto-
>: Anglican, but other Christian religions were permissible.  Similar 
>
>'Proto-Anglican'? The Anglican church was instituted under Henry
>VIII, suppressed by Mary I, and restored to full status by Elizabeth
>I. You appear not to understand what 'proto' means either.
>
The name wasn't.

You are also very ignorant.

Henry VIII made a new Catholic Church with himself at the helm, instead of
the Pope.  His son turned that Church into a Protestant Church.  His sister
Mary reverted it back to Catholicism.  Elizabeth I turned it back to a
Protestant Church, but with Catholic trappings.

I used "proto" in reference to the name.  I am sorry you were too thick to
realise that, but I cannot help your intelligence.

>: conditions were in Scotland, the low Countries, Sweden and Denmark (to name
>: a few.)  
>
>: Going back to Constantine when Christianity was first made the official
>: religion of the Roman Empire, other religions were permissible.  Even under 
>: Theodosius I when he cancelled the tax free perks to the pagan temples
>: there was still religious freedom.
>
>Really? This explains the closing of the schools.

Pagan temples became unprofitable if thats what you mean, but Pagans still
existed.  They used private residences instead of temples.  It also brings
up another interesting point, his predecessor, Julian, was the last Pagan
Emperor of Rome.  Under his brief rule Neo-platoism became the official
religion, but Christians, persay, weren't persecuted.

Please be sure to understand what Theodosius authorised and what various
people (Christians) actually did.

>: For the brief flare of Kingdom of Sicily in the 12th century, the official 
>: religion was Roman Catholicism, but religious freedom was granted to 
>: Muslims -- btw, Sicily is your only successful multi-cultural state (for 
>: about 50 years anyway, before it became another nothing state.)
>
>Really? I would have thought that the Emirate (and Caliphate) of
>Co'rdoba qualified, not to mention dozens of other political
>entities throughout recent history. (BTW, there were no states
>before the 16th century -- not in Europe and the Mediterranean at
>any rate.)

There were states before the 16th century, despite your protest that there
weren't.  You had the Papal states for example.  I think the word you are
scrabbling for is "nation."

Explain how Co'rdoba (in Spain) grew multi-culturally.

>: It also must be remembered that while Christianity was the official religion
>: of Europe, Jewry was permissible, even though (at times) all the classes
>: (lower, middle, and upper) despised Jews.
>
>Do you know the difference between 'Jewry' and 'Judaism'?
>
I meant Jewry as in the entire lump, not a facet of it.  Are you thick or
something?

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Sat Jan 11 14:34:05 PST 1997
Article: 55455 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.stylus.net!news.gwi.net!news.bihs.net!news.tamu.edu!news.sgi.com!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: An eleventh question for proponents of a white nation
Date: 10 Jan 1997 19:37:33 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <5b71tt$pec@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <5ap2hs$dbp@lex.zippo.com> <32e0896b.25548850@news.atlcom.net> <5asn7i$1rn@lex.zippo.com> <32dec8eb.43585711@news.atlcom.net> <5b4okt$312@lex.zippo.com> <5b6bgq$auj@orion.cybercom.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port885-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <5b6bgq$auj@orion.cybercom.net>, amatthews@cybercom.net says...
>
>In article <5b4okt$312@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros wrote:
>>In article <32dec8eb.43585711@news.atlcom.net>, dckom@atlcom.net says...
>>>
>>>On 6 Jan 1997 21:33:38 -0800 c.e., Ourobouros wrote :
>>>>In article <32e0896b.25548850@news.atlcom.net>, dckom@atlcom.net says...
>>>>>
>>>>>On 5 Jan 1997 12:22:20 -0800 c.e., Ourobouros wrote :
>>>>>>In article , Caesar@augur.demon.co.uk
>> says...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>11.
>>>>>>>Would you allow free speech in your "white nation"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Define what you mean by free speech.
>>>>>
>>>>>The freedom to have newspapers and magazines published, the right to hold
>>>>>public political meetings,the right to buy air-time on radio and
>>>>>television, the right to disagree  with the government to the point of
>>>>>calling for rebellion. 
>>>>>
>>>>Concerning the latter point, if the government is breaking the law or to the
>>>>point of treating its people as the enemy (by disarming them) then I agree. 
>> If
>>>>freedom of speech is encouraging others to break the legitimate law then no.
>>>
>>>A nice dodge. Would I as an anti-rascist "white" boy, be allowed the same
>>>rights in your proposed homeland, as, say, Dr. Pierce has now? 
>>>
>>If you decide to promote and encourage others towards the breakdown of the 
>>nation then you will be hung as a traitor to the nation.  Does that answer 
>>your question?  
>
>Yep, now we can add anti-free-speech to the list of your cowardly views, 
>Ol-bore-us.
>
Tell me, O' vacant minded one, does the US government permit you to publicly
threaten the life of Bill Clinton?

>>No society can permit the growth  of traitors or the 
>>internal enemy and survive. 
>
>Any nation that doesn't allow free speech doesn't deserve to survive.
>
Tell me, O' vacant minded one, does the US government permit you to publicly
declare terrorist action on the US?

>>If you decide that our nation is where you want to be, and are law-abiding
>>then you will have the same rights as Dr. Pierce.  
>
>In other words, tow the Nazi line or else.
>
I am not a Natsee, O' vacant minded one.

>Ol' Burro's ass is become more transparent every day.
>
I must applaud you on your high intellectual capacity in a discussion.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Sat Jan 11 23:12:35 PST 1997
Article: 55492 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.InterGate.BC.CA!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!news.nstn.ca!thor.atcon.com!pumpkin.pangea.ca!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!enews.sgi.com!news.sgi.com!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: The Great Debate
Date: 10 Jan 1997 23:12:08 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 148
Message-ID: <5b7eg8$3jc@lex.zippo.com>
References: <199612120033.QAA01666@mailmasher.com>  <5au9li$aoc@lex.zippo.com>  <5aumde$i8m@lex.zippo.com>  <5avdnf$3bd@lex.zippo.com>  <5b0q06$8rs@lex.zippo.com>  <5b3d8r$7r1@lex.zippo.com>  <5b43qk$l4b@lex.zippo.com>  <5b4qcn$3v3@lex.zippo.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port1666-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:55492 alt.politics.nationalism.white:43153

In article , jeff_brown@pol.com says...
>
>In article <5b4qcn$3v3@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros wrote:
>
>>In article ,
>jeff_brown@pol.com says...
>>>
>>>In article <5b43qk$l4b@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros wrote:
>
>>> [...deletia...]
>
>>>>What was the original allegation?
>>>
>>>As follows:
>>>
>>>  > ...I challenge you to ask Jo Blogg on the street about who died in
>>>  > the holocaust.  I can almost guarantee 9 out of 10 responses you will
>>>  > receive the word Jews or equivalent. 
>>>
>>>                                   -- Subject: Re: The Great Debate
>>>                                   -- Date: 4 Jan 1997 14:04:22 -0800
>>>                                   -- Message-ID: <5amk56$ce9@lex.zippo.com>
>>>
>>>Notice that the prattling racist _still_ hasn't offered any evidence for
>>>this allegation.
>>>
>>What evidence would that be?
>
>I didn't make the allegation, so that's not for me to say. The prattling
>racist should already know what evidence there is for his allegation -- or
>that he hasn't any evidence in the first place.
>
Define precisely why I should provide evidence given the allegation above,
ie., can you read and comprehend, or not?

>Notice that the prattling racist _still_ hasn't offered any evidence for
>his allegation.
>
v.supr.

>>>>>>Is calling me a prattling racist an ad hominem attack?
>>>>>
>>>>>Dunno. Is "I am quite sick of prattling idiots asking for evidence to
>>>>>things quite obvious" an ad hominem attack?
>>>>>
>>>>Are you a prattling idiot?
>>>
>>>It doesn't matter whether I'm a "prattling idiot" or not. The prattling
>>>racist raises the issue merely to distract us from the fact that he
>>>_still_ hasn't offered any evidence for his original allegation.
>>>
>>"Ad hominem" means "to the man", therefore it does matter.  I have not
>>distracted attention away from the conversation at all, you have decided to
>>use "prattling racist," and you somehow expect me to believe you're not a
>>hypocrite when it comes to ad hominem attacks.
>
>Notice that the prattling racist has conveniently forgotten his use of
>"prattling idiots" to refer to any who dare ask him to back up his
>allegations with evidence.
>
You accuse me of using ad hominem attacks while using ad hominem attacks
yourself?  Do you now realise why nobody takes you seriously here?

>Notice that the prattling racist is _still_ trying to distract us from the
>fact that he hasn't offered any evidence for his allegation.
>
It is you that is doing the distracting.  Need I remind you of your own
argument concerning ad hominem attacks?

>>Beams and motes, Mr. "Brown."
>>
>>Now answer both questions:  1. Are you, or are you not, using ad hominem 
>>attacks?  2.  Are you a prattling idiot?
>
>Notice that both questions are merely further attempts to distract us from
>the fact that the prattling racist hasn't offered any evidence for his
>allegation.
>
IOW, you believe in making wild allegations without the need to substantiate
them, whereas you believe I must substantiate everything I say.  Do you
realise how hypocritical you really are?

>>>>>>Is it not you, and you alone, that has moved the conversation away from the
>>>>>>argument Mike Curtis and I were having?
>>>>>
>>>>>Nope. I didn't make the original remark about "prattling idiots asking for
>>>>>evidence". The prattling racist did. That's when the conversation shifted.
>>>>>
>>>>Er no, it was your reply that shifted the conversation.  That, I am afraid,
>>>>is a fact, and what you wrote is not.
>>>
>>>It doesn't matter who "shifted the conversation". The prattling racist
>>>raises the issue merely to distract us from the fact that he _still_
>>>hasn't offered any evidence for his original allegation.
>>>
>>Er no, it does matter.  You accused me of diverting, which a) is something
>>you haven't substantiated, and b) something that you started. 
>
>Wrong; review the thread. I didn't divert the conversation to the supposed
>intellectual deficiencies of those who dare ask the prattling racist for
>evidence; the prattling racist himself did so. Now that his diversionary
>tactic is revealed for what it was, he attempts further diversion by
>accusing someone else of initiating said diversion.
>
Wrong; review the thread.  I didn't divert the conversation to the pathetic
level it is now in, nor did I accuse Mike Curtis of having intellectual
deficiencies, which I might add was whom I was conversing with.  It is you,
and you alone, you makes these diversionary moves.  You stand revealed as
a hypocrite once more.

>Notice that the prattling racist is _still_ trying to distract us from the
>fact that he hasn't offered any evidence for his allegation.
>
No, it is you that is doing the distracting, nobody else is.  Are you the
prattling racist that you keep harping on about?

>>You are
>>guilty of making false charges, or would you prefer the label of liar?
>
>I prefer to point out that this is simply another attempt to to distract
>us from the fact that the prattling racist _still_ hasn't offered any
>evidence for his allegation.
>
You have charged me with diverting the conversation, which a) you haven't
substantiated, and b) is your game.

>>>>>Notice that, rather than offer any evidence for his original allegation,
>>>>>the prattling racist is _still_ attempting to divert the discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>There must first be an original allegation for me to attempt diverting from.
>>>
>>>See above. Notice that the prattling racist _still_ hasn't offered any
>>>evidence for his original allegation.
>>>
>>And just what evidence should that be?
>
>See above. 
>
v.supr.

>Notice that the prattling racist is _still_ trying to distract us from the
>fact that he hasn't offered any evidence for his allegation.
>
Au contraire, unless of course you are the prattling racist you are so fond
of mentioning.

Ourobouros.
 


From Ourobouros Sun Jan 12 07:09:30 PST 1997
Article: 55502 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.wildstar.net!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: An eleventh question for proponents of a white nation
Date: 11 Jan 1997 18:53:43 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 84
Message-ID: <5b9jnn$rob@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <5ap2hs$dbp@lex.zippo.com> <32e0896b.25548850@news.atlcom.net> <5asn7i$1rn@lex.zippo.com> <32dec8eb.43585711@news.atlcom.net> <5b4okt$312@lex.zippo.com> <5b6bgq$auj@orion.cybercom.net> <5b71vg$pei@lex.zippo.com> <32d95af9.68113441@news.atlcom.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port810-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <32d95af9.68113441@news.atlcom.net>, dckom@atlcom.net says...
>
>On 10 Jan 1997 19:38:24 -0800 c.e., Ourobouros wrote :
>>In article <5b6bgq$auj@orion.cybercom.net>, amatthews@cybercom.net says...
>>>
>>>In article <5b4okt$312@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros wrote:
>>>>In article <32dec8eb.43585711@news.atlcom.net>, dckom@atlcom.net says...
>>>>>
>>>>>On 6 Jan 1997 21:33:38 -0800 c.e., Ourobouros wrote :
>>>>>>In article <32e0896b.25548850@news.atlcom.net>, dckom@atlcom.net says...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On 5 Jan 1997 12:22:20 -0800 c.e., Ourobouros wrote :
>>>>>>>>In article , Caesar@augur.demon.co.uk
>>>> says...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>11.
>>>>>>>>>Would you allow free speech in your "white nation"?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Define what you mean by free speech.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The freedom to have newspapers and magazines published, the right to hold
>>>>>>>public political meetings,the right to buy air-time on radio and
>>>>>>>television, the right to disagree  with the government to the point of
>>>>>>>calling for rebellion. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Concerning the latter point, if the government is breaking the law or to the
>>>>>>point of treating its people as the enemy (by disarming them) then I agree. 
>>>> If
>>>>>>freedom of speech is encouraging others to break the legitimate law then no.
>>>>>
>>>>>A nice dodge. Would I as an anti-rascist "white" boy, be allowed the same
>>>>>rights in your proposed homeland, as, say, Dr. Pierce has now? 
>>>>>
>>>>If you decide to promote and encourage others towards the breakdown of the 
>>>>nation then you will be hung as a traitor to the nation.  Does that answer 
>>>>your question?  
>>>
>>>Yep, now we can add anti-free-speech to the list of your cowardly views, 
>>>Ol-bore-us.
>>>
>>Tell me, O' vacant minded one, does the US government permit you to publicly
>>threaten the life of Bill Clinton?
>
>Oh tale swallower, 
>	Who mentioned threatening public officials? I was quite specific, a
>list of conditions roughly equal with those granted you, under the existing
>political system.
>
I stand accused of being anti-free-speech by the vacant minded one.  No
government allows its citizens to abuse the law and survives. 

>>>>No society can permit the growth  of traitors or the 
>>>>internal enemy and survive. 
>>>
>>>Any nation that doesn't allow free speech doesn't deserve to survive.
>>>
>>Tell me, O' vacant minded one, does the US government permit you to publicly
>>declare terrorist action on the US?
>
>Does the phrase "The Turner Diaries" mean anything to you? Not only is it
>permitted, it apparently can be rather profitable.
>
"The Turner Diaries" is fiction, please re-read all your comrades arguments
posted recently on the status of fictional works.  

>>
>>>>If you decide that our nation is where you want to be, and are law-abiding
>>>>then you will have the same rights as Dr. Pierce.  
>>>
>>>In other words, tow the Nazi line or else.
>>>
>>I am not a Natsee, O' vacant minded one.
>
>Ouro, you're anti-semitic, or, if you prefer, anti-Jewish. You advocate a
>racial dictatorship. You advocate a sort of mystical leadership principal.
>what am I to call this but national socialism?
>
Believe it or not, National Socialism as envisaged by Adolf Hitler was not
the first racial government, nor was it the first racial dictatorship. What
grounds do you have left that make me a Natsee?

Ourobouros.
  



From Ourobouros Sun Jan 12 18:11:23 PST 1997
Article: 92520 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!clay.se.highway1.com!cpk-news-feed3.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ATTN: Mr. K. McVay
Date: 11 Jan 1997 19:09:10 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <5b9kkm$s9c@lex.zippo.com>
References: <5b4r43$43u@lex.zippo.com> <01bbffe9$4bfcc460$4c7213cc@server>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port810-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <01bbffe9$4bfcc460$4c7213cc@server>, "Anthony says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote in article <5b4r43$43u@lex.zippo.com>...
>> Would you please remove all of my posts off your site?
>> 
>> Your cooperation would be appreciated.
>> 
>> Ourobouros.
>> 
>
>Ha! Forget it, Ourobouros. These guys at Nizkor believe that have a moral,
>ethical and legal right to archive information in such a manner that can
>easily lead messages to be misconstrued and twisted as to their original
>intent.
>
>I again challenge the Nizkorites to explain an easy method whereby someone
>browsing their archives can reconstruct a thread so that someone's comments
>have the benefit of their proper context with respect to previous messages
>and responses.
>
>AFAIK, the purpose of this archive is the equivalent of having a sword over
>your head. It exists as an implied threat so they can use your own words
>against you (twisted and deformed, of course!). With it, they give the
>impression that Big Brother is watching, so you'd better be careful what
>you say. I find this totally despicable and reprehensible, not to mention
>dishonest. (But don't worry, I am trying to give them a taste of their own
>medicine, using their own quotes from DejaNews in an attempt to show them
>what they are doing. I urge others to follow suit.)
>
>Of course, the Nizkorites will feign ignorance or strongly protest
>otherwise. It is to be expected considering their well-documented tactics.
>
>As an aside, I find it interesting to note that their "persons" database
>does not include one Joel Rosenberg, a noted loud-mouth and well-documented
>spewer of obscenities and other nonsensical writings. I am quite certain he
>belongs to this organization, even if not "officially". (Now watch the
>Nizkorites ask me for proof!) In any case, can someone at Nizkor explain
>this apparent oversight?
>
Jeffrey Brown is another individual to whom Nizkor doesn't record (at least
when I last checked.)

Apparently Mr. K. McVay respects the law, so theoretically he should heed 
my request.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Sun Jan 12 18:11:24 PST 1997
Article: 92521 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-5.sprintlink.net!clay.se.highway1.com!cpk-news-feed3.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ATTN: Mr. K. McVay
Date: 11 Jan 1997 19:15:19 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <5b9l07$sgp@lex.zippo.com>
References: <5b4r43$43u@lex.zippo.com> <32D6F755.6101@ibm.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port810-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <32D6F755.6101@ibm.net>, Gord says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>> 
>> Would you please remove all of my posts off your site?
>
>No.
> 
You are not Mr. K. McVay so the choice is not yours to make.

>> Your cooperation would be appreciated.
>
>Tough nookies.  You posted it--you toast it.  Life's a bitch.
>
Are you suggesting that I hack into Nizkor's database and remove them 
myself?

That's not a bad idea...

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Sun Jan 12 18:35:06 PST 1997
Article: 55534 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.InterGate.BC.CA!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!winternet.com!visi.com!mr.net!news-out.microserve.net!news-in.microserve.net!news-xfer.netaxs.com!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc-e!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: An apology
Date: 10 Jan 1997 22:53:24 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <5b7dd4$318@lex.zippo.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port1666-auck.ihug.co.nz

I apologise for the multiple posts (of mine) on apw-p, sorry for any 
inconvenience they may have caused.  Newserver played up.

Ourobouros.






From Ourobouros Sun Jan 12 18:35:08 PST 1997
Article: 55557 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.axionet.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!204.127.130.5!worldnet.att.net!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc-e!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: The Great Debate
Date: 9 Jan 1997 10:26:35 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <5b3d8r$7r1@lex.zippo.com>
References: <199612120033.QAA01666@mailmasher.com>  <5au9li$aoc@lex.zippo.com>  <5aumde$i8m@lex.zippo.com>  <5avdnf$3bd@lex.zippo.com>  <5b0q06$8rs@lex.zippo.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port850-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:55557 alt.politics.nationalism.white:43237

In article , jeff_brown@pol.com says...
>
>In article <5b0q06$8rs@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros wrote:
>
>>In article ,
>jeff_brown@pol.com says...
>>>
>>>In article <5avdnf$3bd@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros wrote:
>
>>> [...deletia...]
>
>>>>Perhaps you'd like to point out where Mike Curtis asked for evidence in 
>>>>this thread, otherwise tis you that prattles.
>>>
>>>Notice that, rather than offer any evidence for his original allegation,
>>>the prattling racist attempts to divert the discussion with still another
>>>ad hominem attack. Note also that he ignores the fact that he himself
>>>first claimed he was being asked for evidence.
>>>
>>>It's amazing what excuses the prattling racists fall back on when they
>>>can't argue rationally.
>>>
>>Could you make sense for once?
>
>Notice that, rather than offer any evidence for his original allegation,
>the prattling racist is _still_ attempting to divert the discussion with
>yet _another_ ad hominem attack.
>
May I ask what you are doing then?

Is calling me a prattling racist an ad hominem attack?

Is it not you, and you alone, that has moved the conversation away from the
argument Mike Curtis and I were having?

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Sun Jan 12 19:44:15 PST 1997
Article: 92529 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!metro.atlanta.com!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!gatech!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: What is Semitism?
Date: 12 Jan 1997 02:03:02 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <5bacsm$d6u@lex.zippo.com>
References: <32d87a33.20990083@news.gte.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port1554-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <32d87a33.20990083@news.gte.net>, BOb@the.helm says...
>
>	What is semitism?  Not to challenge anyone here but it is not a
>religion.  Atheists get to call themselves Jews by primitive tribal
>rules of membership.  
>
>	There is absolutely ZERO religious intolerance, prejudice or
>anything even remotely related against Jews in the US and NOTHING they
>do in public has anything to do with religion.  
>
>	Search your memories and the Web in your spare time.  Find ONE
>religious action, statement, whatever regarding the jewish religion by
>any Jew.  
>
>	You will not find any.  Now think about that for a moment.
>Whatever jews are, in public they are not a religion.  In public they
>have nothing whatsoever to do with any religion.  
>
>	In public and at best, they are a secular voice among dozens of
>other secular voices.  Publically, Jews have no more standing than a
>Lakota or a Souix.  None of the three are a religion.  
>
Semitism is nothing but a language group.  Hebrew, Arabic, Akkadian,
Syriac, Aramaean, Aramiac, and Moabite are all Semitic languages.  

The question is; is the dictionary meaning for anti-Semitism correct? 

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Mon Jan 13 07:34:47 PST 1997
Article: 55644 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.axionet.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!205.252.116.190!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: An eleventh question for proponents of a white nation
Date: 9 Jan 1997 22:46:53 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <5b4okt$312@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <5ap2hs$dbp@lex.zippo.com> <32e0896b.25548850@news.atlcom.net> <5asn7i$1rn@lex.zippo.com> <32dec8eb.43585711@news.atlcom.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port883-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <32dec8eb.43585711@news.atlcom.net>, dckom@atlcom.net says...
>
>On 6 Jan 1997 21:33:38 -0800 c.e., Ourobouros wrote :
>>In article <32e0896b.25548850@news.atlcom.net>, dckom@atlcom.net says...
>>>
>>>On 5 Jan 1997 12:22:20 -0800 c.e., Ourobouros wrote :
>>>>In article , Caesar@augur.demon.co.uk says...
>>>>>
>>>>>11.
>>>>>Would you allow free speech in your "white nation"?
>>>>>
>>>>Define what you mean by free speech.
>>>
>>>The freedom to have newspapers and magazines published, the right to hold
>>>public political meetings,the right to buy air-time on radio and
>>>television, the right to disagree  with the government to the point of
>>>calling for rebellion. 
>>>
>>Concerning the latter point, if the government is breaking the law or to the
>>point of treating its people as the enemy (by disarming them) then I agree.  If
>>freedom of speech is encouraging others to break the legitimate law then no.
>
>A nice dodge. Would I as an anti-rascist "white" boy, be allowed the same
>rights in your proposed homeland, as, say, Dr. Pierce has now? 
>
If you decide to promote and encourage others towards the breakdown of the 
nation then you will be hung as a traitor to the nation.  Does that answer 
your question?  No society can permit the growth  of traitors or the 
internal enemy and survive.  If you want to live amongst Blacks then go 
live among them, our proposed nation will not stop you, just the opposite 
in fact.  If you promote multi-cultural ideas then it would be fitting if 
you actually live among the cultures you so dearly love.  If you love 
Chinese food so much then live in China -- permanently.

If you decide that our nation is where you want to be, and are law-abiding
then you will have the same rights as Dr. Pierce.  If Dr. Pierce broke the
law then he will be penalised for breaking the law, as much as the new law
dictates, just as you would if you broke the law in the new regime.  The 
law will be harsh (retributive), but impartial.  As I commented in another
post not even the dictator will be above the law.
>
>>>>
>>>>>I.e. Would you allow ppl to speak out against your racism?
>>>>
>>>>Define what you mean by speak out.
>>>
>>>	See above. By the way, these are rights granted to racists under the
>>>U.S. constitution.
>>>
>>Ah yes, the benefits of a constitution...too bad they are slowly being eroded.
>
>	Sounds as if they would be destroyed in your dream state.
>
My state would have a constitution which will prevent the alien getting a
foothold to undermine the nation.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Mon Jan 13 07:34:48 PST 1997
Article: 55645 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.axionet.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!205.252.116.190!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: The Great Debate
Date: 9 Jan 1997 23:16:39 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 82
Message-ID: <5b4qcn$3v3@lex.zippo.com>
References: <199612120033.QAA01666@mailmasher.com>  <5au9li$aoc@lex.zippo.com>  <5aumde$i8m@lex.zippo.com>  <5avdnf$3bd@lex.zippo.com>  <5b0q06$8rs@lex.zippo.com>  <5b3d8r$7r1@lex.zippo.com>  <5b43qk$l4b@lex.zippo.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port883-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:55645 alt.politics.nationalism.white:43328

In article , jeff_brown@pol.com says...
>
>In article <5b43qk$l4b@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros wrote:
>
[snip]
>
>>>>>Notice that, rather than offer any evidence for his original allegation,
>>>>>the prattling racist is _still_ attempting to divert the discussion with
>>>>>yet _another_ ad hominem attack.
>>>>>
>>>>May I ask what you are doing then?
>>>
>>>Certainly. I'm refusing to allow ad hominem attacks to divert the
>>>discussion from the fact that the prattling racist _still_ hasn't offered
>>>any evidence for his original allegation. 
>>>
>>What was the original allegation?
>
>As follows:
>
>  > ...I challenge you to ask Jo Blogg on the street about who died in
>  > the holocaust.  I can almost guarantee 9 out of 10 responses you will
>  > receive the word Jews or equivalent. 
>
>                                   -- Subject: Re: The Great Debate
>                                   -- Date: 4 Jan 1997 14:04:22 -0800
>                                   -- Message-ID: <5amk56$ce9@lex.zippo.com>
>
>Notice that the prattling racist _still_ hasn't offered any evidence for
>this allegation.
>
What evidence would that be?

>>>>Is calling me a prattling racist an ad hominem attack?
>>>
>>>Dunno. Is "I am quite sick of prattling idiots asking for evidence to
>>>things quite obvious" an ad hominem attack?
>>>
>>Are you a prattling idiot?
>
>It doesn't matter whether I'm a "prattling idiot" or not. The prattling
>racist raises the issue merely to distract us from the fact that he
>_still_ hasn't offered any evidence for his original allegation.
>
"Ad hominem" means "to the man", therefore it does matter.  I have not
distracted attention away from the conversation at all, you have decided to
use "prattling racist," and you somehow expect me to believe you're not a
hypocrite when it comes to ad hominem attacks.

Beams and motes, Mr. "Brown."

Now answer both questions:  1. Are you, or are you not, using ad hominem 
attacks?  2.  Are you a prattling idiot?

>>>>Is it not you, and you alone, that has moved the conversation away from the
>>>>argument Mike Curtis and I were having?
>>>
>>>Nope. I didn't make the original remark about "prattling idiots asking for
>>>evidence". The prattling racist did. That's when the conversation shifted.
>>>
>>Er no, it was your reply that shifted the conversation.  That, I am afraid,
>>is a fact, and what you wrote is not.
>
>It doesn't matter who "shifted the conversation". The prattling racist
>raises the issue merely to distract us from the fact that he _still_
>hasn't offered any evidence for his original allegation.
>
Er no, it does matter.  You accused me of diverting, which a) is something
you haven't substantiated, and b) something that you started.  You are
guilty of making false charges, or would you prefer the label of liar?

>>>Notice that, rather than offer any evidence for his original allegation,
>>>the prattling racist is _still_ attempting to divert the discussion.
>>>
>>There must first be an original allegation for me to attempt diverting from.
>
>See above. Notice that the prattling racist _still_ hasn't offered any
>evidence for his original allegation.
>
And just what evidence should that be?

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Mon Jan 13 13:00:13 PST 1997
Article: 55671 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.axionet.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!205.252.116.190!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: White folks too dumb for freedom of religion. Was Re: A tweleveth question for the proponents of a white nation
Date: 10 Jan 1997 10:07:06 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 77
Message-ID: <5b60ga$67a@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <5ap2lm$dcl@lex.zippo.com> <852626912snz@augur.demon.co.uk> <5aun01$iem@lex.zippo.com> <5b0vq8$j15@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5b204f$21h@lex.zippo.com> <32d83590.5857956@news.atlcom.net> <5b3koc$cdj@lex.zippo.com> <32ddc55f.42677940@news.atlcom.net> <5b4neg$27r@lex.zippo.com> <32d6062f.4060216@news.atlcom.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port888-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <32d6062f.4060216@news.atlcom.net>, dckom@atlcom.net says...
>
>On 9 Jan 1997 22:26:24 -0800 c.e., Ourobouros wrote :
>>In article <32ddc55f.42677940@news.atlcom.net>, dckom@atlcom.net says...
>>>
>>>On 9 Jan 1997 12:34:20 -0800 c.e., Ourobouros wrote :
>>>>In article <32d83590.5857956@news.atlcom.net>, dckom@atlcom.net says...
>>>
>>>
>>>>>	Sounds like what you're saying is that white folks are just too dumb
>>>>>to not automatically follow any "enigmatic" charlatan that stumbled down
>>>>>the pike equiped with smoke and mirrors.
>>>>>
>>>>Leaders lead, followers follow.  It has nothing to do with intelligence.  I
>>>>guess you are too dumb to realize that.
>>>
>>>Leaders lead, followers follow, and free people choose for themselves. But
>>>then, your politics isn't about freedom, is it?
>>
>	Major crap cropping.
>
Shows your the heights of your intellectual prowess more likely.  Why was it
crap?

>>For one thing; *my* politics will trust its citizens with weapons, howbeit,
>>I can guarantee yours does not,
> 
>How wrong you would be! What do I get for claiming on your guarantee?
>Grab a clue from my .sig, wormie, I'm an anarchist.
>
Amusing.  Time will tell on this.

>>*my* politics will trust its citizens with
>>how they want to bring up their children,
>
>unless they wanted to raise them with knowledge of the full range of human
>culture. 
>
If they want to bring up their children as Negroes, I have no problem with
that, it wouldn't get them very far in life I will add, but they have that
choice.

>> *my* politics will trust its
>>citizens that they won't need affirmative action type programs,
>
>	Seems to me like a "white nation" would be little les then the world's
>biggest affirmative action program. Can't have white boys competing fairly,
>now can we?

Since the white nation will have only whites, what are you trying to say?

>> *my* politics will trust independent-of-the-government-militias.
>
>Show me a national socialist, or fascist regime that allowed such a thing.
>Party militia's in a one party state don't count.
>
Am I a national socialist, fascist, or neither?

>> *My* politics will trust its citizens with what they say, that censorship need not ever be an issue.
>
>Would I, as a anti-racist "white" boy, have the same rights of free
>expression that say, Dr. Pierce has under the current conditions?
>
I have already answered this.

>> The only areas that they might not be trusted on are tax 
>>collections and honesty in buying and selling (which includes patents and
>>copyright.)  *My* politics will stand behind its citizens.
>
>	With the classic secret policeman's pistol, no doubt.

The secret service will primarily be interested in the external as opposed
to the internal.  Monitoring for traitors, foreign spies, etc., is simply
a matter of functioning.

Ourobouros.
 


From Ourobouros Mon Jan 13 20:42:31 PST 1997
Article: 92745 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!hookup!news.sprintlink.net!news-dc-2.sprintlink.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!dciteleport.com!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ATTN: Mr. K. McVay
Date: 11 Jan 1997 19:11:33 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <5b9kp5$sci@lex.zippo.com>
References: <5b4r43$43u@lex.zippo.com> <32D7B628.464A@nbnet.nb.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port810-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <32D7B628.464A@nbnet.nb.ca>, Keith says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>> 
>> Would you please remove all of my posts off your site?
>> 
>> Your cooperation would be appreciated.
>
>What's the matter, your ignorance smacking you in the face?
>
Quite frankly, Mr. Morrison, that is none of your business.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Mon Jan 13 21:09:57 PST 1997
Article: 92752 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!hunter.premier.net!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc-e!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ATTN: Mr. K. McVay
Date: 13 Jan 1997 11:53:17 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <5be3rd$hro@lex.zippo.com>
References: <5b4r43$43u@lex.zippo.com> <32D6F755.6101@ibm.net> <5b9l07$sgp@lex.zippo.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port826-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article , mvanalst@rbi.com says...
>
>In article <5b9l07$sgp@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros wrote:
>
>> In article <32D6F755.6101@ibm.net>, Gord says...
>> >
>> >Ourobouros wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> Would you please remove all of my posts off your site?
>> >
>> >No.
>> > 
>> You are not Mr. K. McVay so the choice is not yours to make.
>> 
>> >> Your cooperation would be appreciated.
>> >
>> >Tough nookies.  You posted it--you toast it.  Life's a bitch.
>> >
>> Are you suggesting that I hack into Nizkor's database and remove them 
>> myself?
>> 
>> That's not a bad idea...
>
>
>Er, yes, it _is_ a bad idea, Mr. self-eater. A _very_ bad idea. In fact,
>it is a _criminal_ idea. 
>
It is not a criminal idea in New Zealand.  I am quite free to enter McVay's
site and do whatever I feel like to McVay's site, from New Zealand.  This
includes destroying or modifying his files.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Mon Jan 13 22:34:42 PST 1997
Article: 92753 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!panix!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc-e!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ATTN: Mr. K. McVay
Date: 13 Jan 1997 11:56:34 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <5be41i$ht3@lex.zippo.com>
References: <5b4r43$43u@lex.zippo.com> <01bbffe9$4bfcc460$4c7213cc@server> <5b9kkm$s9c@lex.zippo.com>  <5bbiaj$j59@lex.zippo.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port826-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article , mvanalst@rbi.com says...
>
>In article <5bbiaj$j59@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros wrote:
>
>> In article , joelr@winternet.com says...
>> >
>> >In article <5b9kkm$s9c@lex.zippo.com> Ourobouros writes:
>> >
>> >>Apparently Mr. K. McVay respects the law, so theoretically he should heed 
>> >>my request.
>> >
>> >>Ourobouros.
>> >
>> >You're leaving out a step.  Please demonstrate that it is illegal under 
>> >either US or Canadian law to keep an accurate archives of your public
>> >postings contrary to your wishes.  Case law, please; your personal 
>> >interpretations of statutes aren't of interest.  
>> >
>> Copyright.
>
>Fair Use: 
>
>http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ21
>
A quote from the above site:
 
 "Although the courts have considered and ruled upon the fair use
 doctrine over and over again, no real definition of the concept
 has ever emerged. Indeed, since the doctrine is an equitable rule
 of reason, no generally applicable definition is possible, and
 each case raising the question must be decided on its own facts."

Your fair use argument just went down the toilet.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Tue Jan 14 03:02:48 PST 1997
Article: 55716 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.magg.net!news.one.se!mcevans.tip.net.!newsfeed.tip.net!newsfeed.sunet.se!news00.sunet.se!sunic!mn6.swip.net!plug.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc-e!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: A tweleveth question for the proponents of a white nation
Date: 13 Jan 1997 11:11:47 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 161
Message-ID: <5be1dj$g99@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <5ap2lm$dcl@lex.zippo.com> <852626912snz@augur.demon.co.uk> <5aun01$iem@lex.zippo.com> <5b0vq8$j15@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5b204f$21h@lex.zippo.com> <5b36l0$es@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5b3orj$ekh@lex.zippo.com> <5b5g6q$q9t@news1.ucsd.edu> <5b625f$7g9@lex.zippo.com> <5bdaqd$4qn@news1.ucsd.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port826-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <5bdaqd$4qn@news1.ucsd.edu>, fledgist@weber.ucsd.edu says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>: In article <5b5g6q$q9t@news1.ucsd.edu>, fledgist@weber.ucsd.edu says...
>: >
>: >Ourobouros wrote:
>: >: In article <5b36l0$es@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura says...
>: >: >
>: >: >Ourobouros wrote:
>: >: >
>: >: >[...]
>: >: >
>: >: >>As usual, Colleen, you don't understand the reply.  If an enigmatic figure rose
>: >: >>to the occasion, and he had the will and determination to have an official
>: >: >>religion then he would install an official religion, if not then not.  
>: >: >
>: >: >>Does Colleen understand now?
>: >: >
>: >: >So you are saying that what religion(s) would be permissible are entirely
>: >: >up to the dictator's whims.  So you are saying that there may or may not
>: >: >be religious freedom.  Which means that there isn't.  And you moan about
>: >: >people being told what they "must believe" in the era of political
>: >: >correctness!!!!
>: >: >
>: >: I'm being bluntly honest.  It wouldn't matter whether it were a racial
>: >: regime or not, concerning religion.
>: >
>: >: Religion and law making are so intertwined it isn't funny.  Btw, just 
>: >: because there is an official religion doesn't necessarily mean a lack of
>: >: religious freedom.  Both Canada and the U.S.A are officially (protestant)
>: >: Christian nations, whether you like it or lump it, and yet there is 
>: >
>: >
>: >Would you cite the official documents which declare Canada and the
>: >United States to be '(protestant) Christian nations'.  Nothing in
>: >either the United States Constitution nor the Canadian Constitution
>: >Act declares any religion or sect to have official status.
>: >
>: Curious, how would you describe the primary religion of the U.S. or Canada,
>: or are you simply stirring shit?
>
>As the religion with the largest number of adherents (or of the
>majority, if that happened to be the case).
>
>
>: >You really don't understand what 'official' means.
>: >
>: Uh huh.
>
>Clearly you don't.
>
Uh huh.

>
>: >
>: >
>: >: religious freedom.  Under Elizabeth I the official religion was proto-
>: >: Anglican, but other Christian religions were permissible.  Similar 
>: >
>: >'Proto-Anglican'? The Anglican church was instituted under Henry
>: >VIII, suppressed by Mary I, and restored to full status by Elizabeth
>: >I. You appear not to understand what 'proto' means either.
>: >
>: The name wasn't.
>
>Huh?
>
See below.
>
>: You are also very ignorant.
>
>: Henry VIII made a new Catholic Church with himself at the helm, instead of
>: the Pope.  His son turned that Church into a Protestant Church.  His sister
>: Mary reverted it back to Catholicism.  Elizabeth I turned it back to a
>: Protestant Church, but with Catholic trappings.
>
>Do you understand what the central point of Anglicanism is? I rather
>doubt it, given that you seem to think that it is protestantism.

Henry VIII's son Edward made it a protestant Church, his sister, Bloody
Mary, reverted is back to true Catholicism, in turn their sister Elizabeth
turned it back to a protestant Church with Catholic trappings.

The central point of the Church of England is the monarch, who is head of
the Church.

>: I used "proto" in reference to the name.  I am sorry you were too thick to
>: realise that, but I cannot help your intelligence.
>
>The name was used in the time of Henry VIII. Whatta maroon.

Prove it.  I say it is not, having studied the early Anglican church, you
say differently.  Please prove that the term "Anglican" was in use even in
Elizabeth's I time.

>: >: conditions were in Scotland, the low Countries, Sweden and Denmark (to name
>: >: a few.)  
>: >
>: >: Going back to Constantine when Christianity was first made the official
>: >: religion of the Roman Empire, other religions were permissible.  Even under 
>: >: Theodosius I when he cancelled the tax free perks to the pagan temples
>: >: there was still religious freedom.
>: >
>: >Really? This explains the closing of the schools.
>
>: Pagan temples became unprofitable if thats what you mean, but Pagans still
>: existed.  They used private residences instead of temples.  It also brings
>: up another interesting point, his predecessor, Julian, was the last Pagan
>: Emperor of Rome.  Under his brief rule Neo-platoism became the official
>: religion, but Christians, persay, weren't persecuted.
>
>I was talking about the closing of the schools, not pagan temples.

Schools tended to be associated with temples.  Don't you know anything?

>: Please be sure to understand what Theodosius authorised and what various
>: people (Christians) actually did.
>
>: >: For the brief flare of Kingdom of Sicily in the 12th century, the official 
>: >: religion was Roman Catholicism, but religious freedom was granted to 
>: >: Muslims -- btw, Sicily is your only successful multi-cultural state (for 
>: >: about 50 years anyway, before it became another nothing state.)
>: >
>: >Really? I would have thought that the Emirate (and Caliphate) of
>: >Co'rdoba qualified, not to mention dozens of other political
>: >entities throughout recent history. (BTW, there were no states
>: >before the 16th century -- not in Europe and the Mediterranean at
>: >any rate.)
>
>: There were states before the 16th century, despite your protest that there
>: weren't.  You had the Papal states for example.  I think the word you are
>: scrabbling for is "nation."
>
>No. The state is  a clearly defined entity (and the 'States of the
>Church' didn't fit that definition -- far too decentralised), so is
>the nation (and the one is not necessarily connected to the other).
>: Explain how Co'rdoba (in Spain) grew multi-culturally.
>
>I suggest you consult some histories.
>
I have examined Spanish history before, including Co'rdoba, and fail to see 
how it grew multiculturally.  Please prove that Co'rdoba grew
multiculturally.

>: >: It also must be remembered that while Christianity was the official religion
>: >: of Europe, Jewry was permissible, even though (at times) all the classes
>: >: (lower, middle, and upper) despised Jews.
>: >
>: >Do you know the difference between 'Jewry' and 'Judaism'?
>: >
>: I meant Jewry as in the entire lump, not a facet of it.  Are you thick or
>: something?
>
>Do you know the difference between 'Jewry' and 'Judaism'?
>
Judaism is the coined term by Flavius Josephus who used the term to 
distinguish their religion against the Hellenistic religion.  Jewry refers
to the whole lump; religion and people.

Ourobouros.



From Ourobouros Tue Jan 14 10:11:33 PST 1997
Article: 92815 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.InterGate.BC.CA!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!winternet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!mindspring!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ATTN: Mr. K. McVay
Date: 13 Jan 1997 18:36:14 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <5bereu$311@lex.zippo.com>
References: <5b4r43$43u@lex.zippo.com> <32D6F755.6101@ibm.net> <5b9l07$sgp@lex.zippo.com> <32D9AC6E.2629@nbnet.nb.ca> <5bci1m$8ts@lex.zippo.com> <5bdmnp$hbl@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port860-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <5bdmnp$hbl@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>>If Canada does indeed have this extradition treaty then perhaps I can
>>continue to press the NZ Privacy Act which makes it illegal for McVay to 
>>make public anything about me without my permission (including anything I 
>>write.)  
>
>Nizkor does not make anything public about you which you have not first
>made public yourself, by posting it to usenet, Twinkletoes.
>
Recording what I write (or speak) and making it public without my 
permission is illegal (at least in NZ).  This, btw, even includes the name.
I can quite literally take a Radio to court if it mentions my name for 
something as simple as a birthday call.  I can also claim copyright on what 
I write to UseNet, and to hell with "fair use" because it isn't definable.  

If I make a public speech, I can still make that speech copyright.

McVay does not have my permission to record and make public what I write, 
nothing more, nothing less.  Nor will I grant him that permission.

If McVay is a law-abiding man then he will comply, if he doesn't then it
shows his contempt for the law.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Tue Jan 14 10:11:34 PST 1997
Article: 92825 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!clicnet!news.clic.net!news.bconnex.net!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ATTN: Mr. K. McVay
Date: 12 Jan 1997 01:57:39 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 107
Message-ID: <5bacij$cs1@lex.zippo.com>
References: <5b4r43$43u@lex.zippo.com> <01bbffe9$4bfcc460$4c7213cc@server> <5ba1n0$hae@access5.digex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port1554-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <5ba1n0$hae@access5.digex.net>, mstein@access5.digex.net says...
>
>In article <01bbffe9$4bfcc460$4c7213cc@server>,
>Anthony Sabatini  wrote:
>>Ourobouros wrote in article <5b4r43$43u@lex.zippo.com>...
>>> Would you please remove all of my posts off your site?
>>> 
>>> Your cooperation would be appreciated.
>>> 
>>> Ourobouros.
>>> 
>>
>>Ha! Forget it, Ourobouros. These guys at Nizkor believe that have a moral,
>>ethical and legal right to archive information in such a manner that can
>>easily lead messages to be misconstrued and twisted as to their original
>>intent.
>>
>>I again challenge the Nizkorites to explain an easy method whereby someone
>>browsing their archives can reconstruct a thread so that someone's comments
>>have the benefit of their proper context with respect to previous messages
>>and responses.
>
>    http://www.dejanews.com
>
I am confident that Mr. Sabatini meant using the Nizkor system for 
constructing threads, not an external entity such as dejanews.

>
>>AFAIK, the purpose of this archive is the equivalent of having a sword over
>>your head. It exists as an implied threat so they can use your own words
>>against you (twisted and deformed, of course!).
>
>    Really?  Perhaps you can produce just one example of how the archives
>have ever been used in a way that distorts the true meaning of the
>original words.
>
I gave an example some months ago with Laura Finsten's contorted reply to
a post of mine.  McVay has it specially referenced for viewers of Nizkor.
Mrs. Finsten delibrately misconstrued my words to mean something that she
wanted it to mean, nothing more, nothing less.

>    It is true that your own words can be used against you.  The real
>question is whether they are used fairly.  If you deny saying something,
>the archive can be used to prove you did.  If you tell a lie, the archive
>can be used to prove you did.  Do you see something wrong with using the
>archive to prove something which is in fact true?  Of course, you may also
>use it in your defense if someone claims you said something which you did
>not.
>
The archives are used for malevolence as the example above indicates.  The
biggest problem with the Nizkor database is that they lack context.  Few
posts make sense when isolated as McVay delibrately records.

>
>>With it, they give the
>>impression that Big Brother is watching, so you'd better be careful what
>>you say.
>
>    I am careful what I say no matter who is or isn't watching.  I happen
>to think that I ought only to say those things I am not ashamed to say,
>and would not be afraid to defend.
>
Your written word is your property, not somebody elses.  Does Mr. K. McVay
have the legal right to record what people write and keep them for public
viewing without the author's permission?
>
>>I find this totally despicable and reprehensible, not to mention
>>dishonest. (But don't worry, I am trying to give them a taste of their own
>>medicine, using their own quotes from DejaNews in an attempt to show them
>>what they are doing. I urge others to follow suit.)
>
>    But who is doing what you've been doing with DejaNews?  You _have_
>taken things out of context.  The archives are there in full context - the
>_potential_ for abuse is there, but then it's there in privately-saved
>posts as well.  However, what you are doing is showing people (including
>me) what we _could_ be doing if we were dishonest.  Find me one example of
>where someone you did it to _actually_ did it - that is, quoted something
>of yours out of context in a way which distorted the meaning.
>
Nizkor's archives are not there in their full context (v.supr).

>    You do know the difference between "are" and "could be," do you not?
>
>
>>Of course, the Nizkorites will feign ignorance
>
>    My ignorance is not feigned.  I am genuinely unaware of anyone
>involved with Nizkor taking words out of context deliberately.  As I said
>once before, if you have such examples, let me know.  I will have very
>strong words with whoever is responsible.  But as I also said before, you
>should really provide sufficient context in your posts, and DejaNews
>already provides a backup server to read threads from.
>
You are not familiar with Mr. Brown and Mrs. Finsten then are you?

[snip]

>>In any case, can someone at Nizkor explain
>>this apparent oversight?
>
>    Ken McVay will have to do that, since he set up the names.
>
That presents a bit of a problem.  On Mr. McVay's past record, he will not
do any such thing, as he avoids any debate that involves himself.

Ourobouros.



From Ourobouros Tue Jan 14 10:21:16 PST 1997
Article: 55731 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.InterGate.BC.CA!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!winternet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: A tweleveth question for the proponents of a white nation
Date: 13 Jan 1997 17:28:32 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <5beng0$kk@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <5ap2lm$dcl@lex.zippo.com> <852626912snz@augur.demon.co.uk> <5aun01$iem@lex.zippo.com> <5b0vq8$j15@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5b204f$21h@lex.zippo.com> <5b36l0$es@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5b3orj$ekh@lex.zippo.com> <5b5g6q$q9t@news1.ucsd.edu> <5b625f$7g9@lex.zippo.com> <5bb5hi$cm4@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5bbhdk$ifj@lex.zippo.com> <5bdm68$hbl@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port860-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <5bdm68$hbl@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>>In article <5bb5hi$cm4@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura says...
>
>>>Ourobouros wrote:
>>>>In article <5b5g6q$q9t@news1.ucsd.edu>, fledgist@weber.ucsd.edu says...
>
>[...]
>
>
>>>>Curious, how would you describe the primary religion of the U.S. or Canada,
>>>>or are you simply stirring shit?
>
>>>>>You really don't understand what 'official' means.
>
>>>>Uh huh.
>
>>>You have just demonstrated the point Fragano and I were making: that you
>>>don't understand what an "official (state) religion" is.  Thank you.
>
>>Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the US
>>are Western nations.
>
>In the first sentence in this post (your words), you ask "how would you describe
>the *primary* religion of the U.S. or Canada..." (emphasis added).  Are you
>using the word "primary" to mean "most prevalent"?  If so, would you please
>explain how this equates with "official" which, in my book, has a quite
>different meaning?  If you are not using the word "primary" to mean "most
>prevalent" in this context, would you kindly explain what it is intended
>to mean here?  Then you might go on to explain what describing Australia,
>Canada, New Zealand and the U.S. as western nations has to do with your
>assertion in an earlier post that Canada and the U.S. are officially 
>protestant Christian countries.
>
Aren't you going to guess why they're called Western nations first?

>[...]
>
>>>You really do sound astonishingly like Colin McKinstry.  You should look
>>>him up, the two of you can fight over which of you will be supreme
>>>dictator of the universe when you get your white dreamland.
>
>>All right.  Why do I sound astonishingly like Colin McKinstry?
>
>I don't know.  Since you have the most patronising tone and tortured
>prose of any poster I've read on this newsgroup, I find the coincidences
>rather astonishing.
>
Let me see; you don't know, but you do know?

I can tell you are applying logic to the scenerio.

>>Have I voiced opinion that I want to be the supreme dictator of the 
>>universe, has this Colin McKinstry voiced such an opinion?
>
>No, merely my inference from your tone.
>
What does a meglomaniac sound like then?

Has this other person voiced his opinion as wanting to be the supreme 
dictator of the universe, or is this another assumption based on your
experiences with meglomaniacs, and can therefore say "I don't know, but I
do know what a meglomaniac's tone is like"?

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Tue Jan 14 10:21:16 PST 1997
Article: 55732 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.InterGate.BC.CA!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!n3ott.istar!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!hunter.premier.net!hammer.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: The Great Debate
Date: 13 Jan 1997 21:28:24 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <5bf5ho$943@lex.zippo.com>
References: <5bepup$22c@lex.zippo.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port888-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:55732 alt.politics.nationalism.white:43447

In article , jeff_brown@pol.com says...
>
>In article <5bepup$22c@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros wrote:
>
>>Er no.  You are claiming I need to provide evidence for whatever it was.
>>I am asking you to prove it, not to keep repeating yourself.
>
>Review the thread. Look for a post in which the prattling racist presents
>evidence for his claim. None can be found. I am not about to present his
>posts line-by-line; that is what archives such as DejaNews are for.
>
Please stop with the diversionary tactics.  Please prove why I need to 
provide evidence in the aforementioned "allegation."

>If the prattling racist is bored of hearing that he has failed to present
>evidence for his allegation, let him put a stop to it by presenting said
>evidence. He has not, and he will not.
>
v.supr.

>> [...deletia...]
>
>>[Ad hominem, plural or singular, "Brown" loses]
>
>Plural or singular, the prattling racist _still_ hasn't offered any
>evidence for his allegation. His little farce concerning "as hominem" is
>meant to distract us from that fact.
>
Er no.  One of your claims was that I was being diversionary by using ad
hominem attacks.  If I wasn't using ad hominem attacks then I wasn't being
diversionary either.  You ignored my first argument that I wasn't using
ad hominem attacks (unlike you), therefore I utilised a second argument to
prove I was not using ad hominem attacks.  Basically, you are a liar.

>> [...deletia...]
>
>>["Brown" asserts that Dene Bebbington asked two questions of me that I
>>left unanswered]
>>
>>No two questions were left unanswered then, that is my reply.  You lie once
>>more.
>
>Wrong. But I suppose I shall have to demonstrate it for those less
>familiar with his tactics:
>
>   Ah, I see, so anybody who isn't prepared to take your assertion at face
>   value and would like some evidence is pedantic? 
>
>No answer from the prattling racist.
>
>   Why do you think this, is there something special about you that 
>   we should accept whatever you tell us?
>
>No answer from the prattling racist. He lied again; no surprise there.
>
To this post I replied, therefore I can still claim that you are a liar.

>[Reference for both quotes: Dene Bebbington ;
>Subject: Re: The Great Debate; Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997; Message-ID:
>]
>
>Notice that the prattling racist _still_ hasn't offered any evidence for
>his allegation.
>
And _still_ he continues hoping that by much speaking his credibility will
rise.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Tue Jan 14 10:21:17 PST 1997
Article: 55733 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.InterGate.BC.CA!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!n3ott.istar!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!howland.erols.net!worldnet.att.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: The Great Debate
Date: 13 Jan 1997 21:27:33 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <5bf5g5$93r@lex.zippo.com>
References: <5bepup$22c@lex.zippo.com> 
NNTP-Posting-Host: port888-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:55733 alt.politics.nationalism.white:43448

In article , jeff_brown@pol.com says...
>
>In article <5bepup$22c@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros wrote:
>
>>Er no.  You are claiming I need to provide evidence for whatever it was.
>>I am asking you to prove it, not to keep repeating yourself.
>
>Review the thread. Look for a post in which the prattling racist presents
>evidence for his claim. None can be found. I am not about to present his
>posts line-by-line; that is what archives such as DejaNews are for.
>
Please stop with the diversionary tactics.  Please prove why I need to 
provide evidence in the aforementioned "allegation."

>If the prattling racist is bored of hearing that he has failed to present
>evidence for his allegation, let him put a stop to it by presenting said
>evidence. He has not, and he will not.
>
v.supr.

>> [...deletia...]
>
>>[Ad hominem, plural or singular, "Brown" loses]
>
>Plural or singular, the prattling racist _still_ hasn't offered any
>evidence for his allegation. His little farce concerning "as hominem" is
>meant to distract us from that fact.
>
Er no.  One of your claims was that I was being diversionary by using ad
hominem attacks.  If I wasn't using ad hominem attacks then I wasn't being
diversionary either.  You ignored my first argument that I wasn't using
ad hominem attacks (unlike you), therefore I utilised a second argument to
prove I was not using ad hominem attacks.  Basically, you are a liar.

>> [...deletia...]
>
>>["Brown" asserts that Dene Bebbington asked two questions of me that I
>>left unanswered]
>>
>>No two questions were left unanswered then, that is my reply.  You lie once
>>more.
>
>Wrong. But I suppose I shall have to demonstrate it for those less
>familiar with his tactics:
>
>   Ah, I see, so anybody who isn't prepared to take your assertion at face
>   value and would like some evidence is pedantic? 
>
>No answer from the prattling racist.
>
>   Why do you think this, is there something special about you that 
>   we should accept whatever you tell us?
>
>No answer from the prattling racist. He lied again; no surprise there.
>
To this post I replied, therefore I can still claim that you are a liar.

>[Reference for both quotes: Dene Bebbington ;
>Subject: Re: The Great Debate; Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997; Message-ID:
>]
>
>Notice that the prattling racist _still_ hasn't offered any evidence for
>his allegation.
>
And _still_ he continues hoping that by much speaking his credibility will
rise.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Tue Jan 14 10:21:18 PST 1997
Article: 55738 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.InterGate.BC.CA!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!winternet.com!visi.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: White folks too dumb for freedom of religion. Was Re: A tweleveth question for the proponents of a white nation
Date: 13 Jan 1997 17:44:41 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 79
Message-ID: <5beoe9$14i@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <5ap2lm$dcl@lex.zippo.com> <852626912snz@augur.demon.co.uk> <5aun01$iem@lex.zippo.com> <5b0vq8$j15@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5b204f$21h@lex.zippo.com> <32d83590.5857956@news.atlcom.net> <5b3koc$cdj@lex.zippo.com> <32ddc55f.42677940@news.atlcom.net> <5b4neg$27r@lex.zippo.com> <5b62g6$rg7@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5b71ck$p26@lex.zippo.com> <5bb9pf$cm4@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5bbhnd$isn@lex.zippo.com> <5bdroh$mu4@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port860-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <5bdroh$mu4@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>>In article <5bb9pf$cm4@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura says...
>
>>>Ourobouros wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>>>>Show me a society that is successful via multi-culturalism.
>
>>>I'm not exactly sure what you mean by multi-culturalism here, but I
>>>offer as an example the United States.
>
>Care to address this part of my response, Sr. Comecola?
>
The United States grew strong under isolation and therefore monocultural.
Now that she has decided to open herself up to foreign cultures and 
influences she is paying the price, and that being death.

NA Indians, Blacks and Jews paid no effective (positive) addition to the 
USA, despite their presence there.  The growth of the US was purely a White
one.  If you want to picky with which White culture, I will reply with a
middle and lower class British culture.

>>>>If you can't then my politics is more mature than yours, because it doesn't
>>>>live in fairyland.
>
>>>Too cold for fairies up here, Colin.  I notice you're whining about
>>>your posts being archived by Nizkor under a pseudonym with a fake
>>>userid.  Scared somebody might eventually figure out who you actually
>>>are and hold you accountable for your publically uttered opinions?
>
>>You do live a fairy world, only someone who lives with the fairies would 
>>call me Colin.  It probably coincides with your belief in a successful
>>multi-cultural state.  What surprises me is why you have decided to call me
>>Colin, it doesn't have any explosive insulting connotations to it which
>>people like you favour.
>
>"people like me" favour appelations with "explosive insulting connotations"?
>I admit that I have, on occasion, called you Twinkletoes.  Was that
>explosively insulting?  I thought it described rather well you clumsily
>obvious evasive manoeuvres when you are backed into corners.  If this is
>not the term you were thinking of when you implied that I use names to
>insult people, perhaps you could document this smear against my good name?
>And if you are unable to do this, perhaps you would like to withdraw it?
>
What do you call "Nazi", "Racist", "Fascist", and the like, but explosive
insulting connotations?

Yes, I admit you don't normally delve into name-calling and explosive
insults, which is why I said "people like you."  Your comrades throughout
the world use them with frequent abandon.

>I call you "Colin" because you sound just like Colin McKinstry, another
>New Zealander who quit posting here shortly before you, pseudonym, fake
>userid and all, appeared.
>
How do I sound like "Colin"?  

Supposing that was his real name, why would I suddenly change to not using
that name?

Was his address valid?  If it was, why would I suddenly try to hide it?

Believe it or not, New Zealand is inhabited by more than one person.

>>Quite frankly my dear, why I want them removed is none of your business.
>
>No, it isn't.  I am interested, though, in why you would wish to spew 
>gibberish in these public fora and then turn around and whine that others
>may read it in other places.  I am also very curious how you think that
>you, a psuedonymous fake userid, can claim control over anything.  You
>don't exist, after all.  
>
The reasons will remain my own.  Your curiousity plays no bearing on my
decision.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Tue Jan 14 10:21:19 PST 1997
Article: 55739 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.InterGate.BC.CA!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!winternet.com!visi.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: The Boredom of "Brown" (was The Great Debate)
Date: 13 Jan 1997 18:10:33 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <5bepup$22c@lex.zippo.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port860-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:55739 alt.politics.nationalism.white:43455

In article , 
jeff_brown@pol.com says...
>
>In article <5be1rl$gl6@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros wrote:
>
[snip]

The Merry-Go-Round continues abated:

>>>
>>>>>Notice that the prattling racist _still_ hasn't offered any evidence 
>>>>>for his allegation.
>>>>>
>>>>Do you hope that by much speaking and repeating your words will become
>>>>valid?
>>>
>>>If the prattling racist wants to demonstrate that my words are invalid,
>>>let him cite the evidence for his assertion. Notice that he _still_ hasn't
>>>done so.
>>>
>>Er no.  You are the one making the claims.  You made them, you back them.
>
>Er no. I have made no claim requiring evidence. The prattling racist has
>made a claim for which he has yet to provide any evidence. I merely point
>this out.
>
Er no.  You are claiming I need to provide evidence for whatever it was.
I am asking you to prove it, not to keep repeating yourself.

>If the prattling racist wants to demonstrate that I am in error, let him
>cite the post containing the evidence for his assertion.
>
There is no need, many of your posts demonstrates that you are in error :-)

[Ad hominem, plural or singular, "Brown" loses]

>Pedantic, yes, but the the prattling racist is only evading the fact that
>he has yet to provide any evidence for his allegation.
>
What fact?

["Brown" repeating himself snipped]

["Brown" asserts that Dene Bebbington asked two questions of me that I
left unanswered]

No two questions were left unanswered then, that is my reply.  You lie once
more.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Tue Jan 14 10:21:20 PST 1997
Article: 55740 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.InterGate.BC.CA!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!winternet.com!visi.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: A tweleveth question for the proponents of a white nation
Date: 13 Jan 1997 17:49:23 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <5beon3$1fa@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <5ap2lm$dcl@lex.zippo.com> <852626912snz@augur.demon.co.uk> <5aun01$iem@lex.zippo.com> <5b0vq8$j15@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5b204f$21h@lex.zippo.com> <5b36l0$es@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5b3orj$ekh@lex.zippo.com> <5b5g6q$q9t@news1.ucsd.edu> <5b625f$7g9@lex.zippo.com> <5bb5hi$cm4@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5bbhdk$ifj@lex.zippo.com> <5bduf8$6ur@news1.ucsd.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port860-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <5bduf8$6ur@news1.ucsd.edu>, fledgist@weber.ucsd.edu says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>: In article <5bb5hi$cm4@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura says...
>: >
>: >Ourobouros wrote:
>: >>In article <5b5g6q$q9t@news1.ucsd.edu>, fledgist@weber.ucsd.edu says...
>: >
>: >[...]
>: >
>: >>>Would you cite the official documents which declare Canada and the
>: >>>United States to be '(protestant) Christian nations'.  Nothing in
>: >>>either the United States Constitution nor the Canadian Constitution
>: >>>Act declares any religion or sect to have official status.
>: >
>: >>Curious, how would you describe the primary religion of the U.S. or Canada,
>: >>or are you simply stirring shit?
>: >
>: >>>You really don't understand what 'official' means.
>: >
>: >>Uh huh.
>: >
>: >You have just demonstrated the point Fragano and I were making: that you
>: >don't understand what an "official (state) religion" is.  Thank you.
>: >
>: Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the US
>: are Western nations.
>
>True, but of absolutely no relevance to what was said hitherto.
>
Not so.
>
>: Why are they called "west."
>
>Because of their geographical relationship to the 'Middle East'.
>
Okay, please explain Australia, New Zealand are called Western nations (they
are more East than West).

Please explain why African countries aren't called Western.  

>
>: >You really do sound astonishingly like Colin McKinstry.  You should look
>: >him up, the two of you can fight over which of you will be supreme
>: >dictator of the universe when you get your white dreamland.
>: >
>: All right.  Why do I sound astonishingly like Colin McKinstry?
>
>Identity.

Explain.

>: Have I voiced opinion that I want to be the supreme dictator of the 
>: universe, has this Colin McKinstry voiced such an opinion?
>
>No, but neither of you is articled.

Explain.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Tue Jan 14 16:32:34 PST 1997
Article: 92897 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!news.aloha.net!svr1.pdx.gstis.net!zinger.callamer.com!news1.crl.com!nexp.crl.com!newshost.cyberramp.net!news-in.iadfw.net!newsfeed.gte.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-fw-12.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-pull.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ATTN: Mr. K. McVay
Date: 10 Jan 1997 23:39:12 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <5b7g30$4hj@lex.zippo.com>
References: <5b4r43$43u@lex.zippo.com>  <5b74un$8df@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port1666-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <5b74un$8df@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca>, kmcvay@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca says...
>
>In article , 
>joelr@winternet.com (Joel Rosenberg) wrote:
>
>[Mr. McKinstry asked]
>
As I have told Laura, I am not Mr. McKinstry, Colin, Sr. Comecola or any
other name you so desire to make up (unless of course you get flukey).

>   "Would you please remove all of my posts off your site?"
>
>>I can't speak for Ken, but I can probably anticipate his answer:
>>Nope.  
>
>Darned good guess... have you considered a career as a psychic,
>Mr. Rosenberg?
>
And why won't you fulfil this request of mine, Mr. K. McVay?

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Sat Jan 18 18:23:46 PST 1997
Article: 56191 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.axionet.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!204.73.178.14!visi.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: Question #6 To Proponets Of Multicultural Socities.
Date: 13 Jan 1997 11:01:45 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 152
Message-ID: <5be0qp$g4e@lex.zippo.com>
References: <5b0lqa$9et@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com> <5b2n9k$5jg@gyda.ifi.uio.no> <32D5B81E.7612@provide.net> <5bajnv$fdg@gyda.ifi.uio.no> <5bbeab$gdo@lex.zippo.com> <5bd7fa$64d@gyda.ifi.uio.no>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port826-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:56191 alt.politics.nationalism.white:44036

In article <5bd7fa$64d@gyda.ifi.uio.no>, christop@ifi.uio.no says...
>
>
>In article <5bbeab$gdo@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros writes:
>> In article <5bajnv$fdg@gyda.ifi.uio.no>, christop@ifi.uio.no says...
>> >In article <32D5B81E.7612@provide.net>, James Doemer  writes:
>> >> Christopher Henrik Lund wrote:
>> >> > In article <5b0lqa$9et@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com>, Jeff  writes:
>> >> > > What "things" have to occur before even you say that
>> >> > > multicultural societies are not going to work?
>> >> > Please explain how a multiculteral society could fail to work if there is no
>> >> > bigotry involved.
>> >> Because a multicultural societey completely free of bigotry has not yet 
>> >> been acheived, there is no such thing
>> >
>> >That's plain wrong. Ever been to a university campus? Here in Oslo, we have 30
>> >-40 000 students. The majority are Norwegians, but we also have some fairly
>> >large contigents of Iranians, Pakistanis, Vietnamese, Chinese (lots of them),
>> >and quite a few students from various central African nations. The integration
>> >is not perfect, due to linguistic problems, so many of these people stick with
>> >others with the same background. But those who have lived here for some years
>> >are fairly well integrated. They speak Norwegian (or English) well enough to
>> >communicate with people with different backgrounds, and work with them on a
>> >daily basis. I've been working/socializing with people from Iran, Pakistan,
>> >China, Taiwan, Korea, and ...India? (I never asked). Both my brothers studied 
>> >in the US. Both have married non-"white" women.
>> 
>> Note: common language.
>
>Well, that does make it easier to communicate, doesn't it?
>
Ah, but multiculturalism dictates multiple languages.

>>  Why do they have to speak Norwegian?
>
>English works just fine too.
>
*sigh*

>>  If all 
>> cultures are equal then all languages involved with those cultures are
>> equal.
>
>Sure, but when living among people who speak a different language than one's
>own, one should learn to speak that language. My mother lived in China for
>five years. So she learned to speak Mandarin. Not fluently, but well enough to
>communicate with the locals.
>
>>  IOW they don't have to speak Norwegian at all.
>
>If they want to communicate with Norwegians they do.
>
Er no.  Multiculturalism dictates that all cultures have their say, if they
have to speak Norwegian, well that is not multiculturalism in its highest
form.  No, Norwegians will have to learn the other cultures languages.

>> You are also using an artificial environment to make a point.
>
>Why is this an artifical environment?
>
An University.  This is not community living, the workplace, etc.  
  
>You're reaching, Ouro.
>
sez you.

>	[I use Egypt as an example of a multi"racial" society, and predict
>	 complaints from Ouro]
>
>> Yes I will complain.
>
>I knew you would.
>
>>  Egypt grew monocultural and fell multicultural.
>
>Sez you.
>
Sez I.

>>  You
>> expect that if another race is present then you have a case of 
>> multiculturalism.
>
>The only race present was the human race, Ouro.
>
*sigh*

"the human race" means you are isolating and identifying one particular
human race, which one do you mean?

>Well, they kept livestock.
>
Which is typical of civilised people.

>> Nothing could me further from the truth.  In you above
>> example with the University, Norway is the dominant culture, and all other
>> cultures have to play by Norway's rules and regulations.  That is not
>> multiculturalism.  That is monoculturalism imposing its will on other
>> cultures.
>
>No. People have to adjust to one another. And when someone moves to an area
>with a different culture, that someone will have to make concessions when
>his/her culture conflicts with that of the locals. That is not the same as
>abandoning his/her culture, it means making adjustments. Do you understand the
>difference? The locals, on the other hand, are likely to take up parts of this
>someone's culture. Thus, you get Chinese resteraunts, jazz music, porcelain,
>silk, and so on. The result is a mutual culteral enrichment. I can't begin to
>tell you how bland and boring the Norwegian cuisine was before we started
>getting immigrants.
>
Phooey.

>I suspect the entire paragraph went over your head. Oh well.
>
All you have shown is that Norwegians have been picky and choosy about
other cultures.  Do Norwegians eat rat, cat, dog and anything else that
crawls as per Chinese delicacies?

Do you allow Chinamen do eat cats that they been run over by a car?

>> It is true that from around 700 B.C. Egypt became a multicultural society,
>> and it should also be known that was the last time Egypt was ever strong.
>
>Sez you.
>
Sez I.

>> >Every time you see people from different cultures living and working together,
>> >you're looking at an example of successful multiculteralism. A group of
>> >friends with different skin color. "Mixed" marriages. Etc, etc.
>> >You have to remember that the US is not *one* culture, but a basket full of 
>> >different cultures. And because many of these cultures involve bigotry and 
>> >hatred (such as yours), there is trouble.
>> >
>> Er no.  The US is still predominantly mono-cultural.  It grew mono-
>> culturally, and is dying multi-culturally.
>
>You've never been to the US, have you? I've lived there for *years*. The US is
>not monocultural, and it never was. Even pre-Columbian America was not
>monoculteral. Stop talking about things you don't know anything about.
>
*sigh*

Pre-Columbian American: 
 1. No United States.
 2. No all encompassing American Empire.

Therefore it makes sense it wasn't monocultural.  Stop grasping at straws.

The US used to be highly monocultural.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Sat Jan 18 18:23:46 PST 1997
Article: 56192 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.axionet.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!205.252.116.190!feed1.news.erols.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: An apology
Date: 13 Jan 1997 10:44:39 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <5bdvqn$fb7@lex.zippo.com>
References: <5b7dd4$318@lex.zippo.com> <5bdavk$4qn@news1.ucsd.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port826-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <5bdavk$4qn@news1.ucsd.edu>, fledgist@weber.ucsd.edu says...
>
>Ourobouros wrote:
>: I apologise for the multiple posts (of mine) on apw-p, sorry for any 
>: inconvenience they may have caused.  Newserver played up.
>
>A bad workman blames his tools.
>
Ah, so that's why they call you a wanker.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Mon Jan 20 15:41:30 PST 1997
Article: 93753 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.InterGate.BC.CA!n1van.istar!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!news.sgi.com!enews.sgi.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.flame.dan.gannon.nazi.scum,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Contemptuous of trash? Only on my _good_ days.
Date: 16 Jan 1997 11:05:53 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 73
Message-ID: <5blu6h$ge0@lex.zippo.com>
References: <32CDAA4A.6414@phoenix.net> <5bf2af$ga7@freenet-news.carleton.ca> <5bjq2i$t1t@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca> <5bk11d$90@lex.zippo.com> <5blhsp$s22@scoop.eco.twg.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port1672-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:44311 alt.politics.white-power:56413 alt.flame.dan.gannon.nazi.scum:159 alt.revisionism:93753

In article <5blhsp$s22@scoop.eco.twg.com>, chall@eco.twg.com says...
>
>In article <5bk11d$90@lex.zippo.com>,   wrote:
>
>[Article by Mr. McVay, deleted.]
>
>>As we can easily tell, McVay is full of hatred and a bigot.  Question is, why
>>is McVay hateful and bigotted towards "deniers" and white separatists?
>
>Well, it's my understanding that "bigotry" can only be used to
>describe an *irrational* dislike. It would certainly seem strange
>to hear someone talk about "bigotry towards murderers". After all,
>it's easy to see that murderers cause harm, and so it's clearly 
>rational to disapprove of their actions.
>
Are murderers bigots?  If they are not then your analogy is feeble.

>On the other hand, phrases like "bigotry against African-Americans"
>make perfect sense. If the law-abiding taxpayer living down the 
>street happens to have a different skin color than I do, then what 
>difference could that conceivably make to me? How does it harm me? 
>If I dislike him for no other reason than his skin color, then it's
>pretty clear that I'm being irrational.
>
I am talking about logical contradictions.

>So: Is it meaningful to talk about "bigotry towards white separatists?"
>Well, look at it this way: If someone proposes doing to my country
>what Hitler did to Germany, then it seems obvious that they're proposing 
>to harm me and many of my friends. Since I don't like being harmed, it's 
>clearly rational for me to condemn the person putting forth this 
>proposal.
>
What did Hitler do that was so awful to Germany?  Please bear in mind he wanted
a war in the East, not the West.  

>So I'll hope you'll agree that Mr. McVay is innocent of the charge
>of "bigotry".
>
No, I do not.  He is a bigot.  He has an irrational dislike of white 
separatists, and holocaust revisionists.  This was evidenced by his post.
>
>The question of "hateful" is more difficult. As a self-described
>Liberal, I'm not allowed to hate anyone. I have occasional lapses, 
>of course, but for the most part I only pity you. I mean, at the
>instant of your birth, you had the potential to be a decent human 
>being. But society failed you, and allowed your education to be 
>utterly botched, and now all your potential has been wasted.
>
Bah ha ha.

While I can say I haven't had the rosiest of lives, society did not fail me.
How could it fail me?  Unless, of course, you mean the influx of non-whites.

My education wasn't botched at all.  Instead I have used it to my advantage, 
and my potential grows.  What you say is utter BS.

>So, I can't hate you as an individual. I *can* hate the harm 
>that society has done to you, and the harm that you're doing
>to society in turn.
>
More BS.  You can hate me as an individual, and you probably already do.  What
harm has society done to me?  Well I could say the influx of non-white peoples,
but I doubt you would hate them, and I don't pass my time beating up non-
whites.

>I don't know if Mr. McVay sees things the same way. I suppose 
>you could ask him.
>
We would have to know if your explanation was correct first, something I 
immensely doubt.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Mon Jan 20 17:57:28 PST 1997
Article: 56419 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.InterGate.BC.CA!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!winternet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!nntp.uio.no!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!arclight.uoregon.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: White folks too dumb for freedom of religion. Was Re: A tweleveth question for the proponents of a white nation
Date: 16 Jan 1997 18:26:20 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <5bmo0c$14h@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <5ap2lm$dcl@lex.zippo.com> <852626912snz@augur.demon.co.uk> <5aun01$iem@lex.zippo.com> <5b0vq8$j15@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5b204f$21h@lex.zippo.com> <32d83590.5857956@news.atlcom.net> <5b3koc$cdj@lex.zippo.com> <32ddc55f.42677940@news.atlcom.net> <5b4neg$27r@lex.zippo.com> <5b62g6$rg7@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5b71ck$p26@lex.zippo.com> <5bb9pf$cm4@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <5bbhnd$isn@lex.zippo.com> <5bd50o$5id@gyda.ifi.uio.no>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port1696-auck.ihug.co.nz

In article <5bd50o$5id@gyda.ifi.uio.no>, christop@ifi.uio.no says...
>
>
>In article <5bbhnd$isn@lex.zippo.com>, Ourobouros writes:
>
>> You do live a fairy world, only someone who lives with the fairies would 
>> call me Colin.  It probably coincides with your belief in a successful
>> multi-cultural state.  What surprises me is why you have decided to call me
>> Colin, it doesn't have any explosive insulting connotations to it which
>> people like you favour.
>
>So what should we call you? "Pubert"?
>
>"Mr Stone"?
>
Howabout Pugnandus or Mystes Alchimia?

Either of them catch my fancy.

>What is your real name, anyway?

That would be telling, though my birth certificate doesn't contain the name
"Colin" and/or "McKinstry" if that is what you are hinting.

>Why don't you have the courage to reveal it to us?
>Because you don't really have the courage of your convictions?
>
It has nothing to do with courage.  New Zealand, under the auspices of the
United Nations is the enemy of freedom of speech.  While I am probably small
fry to big brother at the moment, who knows what the future will hold.

Pugnandus or Mystes Alchimia






From Ourobouros Mon Jan 20 17:57:29 PST 1997
Article: 56420 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.InterGate.BC.CA!n1van.istar!van.istar!west.istar!ott.istar!istar.net!winternet.com!news.minn.net!skypoint.com!newshub.tc.umn.edu!spool.mu.edu!howland.erols.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: An eleventh question for proponents of a white nation
Date: 16 Jan 1997 10:50:45 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <5blta5$fti@lex.zippo.com>
References:  <01bbfb37$df648320$77c6b7c7@default> <32d88a64.3237224@news.xensei.com> <32DA685D.597@ix.netcom.com> <5bebjc$85@orion.cybercom.net> <32DB16F9.1FD1@ix.netcom.com> <5bhnrt$m9c@orion.cybercom.net> <32DCA84C.4D40@nr.infi.net> <5bk0c2$t8s@lex.zippo.com> <32df32ad.12715298@news.atlcom.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port1672-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:56420 alt.politics.nationalism.white:44316

In article <32df32ad.12715298@news.atlcom.net>, dckom@atlcom.net says...
>
>On 15 Jan 1997 17:30:42 -0800 c.e., Ourobouros wrote :
>>In article <32DCA84C.4D40@nr.infi.net>, lazm says...
>>>
>>>The first reference in history I've found to the Aryans after a cursory 
>>>search was in 1500 B.C. in Persia.  From there they intermingled with the 
>>>Indians quite a bit and instituted the caste system.(A real winner.)  An 
>>>Indian professor has tried to trace them back even further with ancient 
>>>writings and tales and determined they most likely came from the distant 
>>>north and most probably the Siberian region.  The ancient Aryans might 
>>>even be most closely related to the AmerInds and Eskimos.
>>
>>Wrong skull shape.
>You're sure that it wasn't the petrified ear-wax that tipped you?
>
Your feeble attempt at belittling doesn't change a thing.

Ourobouros.


From Ourobouros Thu Jan 23 16:26:45 PST 1997
Article: 94137 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!noc.van.hookup.net!nic.mtl.hookup.net!rcogate.rco.qc.ca!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!portc02.blue.aol.com!news.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!super.zippo.com!zdc-e!zippo!drn
From: Ourobouros
Newsgroups: alt.skinheads,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.flame,alt.flame.dan.gannon.nazi.scum,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Contemptuous of trash? Only on my _good_ days.
Date: 15 Jan 1997 17:42:05 -0800
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 77
Message-ID: <5bk11d$90@lex.zippo.com>
References: <32CDAA4A.6414@phoenix.net> <5bbs4k$rsp@freenet-news.carleton.ca>  <5bf2af$ga7@freenet-news.carleton.ca> <5bjq2i$t1t@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: port1708-auck.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.skinheads:49969 alt.politics.nationalism.white:44640 alt.politics.white-power:56672 alt.flame:33627 alt.flame.dan.gannon.nazi.scum:166 alt.revisionism:94137

In article <5bjq2i$t1t@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca>, kmcvay@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca says...
>
>In article , crom@eskimo.com (Dana Booth) wrote:
>
>"His replies to articles originating from white seperatists or 
>revisionist individuals are contemptuous and disrespectful, highly so. 
>Yet, often, the original articles were not. Is it okay to treat with 
>contempt and disrespect those with unpopular political philosophy? I've 
>seen Ken Mcvay engage in this behavior time and time again."
>
McVay's reply is unedited to demonstrate his prejudices.

>First: There are no - repeat NO - revisionists posting to
>alt.revisionism. There are Holocaust deniers, there are racial
>supremacists, but not a single revisionist may be found.
>
>(see http://www.nizkor.org/features/revision-or-denial/)
>
>(Arno Mayer is a revisionist, and I respect him. He does not post.)
>
>Second: I reply to white separatists with contempt because I find
>their deceipts and their philosophy _beneath_ contempt, and don't
>know how to express that level of disgust.
>
>If that disturbs you, that's tough, Bucky. Get used to it, because
>it isn't going away.
>
>The constant stream of unadulterated bullshit which stems from the
>likes of Cliff Swiger, William Scott, Colin McKinstry, and their
>assorted riff-raff companions is enough to make any human being
>contemptuous.
>
>They laud the counterfeiting of American money. Let me guess - is
>that an "unpopular political philosophy" in your book, Bucky?
>
>They laud the robbery of armoured cars. Let me guess - is that an
>"unpopular political philosophy" in your book, Bucky?
>
>They laud the murder of Alan Berg. Let me guess - is that an
>"unpopular political philosophy," Bucky?
>
>They laud the terrorism facing Spokane as if it were something to
>be proud of. Let me guess - is that an "unpopular political
>philosophy," Bucky?
>
>When George Burdi signs "You just killed a kike, don't it feel
>right," is that an "unpopular political philosophy," Bucky?
>
>When nazi pinheads hide in a cellar, waiting for dying AIDS
>patients to walk past the haus, then rush out and beat them, is
>that your "unpopular political philosophy," Bucky?
>
>When William "Gutter-Mouth" Grosvenor speaks of his wish that
>human beings die a horrible and painful death, is that your idea
>of an "unpopular political philosophy," Bucky?
>
>If so, you're just another piece of human trash, pal, and that's
>exactly how you can expect to be viewed. 
>
>Trash - pure, simple, human trash. Trash has a perfect right to
>exist, right along with the rest of us, but it's still trash, it
>still reeks, and it still lives in the gutter, fit for nothing
>more than a ride in the pooper-scooper.
>
>If one choses to run with trash, one can expect contempt from the
>population to follow. If that's what you want, fine. Go for it,
>but don't expect respect from me, Bucky.
>
As we can easily tell, McVay is full of hatred and a bigot.  Question is, why
is McVay hateful and bigotted towards "deniers" and white separatists?

Waiting for the logical contradiction.

I also doubt McVay knows what the word "laud" means.

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.