Shofar FTP Archive File: people/m/mckinstry.colin/1995/mckinstry.0895
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Fri Aug 4 09:56:14 PDT 1995
Article: 24948 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.mid.net!news.dra.com!indigo.dra.com!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: McKinstry's latest lie
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 08:46:45 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 30
Message-ID:
References: <3uo8ov$7ks@agate.berkeley.edu> <1995Jul26.023318.18174@hobbes.kzoo.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
> > Hang on here, I never said parasite is defined as Jew.
>
> McKinstry, you are lying... again.
>
> In message dated Thu, 13
> Jul 1995, subject: 'Re: Talmud Teachings', you stated:
>
> > The 1950's Webster Dictionary under the heading parasite lists
> > in the definition: Jew.
>
> This is in direct contradiction to your claim quoted above, that you never
> said that parasite is defined as Jew.
>
> > It's a slang definition of parasite, not the actual definition.
>
> Again, this is in direct contradiction to your post of July 13, in which
> you stated that the definition was listed in "[t]he 1950's Webster
> Dictionary" -- generally used to determine "actual definitions".
>
> I do not expect, McKinstry, that you will either correct or explain this
> inconsistency in your statements. Do not delude yourself, however, that
> such bald-faced lies go unnoticed.
>
Jeffrey, I take it that you ignored the context. Yes you can edit what I
wrote to back your argument. However the discussion was a slang meanings
of goyim, and a Jew mentioned the term Jew as filth. I notice that you
neglected to mention this. If you took my saying as non slang then you
are one that should not ever complain about illiteracy of others.
Colin.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Fri Aug 4 09:56:21 PDT 1995
Article: 24952 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.dacom.co.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ARyans in Egypt and Greece? (LOL!!) (was RE: Egypt, Greece and India)
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 09:02:17 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 153
Message-ID:
References: <3vledo$27m@transfer.stratus.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7131 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7288 alt.revisionism:24952
> >White supremcists, white nationalists and so forth have regularly stated
> >that the ancients of these nations were Aryan/white. Some liberals
> >contest this with some sort of proof (?). I would suggest to these
> >liberals that they take a trip to a good museum and have a look at these
> >nations exhibits.
>
> Then why did the greeks write about the "Aryans"? Why did Caesar who
> was partial Greek (A roman was greek mixed in with various Italic
> tribes) write about the northern tribes (barbarians): he even identified
> them (paraphrased): "east of the rhine, they are tall in stature, light
> complexion and various hair colors, right of the rhine they are tall,
> light complexion Blonde and more barbaric than the people to the west;
> other than these features, they are almost identical as a people."
>
> Caesar was talking about the ancient "Celts" and the various "Germanic"
> tribes. The Celts occupied Northern Italy, France and Iberia (Spain)
> The Germanics were east of the Rhine River; the Slavs were to the east
> of the Germanics.
>
> Now, this is clear evidence that the ARyans were not the Greeks, because
> in order for them to be Greek, they would have had to also have been
> Roman.
>
> Various ARyan tribes, when hungry, used to attack towns in Greece.
>
> You can't get around that. Greek history gives us information about
> the ARyans. Who wrote it? Another group of ARyans, who described
> the Aryans as being "different"?????
>
Greeks were sandy haired. Romans also described the Germans as different
yet the early Romans were the same. Some Roman Catholic monks did similar
to the Vikings (during their raiding periods).
> >Having just been around Auckland's War Museum (26/07/1995). I will now
> >share the results. First the Egyptian exhibit. On centre stage we have a
> >female mummy. On the lid we have a sculpture of her face. Thin lips,
> >high cheek bones, long head, and more importantly pure white paint.
>
> I'd be real careful about that. There were reasons why the egyptians
> laid things out the way they did. There were reasons for almost every
> thing. From color to design etc.
>
So this is an excuse for ignoring historical evidence? Why would the most
powerful (at the time) nation want to have their progeny believe they were
white when they were Negroes? Also you should find out the Egyptian's
belief in the afterlife, it should disprove very succinctly your statement
above.
> And since when do Aryans have the market cornered with "high cheek
> bones and thin lips"?
>
lzaird believes the ancient egyptians were negro.
> Egyptian people are not "Black"; they're more mediteranian. They can
> have European features.
>
> >Then
> >there is a hieroglyph of a red skinned man before one of the animal headed
> >egyptian gods (also red skinned). Then there are the statures of either
> >red skinned people or white skinned people. Not one black (or brown)
> >stature among them and of course the flat nose and inflated lips are
> >nonexistent as well.
>
> I work with an Egyptian. She does not have "inflated lips and a flat
> nose'.
>
The current Egyptians are mongrels (ie., mixed breed).
> >Next is the greek exhibit. We have non painted statures of the greek men
> >and women (we could say Aryan but since liberals can't tell negro features
> >from Aryan features I'll move on). However the Museum possesses two
> >paintings of greek men. Which of course have pink skin and light brown
> >hair (sandy).
>
> Greeks are European. They are not Germanic, but they are white.
>
> >Lastly the Indian exhibit. There are several time periods. One of which
> >covers the Aryans. Again we have painted statures (and even a tapestry
> >from SE Asia of the Indian Aryans -- from trade links). Which of course
> >show the Aryan skin and face (white, pink or red).
>
> So because of one artist choice in color, you believe that ARyans
> were in India?
>
Do you have a better meaning? It seems very good evidence for proof that
they were fair and not dark. Why would they want the world to now that
such a powerful nation was white when they were dark?
> Maybe the color had other meaning? Have you thought of that? Maybe
> the artist wasn't a racist.
>
Maybe the artists were painting the everyday person.
> >Somehow I doubt this will convince the liberals, so I suggest you do your
> >own tour of a Museum.
>
> It wouldn't even convince a Libertarian like myself.
>
> >Though even after this I can expect lzaird to
> >continue to believe in Negro (sorry, Sub Saharan) high civilization of
> >Egypt.
>
> I would not classify Egyptians as "Negro". I think the closest
> articulation would be "mediteranian".
>
lzaird's beliefs again.
> >Which indicates the level of intelligence lzaird has attained.
>
> Of course, you couldn't show the readership how this indicates
> any level of intellect, could you?
>
No, but your reply indicates your own. You're a parrot that has never
bothered to examine evidence. You only believe some charismatic figure
that tells you differently to what is actually there.
> >Of
> >course if a Museum is too much effort, a poor substitute is a good book on
> >the relevant time periods. It's a lot harder to dispute an actual exhibit
> >(though I'm sure lzaird will try).
>
> Alls I can say is "dream on".
>
Dreamers tend to be highly successful. The tend to have goals whereas
parrots don't.
> Our European ancestors (Gaul, Germania, Iberia, Brittania, Italia),
> were tribal, barbaric, and nomadic.
>
> About half were "Germanic" and the others were "Celtic". And the
> differences between these two groups is getting cloudier and cloudier
> as scientists try to reconstruct their cultures. Of course there were
> other groups in Europe: "Etruscans of Northern Italy", the "Picts" of
> Great Britain; these tribes were absorbed by either the Celts or the
> various Germanic tribes.
>
> Nobody knows anything about these ancient Europeans unless we refer to
> "Greek and Roman" literature. If it wasn't for Greek and Rome, we
> wouldn't have known anything about the Celts, Saxons, Goths, Etruscans or
> the Gauls.
>
Too bad they didn't leave any evidence, or skeletons or anything of that
nature to back up the Greek and Roman authors.
> So, to say the least, the very historical references we use to find
> information on the ARyans, were written by the Greeks and Romans: a
> different culture.
>
> Your theory is flawed.
>
Too bad I looked at actual artifacts, not Greek and Roman authors.
Colin.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Fri Aug 4 10:27:51 PDT 1995
Article: 7288 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.dacom.co.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ARyans in Egypt and Greece? (LOL!!) (was RE: Egypt, Greece and India)
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 09:02:17 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 153
Message-ID:
References: <3vledo$27m@transfer.stratus.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7131 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7288 alt.revisionism:24952
> >White supremcists, white nationalists and so forth have regularly stated
> >that the ancients of these nations were Aryan/white. Some liberals
> >contest this with some sort of proof (?). I would suggest to these
> >liberals that they take a trip to a good museum and have a look at these
> >nations exhibits.
>
> Then why did the greeks write about the "Aryans"? Why did Caesar who
> was partial Greek (A roman was greek mixed in with various Italic
> tribes) write about the northern tribes (barbarians): he even identified
> them (paraphrased): "east of the rhine, they are tall in stature, light
> complexion and various hair colors, right of the rhine they are tall,
> light complexion Blonde and more barbaric than the people to the west;
> other than these features, they are almost identical as a people."
>
> Caesar was talking about the ancient "Celts" and the various "Germanic"
> tribes. The Celts occupied Northern Italy, France and Iberia (Spain)
> The Germanics were east of the Rhine River; the Slavs were to the east
> of the Germanics.
>
> Now, this is clear evidence that the ARyans were not the Greeks, because
> in order for them to be Greek, they would have had to also have been
> Roman.
>
> Various ARyan tribes, when hungry, used to attack towns in Greece.
>
> You can't get around that. Greek history gives us information about
> the ARyans. Who wrote it? Another group of ARyans, who described
> the Aryans as being "different"?????
>
Greeks were sandy haired. Romans also described the Germans as different
yet the early Romans were the same. Some Roman Catholic monks did similar
to the Vikings (during their raiding periods).
> >Having just been around Auckland's War Museum (26/07/1995). I will now
> >share the results. First the Egyptian exhibit. On centre stage we have a
> >female mummy. On the lid we have a sculpture of her face. Thin lips,
> >high cheek bones, long head, and more importantly pure white paint.
>
> I'd be real careful about that. There were reasons why the egyptians
> laid things out the way they did. There were reasons for almost every
> thing. From color to design etc.
>
So this is an excuse for ignoring historical evidence? Why would the most
powerful (at the time) nation want to have their progeny believe they were
white when they were Negroes? Also you should find out the Egyptian's
belief in the afterlife, it should disprove very succinctly your statement
above.
> And since when do Aryans have the market cornered with "high cheek
> bones and thin lips"?
>
lzaird believes the ancient egyptians were negro.
> Egyptian people are not "Black"; they're more mediteranian. They can
> have European features.
>
> >Then
> >there is a hieroglyph of a red skinned man before one of the animal headed
> >egyptian gods (also red skinned). Then there are the statures of either
> >red skinned people or white skinned people. Not one black (or brown)
> >stature among them and of course the flat nose and inflated lips are
> >nonexistent as well.
>
> I work with an Egyptian. She does not have "inflated lips and a flat
> nose'.
>
The current Egyptians are mongrels (ie., mixed breed).
> >Next is the greek exhibit. We have non painted statures of the greek men
> >and women (we could say Aryan but since liberals can't tell negro features
> >from Aryan features I'll move on). However the Museum possesses two
> >paintings of greek men. Which of course have pink skin and light brown
> >hair (sandy).
>
> Greeks are European. They are not Germanic, but they are white.
>
> >Lastly the Indian exhibit. There are several time periods. One of which
> >covers the Aryans. Again we have painted statures (and even a tapestry
> >from SE Asia of the Indian Aryans -- from trade links). Which of course
> >show the Aryan skin and face (white, pink or red).
>
> So because of one artist choice in color, you believe that ARyans
> were in India?
>
Do you have a better meaning? It seems very good evidence for proof that
they were fair and not dark. Why would they want the world to now that
such a powerful nation was white when they were dark?
> Maybe the color had other meaning? Have you thought of that? Maybe
> the artist wasn't a racist.
>
Maybe the artists were painting the everyday person.
> >Somehow I doubt this will convince the liberals, so I suggest you do your
> >own tour of a Museum.
>
> It wouldn't even convince a Libertarian like myself.
>
> >Though even after this I can expect lzaird to
> >continue to believe in Negro (sorry, Sub Saharan) high civilization of
> >Egypt.
>
> I would not classify Egyptians as "Negro". I think the closest
> articulation would be "mediteranian".
>
lzaird's beliefs again.
> >Which indicates the level of intelligence lzaird has attained.
>
> Of course, you couldn't show the readership how this indicates
> any level of intellect, could you?
>
No, but your reply indicates your own. You're a parrot that has never
bothered to examine evidence. You only believe some charismatic figure
that tells you differently to what is actually there.
> >Of
> >course if a Museum is too much effort, a poor substitute is a good book on
> >the relevant time periods. It's a lot harder to dispute an actual exhibit
> >(though I'm sure lzaird will try).
>
> Alls I can say is "dream on".
>
Dreamers tend to be highly successful. The tend to have goals whereas
parrots don't.
> Our European ancestors (Gaul, Germania, Iberia, Brittania, Italia),
> were tribal, barbaric, and nomadic.
>
> About half were "Germanic" and the others were "Celtic". And the
> differences between these two groups is getting cloudier and cloudier
> as scientists try to reconstruct their cultures. Of course there were
> other groups in Europe: "Etruscans of Northern Italy", the "Picts" of
> Great Britain; these tribes were absorbed by either the Celts or the
> various Germanic tribes.
>
> Nobody knows anything about these ancient Europeans unless we refer to
> "Greek and Roman" literature. If it wasn't for Greek and Rome, we
> wouldn't have known anything about the Celts, Saxons, Goths, Etruscans or
> the Gauls.
>
Too bad they didn't leave any evidence, or skeletons or anything of that
nature to back up the Greek and Roman authors.
> So, to say the least, the very historical references we use to find
> information on the ARyans, were written by the Greeks and Romans: a
> different culture.
>
> Your theory is flawed.
>
Too bad I looked at actual artifacts, not Greek and Roman authors.
Colin.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Fri Aug 4 10:36:24 PDT 1995
Article: 7289 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.skinheads,uk.politics
Subject: Re: Top cop blames the blacks
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 17:07:14 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 30
Message-ID:
References: <3uqvar$3sc@gwen.ibmpcug.co.uk> <806620827snz@drmac.demon.co.uk> <3v194e$emd@news.ox.ac.uk> <3vg3ms$33h@gwen.ibmpcug.co.uk> <807131643snz@drmac.demon.co.uk> <3vja8i$pef@gwen.ibmpcug.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:24957 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7289 alt.politics.white-power:7133 alt.skinheads:19068
> Duncan you seem to be on a crusade against black people.
>
> You feel that your race is superior to mine, lets not argue the point.
>
> It can so easiliy be disproved by that fact that AFRICAN students
>
> consistantly out perform, the native population at A'Level and at
>
> university by a wide margin.
>
Which country is this in? Latin America?
>
> African-Caribeans fall behind African students. They are between 15%-25%
>
> white, what does this tell me about your theory of African racial inferiority?
>
I didn't realize so many African-Caribeans had moved to Latin America.
>
> Tell me about your problems Duncan? mabey I can help you get over what ever
>
> your suffering from.
>
>
If what you are saying is correct in a civilised country then I imagine
the courses they excel in are things like African studies, Rap Music,
cross dressing, street mugging and other African strong subjects. Do they
offer courses in cannabalism?
Colin. The real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Fri Aug 4 10:42:02 PDT 1995
Article: 7131 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.dacom.co.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ARyans in Egypt and Greece? (LOL!!) (was RE: Egypt, Greece and India)
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 09:02:17 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 153
Message-ID:
References: <3vledo$27m@transfer.stratus.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7131 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7288 alt.revisionism:24952
> >White supremcists, white nationalists and so forth have regularly stated
> >that the ancients of these nations were Aryan/white. Some liberals
> >contest this with some sort of proof (?). I would suggest to these
> >liberals that they take a trip to a good museum and have a look at these
> >nations exhibits.
>
> Then why did the greeks write about the "Aryans"? Why did Caesar who
> was partial Greek (A roman was greek mixed in with various Italic
> tribes) write about the northern tribes (barbarians): he even identified
> them (paraphrased): "east of the rhine, they are tall in stature, light
> complexion and various hair colors, right of the rhine they are tall,
> light complexion Blonde and more barbaric than the people to the west;
> other than these features, they are almost identical as a people."
>
> Caesar was talking about the ancient "Celts" and the various "Germanic"
> tribes. The Celts occupied Northern Italy, France and Iberia (Spain)
> The Germanics were east of the Rhine River; the Slavs were to the east
> of the Germanics.
>
> Now, this is clear evidence that the ARyans were not the Greeks, because
> in order for them to be Greek, they would have had to also have been
> Roman.
>
> Various ARyan tribes, when hungry, used to attack towns in Greece.
>
> You can't get around that. Greek history gives us information about
> the ARyans. Who wrote it? Another group of ARyans, who described
> the Aryans as being "different"?????
>
Greeks were sandy haired. Romans also described the Germans as different
yet the early Romans were the same. Some Roman Catholic monks did similar
to the Vikings (during their raiding periods).
> >Having just been around Auckland's War Museum (26/07/1995). I will now
> >share the results. First the Egyptian exhibit. On centre stage we have a
> >female mummy. On the lid we have a sculpture of her face. Thin lips,
> >high cheek bones, long head, and more importantly pure white paint.
>
> I'd be real careful about that. There were reasons why the egyptians
> laid things out the way they did. There were reasons for almost every
> thing. From color to design etc.
>
So this is an excuse for ignoring historical evidence? Why would the most
powerful (at the time) nation want to have their progeny believe they were
white when they were Negroes? Also you should find out the Egyptian's
belief in the afterlife, it should disprove very succinctly your statement
above.
> And since when do Aryans have the market cornered with "high cheek
> bones and thin lips"?
>
lzaird believes the ancient egyptians were negro.
> Egyptian people are not "Black"; they're more mediteranian. They can
> have European features.
>
> >Then
> >there is a hieroglyph of a red skinned man before one of the animal headed
> >egyptian gods (also red skinned). Then there are the statures of either
> >red skinned people or white skinned people. Not one black (or brown)
> >stature among them and of course the flat nose and inflated lips are
> >nonexistent as well.
>
> I work with an Egyptian. She does not have "inflated lips and a flat
> nose'.
>
The current Egyptians are mongrels (ie., mixed breed).
> >Next is the greek exhibit. We have non painted statures of the greek men
> >and women (we could say Aryan but since liberals can't tell negro features
> >from Aryan features I'll move on). However the Museum possesses two
> >paintings of greek men. Which of course have pink skin and light brown
> >hair (sandy).
>
> Greeks are European. They are not Germanic, but they are white.
>
> >Lastly the Indian exhibit. There are several time periods. One of which
> >covers the Aryans. Again we have painted statures (and even a tapestry
> >from SE Asia of the Indian Aryans -- from trade links). Which of course
> >show the Aryan skin and face (white, pink or red).
>
> So because of one artist choice in color, you believe that ARyans
> were in India?
>
Do you have a better meaning? It seems very good evidence for proof that
they were fair and not dark. Why would they want the world to now that
such a powerful nation was white when they were dark?
> Maybe the color had other meaning? Have you thought of that? Maybe
> the artist wasn't a racist.
>
Maybe the artists were painting the everyday person.
> >Somehow I doubt this will convince the liberals, so I suggest you do your
> >own tour of a Museum.
>
> It wouldn't even convince a Libertarian like myself.
>
> >Though even after this I can expect lzaird to
> >continue to believe in Negro (sorry, Sub Saharan) high civilization of
> >Egypt.
>
> I would not classify Egyptians as "Negro". I think the closest
> articulation would be "mediteranian".
>
lzaird's beliefs again.
> >Which indicates the level of intelligence lzaird has attained.
>
> Of course, you couldn't show the readership how this indicates
> any level of intellect, could you?
>
No, but your reply indicates your own. You're a parrot that has never
bothered to examine evidence. You only believe some charismatic figure
that tells you differently to what is actually there.
> >Of
> >course if a Museum is too much effort, a poor substitute is a good book on
> >the relevant time periods. It's a lot harder to dispute an actual exhibit
> >(though I'm sure lzaird will try).
>
> Alls I can say is "dream on".
>
Dreamers tend to be highly successful. The tend to have goals whereas
parrots don't.
> Our European ancestors (Gaul, Germania, Iberia, Brittania, Italia),
> were tribal, barbaric, and nomadic.
>
> About half were "Germanic" and the others were "Celtic". And the
> differences between these two groups is getting cloudier and cloudier
> as scientists try to reconstruct their cultures. Of course there were
> other groups in Europe: "Etruscans of Northern Italy", the "Picts" of
> Great Britain; these tribes were absorbed by either the Celts or the
> various Germanic tribes.
>
> Nobody knows anything about these ancient Europeans unless we refer to
> "Greek and Roman" literature. If it wasn't for Greek and Rome, we
> wouldn't have known anything about the Celts, Saxons, Goths, Etruscans or
> the Gauls.
>
Too bad they didn't leave any evidence, or skeletons or anything of that
nature to back up the Greek and Roman authors.
> So, to say the least, the very historical references we use to find
> information on the ARyans, were written by the Greeks and Romans: a
> different culture.
>
> Your theory is flawed.
>
Too bad I looked at actual artifacts, not Greek and Roman authors.
Colin.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Fri Aug 4 10:42:05 PDT 1995
Article: 7133 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.skinheads,uk.politics
Subject: Re: Top cop blames the blacks
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 17:07:14 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 30
Message-ID:
References: <3uqvar$3sc@gwen.ibmpcug.co.uk> <806620827snz@drmac.demon.co.uk> <3v194e$emd@news.ox.ac.uk> <3vg3ms$33h@gwen.ibmpcug.co.uk> <807131643snz@drmac.demon.co.uk> <3vja8i$pef@gwen.ibmpcug.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:24957 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7289 alt.politics.white-power:7133 alt.skinheads:19068
> Duncan you seem to be on a crusade against black people.
>
> You feel that your race is superior to mine, lets not argue the point.
>
> It can so easiliy be disproved by that fact that AFRICAN students
>
> consistantly out perform, the native population at A'Level and at
>
> university by a wide margin.
>
Which country is this in? Latin America?
>
> African-Caribeans fall behind African students. They are between 15%-25%
>
> white, what does this tell me about your theory of African racial inferiority?
>
I didn't realize so many African-Caribeans had moved to Latin America.
>
> Tell me about your problems Duncan? mabey I can help you get over what ever
>
> your suffering from.
>
>
If what you are saying is correct in a civilised country then I imagine
the courses they excel in are things like African studies, Rap Music,
cross dressing, street mugging and other African strong subjects. Do they
offer courses in cannabalism?
Colin. The real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Fri Aug 4 17:23:57 PDT 1995
Article: 24957 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.skinheads,uk.politics
Subject: Re: Top cop blames the blacks
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 17:07:14 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 30
Message-ID:
References: <3uqvar$3sc@gwen.ibmpcug.co.uk> <806620827snz@drmac.demon.co.uk> <3v194e$emd@news.ox.ac.uk> <3vg3ms$33h@gwen.ibmpcug.co.uk> <807131643snz@drmac.demon.co.uk> <3vja8i$pef@gwen.ibmpcug.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:24957 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7289 alt.politics.white-power:7133 alt.skinheads:19068
> Duncan you seem to be on a crusade against black people.
>
> You feel that your race is superior to mine, lets not argue the point.
>
> It can so easiliy be disproved by that fact that AFRICAN students
>
> consistantly out perform, the native population at A'Level and at
>
> university by a wide margin.
>
Which country is this in? Latin America?
>
> African-Caribeans fall behind African students. They are between 15%-25%
>
> white, what does this tell me about your theory of African racial inferiority?
>
I didn't realize so many African-Caribeans had moved to Latin America.
>
> Tell me about your problems Duncan? mabey I can help you get over what ever
>
> your suffering from.
>
>
If what you are saying is correct in a civilised country then I imagine
the courses they excel in are things like African studies, Rap Music,
cross dressing, street mugging and other African strong subjects. Do they
offer courses in cannabalism?
Colin. The real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 08:50:15 PDT 1995
Article: 25031 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: Egypt, Greece and India
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:18:14 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 11
Message-ID:
References: <3vltr0$lu6@news1.best.com> <3vn1nf$50l@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <3vovgc$ch@news1.best.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7182 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7324 alt.revisionism:25031 alt.skinheads:19127 alt.discrimination:26899
> : Ah, I see "Beebe the insulting" is back to hurl insults at those he can't
> : rationally argue against....
>
> I see you're still an illiterate idiot who hasn't leanred to use a news
> reader yet . . .
>
Mike once again calling the kettle black.
Mike "I only open my mouth to change feet" Beebe.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 08:50:19 PDT 1995
Article: 25034 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: Egypt, Greece and India
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:25:27 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 15
Message-ID:
References: <3vnr2n$gd9@News1.mcs.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7185 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7327 alt.revisionism:25034 alt.skinheads:19130 alt.discrimination:26902
> The first advanced civilization in Europe arose on the island of
> Crete, now part of Greece. People from Europe, Africa, and Asia settled
> there. Crete had plumbing, a merchant navy, an international trading
> business, sophisticated architecture, gorgeous art and by the standards
> of the time was apparently a reasonably peaceful society. There is also
> evidence to suggest that genders related to each other on a fairly equal
> basis.
> Its astounding what Europeans, Africans and Asians can do when they
> work together. We should try it again sometime.
To which part of Asia are you referring? There is no evidence that the
short, slit eyed people were involved. You are of course referring to the
same place that Sargon I of Agade raided aren't you?
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 08:50:22 PDT 1995
Article: 25036 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!news1.digital.com!decwrl!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:32:12 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 23
Distribution: World
Message-ID:
References: <3vme8p$fea@earth.usa.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:25036 alt.politics.white-power:7186 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7328
> He has accused you of saying I fuck sheep. Only someone who
> has the brain power of a retarded snail would write such a
> thing, either that or someone experienced in such sexual
> practises...
>
> On the other hand, Mr. McKinstry has accused Jews of molesting "three-
> year-old girls" or "nine-year-old boys!" By Mr. McKinstry's own logic:
>
> Only someone who has the brain power of a retarded snail would
> write such a thing, either that or someone experienced in such
> sexual practises...
>
> So, Mr. McKinstry either "has the brain power of a retarded snail," or
> else he is a practicing pederast!
>
Flawed logic, the Talmud Sanhedrin 55a-55b allows Jews to molest
three-year-old girls and nine-year-old boys. There was no need to imagine
it, since it is clearly written down in the Talmud. However Richard
Schultz used his imagination and since there is a law against it, it
reflects his intellectual level. However he has since stated that was not
his meaning.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 08:50:24 PDT 1995
Article: 25037 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:37:29 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 23
Message-ID:
References: <3vcfif$99i@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vj9ug$1ntc@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vq0s6$ph2@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:25037 alt.politics.white-power:7187 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7329
> Your brain is like a mass of saltwater taffy that anyone can stretch or pull
> at will, Colon. It probably has to be that way, though, if you are going to
> be susceptible to the verbal ejaculations of morons like Less and Pidgin.
Too bad I thrashed you some time ago in an argument. Sort of goes against
your reasoning, but then you were never very good at derogatry remarks.
> Your responses are becoming tiresome- if I wanted an echo, I'd buy a
parrot, Colon. If you are going to flame, at least be original, OK?
>
Obviously the old methods still bite...
> BTW, I said to ease up on the Valium, Colon, not to go cold turkey off it.
> The symptoms of that were evident in that last echo of yours- you were ranting
> (again)...
>
Seeing as I have no experience with Valium and therefore have no knowledge
of it's effects, we must expect that you have gone through this
procedure. Is this what your psychiatrist prescribed?
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
P.S Get well soon.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 08:50:26 PDT 1995
Article: 25038 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln2.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.skinheads,uk.politics
Subject: Re: Top cop blames the blacks
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:54:43 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 29
Message-ID:
References: <3uqvar$3sc@gwen.ibmpcug.co.uk> <806620827snz@drmac.demon.co.uk> <3v194e$emd@news.ox.ac.uk> <3vg3ms$33h@gwen.ibmpcug.co.uk> <807131643snz@drmac.demon.co.uk> <3vja8i$pef@gwen.ibmpcug.co.uk> <3vqtql$9g6@epsilon.qmw.ac.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:25038 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7330 alt.politics.white-power:7188 alt.skinheads:19131
> : > Duncan you seem to be on a crusade against black people.
> : > You feel that your race is superior to mine, lets not argue the point.
> : > It can so easiliy be disproved by that fact that AFRICAN students
> : > consistantly out perform, the native population at A'Level and at
> : > university by a wide margin.
> : >
> : Which country is this in? Latin America?
> : >
> : > African-Caribeans fall behind African students. They are between 15%-25%
> : > white, what does this tell me about your theory of African racial
> : >inferiority?
>
> No, what the poster you quote is doing is drawing out the fact that the
> black population in the UK is divided into those who came via the Carribean
> and those who came direct from Africa. The only ethnic division between the
> two groups is that those from the Carribean have some white ancestry in their
> background. There is, of course, considerable cultural difference due to
> their divergent history.
>
> It happens to be a fact that pupils from a direct African background
have better
> exam grades than pupils from a white background. Part of the reason for this
> is that immigrants to the UK from Africa tend to be from the educated top
> social groups of their own country.
>
Makes sense. So the UK is getting the creme of the Blacks. Whereas the
statistics are based (for whites) on the entire population.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 21:08:43 PDT 1995
Article: 7324 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: Egypt, Greece and India
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:18:14 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 11
Message-ID:
References: <3vltr0$lu6@news1.best.com> <3vn1nf$50l@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <3vovgc$ch@news1.best.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7182 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7324 alt.revisionism:25031 alt.skinheads:19127 alt.discrimination:26899
> : Ah, I see "Beebe the insulting" is back to hurl insults at those he can't
> : rationally argue against....
>
> I see you're still an illiterate idiot who hasn't leanred to use a news
> reader yet . . .
>
Mike once again calling the kettle black.
Mike "I only open my mouth to change feet" Beebe.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 21:08:47 PDT 1995
Article: 7327 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: Egypt, Greece and India
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:25:27 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 15
Message-ID:
References: <3vnr2n$gd9@News1.mcs.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7185 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7327 alt.revisionism:25034 alt.skinheads:19130 alt.discrimination:26902
> The first advanced civilization in Europe arose on the island of
> Crete, now part of Greece. People from Europe, Africa, and Asia settled
> there. Crete had plumbing, a merchant navy, an international trading
> business, sophisticated architecture, gorgeous art and by the standards
> of the time was apparently a reasonably peaceful society. There is also
> evidence to suggest that genders related to each other on a fairly equal
> basis.
> Its astounding what Europeans, Africans and Asians can do when they
> work together. We should try it again sometime.
To which part of Asia are you referring? There is no evidence that the
short, slit eyed people were involved. You are of course referring to the
same place that Sargon I of Agade raided aren't you?
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 21:08:49 PDT 1995
Article: 7328 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!news1.digital.com!decwrl!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:32:12 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 23
Distribution: World
Message-ID:
References: <3vme8p$fea@earth.usa.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:25036 alt.politics.white-power:7186 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7328
> He has accused you of saying I fuck sheep. Only someone who
> has the brain power of a retarded snail would write such a
> thing, either that or someone experienced in such sexual
> practises...
>
> On the other hand, Mr. McKinstry has accused Jews of molesting "three-
> year-old girls" or "nine-year-old boys!" By Mr. McKinstry's own logic:
>
> Only someone who has the brain power of a retarded snail would
> write such a thing, either that or someone experienced in such
> sexual practises...
>
> So, Mr. McKinstry either "has the brain power of a retarded snail," or
> else he is a practicing pederast!
>
Flawed logic, the Talmud Sanhedrin 55a-55b allows Jews to molest
three-year-old girls and nine-year-old boys. There was no need to imagine
it, since it is clearly written down in the Talmud. However Richard
Schultz used his imagination and since there is a law against it, it
reflects his intellectual level. However he has since stated that was not
his meaning.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 21:08:51 PDT 1995
Article: 7329 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:37:29 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 23
Message-ID:
References: <3vcfif$99i@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vj9ug$1ntc@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vq0s6$ph2@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:25037 alt.politics.white-power:7187 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7329
> Your brain is like a mass of saltwater taffy that anyone can stretch or pull
> at will, Colon. It probably has to be that way, though, if you are going to
> be susceptible to the verbal ejaculations of morons like Less and Pidgin.
Too bad I thrashed you some time ago in an argument. Sort of goes against
your reasoning, but then you were never very good at derogatry remarks.
> Your responses are becoming tiresome- if I wanted an echo, I'd buy a
parrot, Colon. If you are going to flame, at least be original, OK?
>
Obviously the old methods still bite...
> BTW, I said to ease up on the Valium, Colon, not to go cold turkey off it.
> The symptoms of that were evident in that last echo of yours- you were ranting
> (again)...
>
Seeing as I have no experience with Valium and therefore have no knowledge
of it's effects, we must expect that you have gone through this
procedure. Is this what your psychiatrist prescribed?
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
P.S Get well soon.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 21:37:55 PDT 1995
Article: 7182 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: Egypt, Greece and India
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:18:14 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 11
Message-ID:
References: <3vltr0$lu6@news1.best.com> <3vn1nf$50l@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <3vovgc$ch@news1.best.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7182 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7324 alt.revisionism:25031 alt.skinheads:19127 alt.discrimination:26899
> : Ah, I see "Beebe the insulting" is back to hurl insults at those he can't
> : rationally argue against....
>
> I see you're still an illiterate idiot who hasn't leanred to use a news
> reader yet . . .
>
Mike once again calling the kettle black.
Mike "I only open my mouth to change feet" Beebe.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 21:37:58 PDT 1995
Article: 7185 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: Egypt, Greece and India
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:25:27 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 15
Message-ID:
References: <3vnr2n$gd9@News1.mcs.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7185 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7327 alt.revisionism:25034 alt.skinheads:19130 alt.discrimination:26902
> The first advanced civilization in Europe arose on the island of
> Crete, now part of Greece. People from Europe, Africa, and Asia settled
> there. Crete had plumbing, a merchant navy, an international trading
> business, sophisticated architecture, gorgeous art and by the standards
> of the time was apparently a reasonably peaceful society. There is also
> evidence to suggest that genders related to each other on a fairly equal
> basis.
> Its astounding what Europeans, Africans and Asians can do when they
> work together. We should try it again sometime.
To which part of Asia are you referring? There is no evidence that the
short, slit eyed people were involved. You are of course referring to the
same place that Sargon I of Agade raided aren't you?
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 21:38:01 PDT 1995
Article: 7186 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!news1.digital.com!decwrl!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:32:12 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 23
Distribution: World
Message-ID:
References: <3vme8p$fea@earth.usa.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:25036 alt.politics.white-power:7186 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7328
> He has accused you of saying I fuck sheep. Only someone who
> has the brain power of a retarded snail would write such a
> thing, either that or someone experienced in such sexual
> practises...
>
> On the other hand, Mr. McKinstry has accused Jews of molesting "three-
> year-old girls" or "nine-year-old boys!" By Mr. McKinstry's own logic:
>
> Only someone who has the brain power of a retarded snail would
> write such a thing, either that or someone experienced in such
> sexual practises...
>
> So, Mr. McKinstry either "has the brain power of a retarded snail," or
> else he is a practicing pederast!
>
Flawed logic, the Talmud Sanhedrin 55a-55b allows Jews to molest
three-year-old girls and nine-year-old boys. There was no need to imagine
it, since it is clearly written down in the Talmud. However Richard
Schultz used his imagination and since there is a law against it, it
reflects his intellectual level. However he has since stated that was not
his meaning.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 21:38:03 PDT 1995
Article: 7187 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:37:29 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 23
Message-ID:
References: <3vcfif$99i@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vj9ug$1ntc@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vq0s6$ph2@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:25037 alt.politics.white-power:7187 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7329
> Your brain is like a mass of saltwater taffy that anyone can stretch or pull
> at will, Colon. It probably has to be that way, though, if you are going to
> be susceptible to the verbal ejaculations of morons like Less and Pidgin.
Too bad I thrashed you some time ago in an argument. Sort of goes against
your reasoning, but then you were never very good at derogatry remarks.
> Your responses are becoming tiresome- if I wanted an echo, I'd buy a
parrot, Colon. If you are going to flame, at least be original, OK?
>
Obviously the old methods still bite...
> BTW, I said to ease up on the Valium, Colon, not to go cold turkey off it.
> The symptoms of that were evident in that last echo of yours- you were ranting
> (again)...
>
Seeing as I have no experience with Valium and therefore have no knowledge
of it's effects, we must expect that you have gone through this
procedure. Is this what your psychiatrist prescribed?
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
P.S Get well soon.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 21:38:07 PDT 1995
Article: 7193 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugll6.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: RACISM MAKES WHITE PEOPLE STUPID AND LAZY
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 1995 11:58:15 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 20
Message-ID:
References: <3vh2b7$dt3@News1.mcs.net> <3vm8bt$iob@limestone.kosone.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll6.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
> You don't understand: white supremacists are ALREADY stupid. Look at
> the white power types posting in here.. Les Griswold, Colin McKinstry,
> George "The Coward" Burdi, etc. These guys, collectively, have got the
> brains of a Rolodex. Well, we're not sure about Les; it takes at least an 85
> I.Q. to lie as well as he does, though granted he always gets caught
eventually.
>
I take it that this 85 I.Q with lying comes from personal experience? How
else would you know?
> So, you see, dumbkopfs like these are trying to *lower* competition. In
a competitive
> world, they're not doing so well.
So where do you feature in this competitive world? I take it the welfare
department gives you reasonable handouts for your low I.Q (85 or perhaps a
Rolodex)? I assume the mentally handicapped are well looked after in the
USA.
Colin.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 22:31:54 PDT 1995
Article: 19127 of alt.skinheads
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: Egypt, Greece and India
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:18:14 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 11
Message-ID:
References: <3vltr0$lu6@news1.best.com> <3vn1nf$50l@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <3vovgc$ch@news1.best.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7182 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7324 alt.revisionism:25031 alt.skinheads:19127 alt.discrimination:26899
> : Ah, I see "Beebe the insulting" is back to hurl insults at those he can't
> : rationally argue against....
>
> I see you're still an illiterate idiot who hasn't leanred to use a news
> reader yet . . .
>
Mike once again calling the kettle black.
Mike "I only open my mouth to change feet" Beebe.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Aug 5 22:31:58 PDT 1995
Article: 19130 of alt.skinheads
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: Egypt, Greece and India
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:25:27 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 15
Message-ID:
References: <3vnr2n$gd9@News1.mcs.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7185 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7327 alt.revisionism:25034 alt.skinheads:19130 alt.discrimination:26902
> The first advanced civilization in Europe arose on the island of
> Crete, now part of Greece. People from Europe, Africa, and Asia settled
> there. Crete had plumbing, a merchant navy, an international trading
> business, sophisticated architecture, gorgeous art and by the standards
> of the time was apparently a reasonably peaceful society. There is also
> evidence to suggest that genders related to each other on a fairly equal
> basis.
> Its astounding what Europeans, Africans and Asians can do when they
> work together. We should try it again sometime.
To which part of Asia are you referring? There is no evidence that the
short, slit eyed people were involved. You are of course referring to the
same place that Sargon I of Agade raided aren't you?
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 6 15:22:25 PDT 1995
Article: 25031 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: Egypt, Greece and India
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:18:14 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 11
Message-ID:
References: <3vltr0$lu6@news1.best.com> <3vn1nf$50l@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <3vovgc$ch@news1.best.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7182 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7324 alt.revisionism:25031 alt.skinheads:19127 alt.discrimination:26899
> : Ah, I see "Beebe the insulting" is back to hurl insults at those he can't
> : rationally argue against....
>
> I see you're still an illiterate idiot who hasn't leanred to use a news
> reader yet . . .
>
Mike once again calling the kettle black.
Mike "I only open my mouth to change feet" Beebe.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 6 15:22:29 PDT 1995
Article: 25034 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: Egypt, Greece and India
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:25:27 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 15
Message-ID:
References: <3vnr2n$gd9@News1.mcs.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7185 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7327 alt.revisionism:25034 alt.skinheads:19130 alt.discrimination:26902
> The first advanced civilization in Europe arose on the island of
> Crete, now part of Greece. People from Europe, Africa, and Asia settled
> there. Crete had plumbing, a merchant navy, an international trading
> business, sophisticated architecture, gorgeous art and by the standards
> of the time was apparently a reasonably peaceful society. There is also
> evidence to suggest that genders related to each other on a fairly equal
> basis.
> Its astounding what Europeans, Africans and Asians can do when they
> work together. We should try it again sometime.
To which part of Asia are you referring? There is no evidence that the
short, slit eyed people were involved. You are of course referring to the
same place that Sargon I of Agade raided aren't you?
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 6 15:22:32 PDT 1995
Article: 25036 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!news1.digital.com!decwrl!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:32:12 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 23
Distribution: World
Message-ID:
References: <3vme8p$fea@earth.usa.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:25036 alt.politics.white-power:7186 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7328
> He has accused you of saying I fuck sheep. Only someone who
> has the brain power of a retarded snail would write such a
> thing, either that or someone experienced in such sexual
> practises...
>
> On the other hand, Mr. McKinstry has accused Jews of molesting "three-
> year-old girls" or "nine-year-old boys!" By Mr. McKinstry's own logic:
>
> Only someone who has the brain power of a retarded snail would
> write such a thing, either that or someone experienced in such
> sexual practises...
>
> So, Mr. McKinstry either "has the brain power of a retarded snail," or
> else he is a practicing pederast!
>
Flawed logic, the Talmud Sanhedrin 55a-55b allows Jews to molest
three-year-old girls and nine-year-old boys. There was no need to imagine
it, since it is clearly written down in the Talmud. However Richard
Schultz used his imagination and since there is a law against it, it
reflects his intellectual level. However he has since stated that was not
his meaning.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 6 15:22:34 PDT 1995
Article: 25037 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:37:29 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 23
Message-ID:
References: <3vcfif$99i@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vj9ug$1ntc@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vq0s6$ph2@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:25037 alt.politics.white-power:7187 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7329
> Your brain is like a mass of saltwater taffy that anyone can stretch or pull
> at will, Colon. It probably has to be that way, though, if you are going to
> be susceptible to the verbal ejaculations of morons like Less and Pidgin.
Too bad I thrashed you some time ago in an argument. Sort of goes against
your reasoning, but then you were never very good at derogatry remarks.
> Your responses are becoming tiresome- if I wanted an echo, I'd buy a
parrot, Colon. If you are going to flame, at least be original, OK?
>
Obviously the old methods still bite...
> BTW, I said to ease up on the Valium, Colon, not to go cold turkey off it.
> The symptoms of that were evident in that last echo of yours- you were ranting
> (again)...
>
Seeing as I have no experience with Valium and therefore have no knowledge
of it's effects, we must expect that you have gone through this
procedure. Is this what your psychiatrist prescribed?
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
P.S Get well soon.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 6 21:35:50 PDT 1995
Article: 7350 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!news.intermedia.com!emi.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln2.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Captain John Smith & Pocachontas
Date: 3 Aug 1995 03:51:41 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 44
Message-ID:
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7222 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7350
I thought I'd drag this subject back seeing as the jewish propaganda
machine over this movie has hit New Zealand.
First some history on Captain John Smith. His three successive duels
between three Turkish champions made him a hero. His coat of arms for
this feat featured three Turkish heads. In a latter battle he was to be
taken prisoner and enslaved by a Turkish master. Whose head he latter
smashed. His journey back to England involved defeating pirates. So
Captain John Smith was an accomplished military man. He was also known as
a good keen christian (unlikely to believe in wood spirits and so forth).
He arrived in the Americas in 1607. His meeting with Pocachontas occured
in 1608. Having been captured by the local indians, he was about to be
executed with a club (head smashed) when Pocachantas ripped off her top in
the act of submission and threw her hands around his head, appealing to
her father for his preservation. Pocachantas was an obese woman at this
time. If anything did occur between Captain John Smith and Pocachantas it
would have been remarkably brief as he left the Americas in 1609.
Pocachantas slimmed down and married an Englishman by the name of John
Rolfe (whom it is claimed she loved). Soon after her arrival in England
she died either to smallpox or influenza.
Going back to 1607 he arrived in Jamestown which was beleaguered by Indian
thieves (not much has changed). These Indians were christianized and were
therefore equal with the settlers (or so the liberal types of the time
maintained.) One blatant Indian that was stealing a valuable item from
the fort was witnessed by the Captain after which he drew his sword and
cut down the offender. Thieving stopped.
Here are some immortal words on the subject of the "in tune with nature"
noble savage indians by Captain John Smith. Note that it is in a foreign
language to liberals:
"The Turkies, and other beasts and Fowle, will exceedingly increase if we
beat the Savages out of the Country, for all times of the yeere they never
spare Male nor Female, old nor young, eggs nor birds, fat nor leane, in
season nor out of season with them all is one"*
ie., the "in tune with nature" indians ate everything and spared nothing.
Leaving no animals to continue breeding. Which would account for their
nomadic lifestyle.
* Capt. John Smith, The General Historie, Richmond 1819.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 6 21:35:58 PDT 1995
Article: 7357 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!news.intermedia.com!emi.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln2.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: Why bother?
Date: 3 Aug 1995 03:09:33 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 237
Message-ID:
References: <3tsasc$2on@ionews.io.org> <3u4p1f$8t9@ionews.io.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.nationalism.white:7357 alt.politics.white-power:7236
> > > > I seem to recall you saying I was going through a drug facility.
It seems
> > > > my hypothesis was correct. You based your assumption on your own
> > > > experiences.
> > >
> > > Nah, I said you were checking into "Loons R Us" for electroshock
> > > treatments and getting your meds adjusted.
> > >
> > I have never met a person with more grand delusions that Jeanne
> > Kowalewski. Not only does she have telepathy, but teleportation
>
> This is great stuff, Colin! I was looking for more things to pad out my
> resume, and having the abilities for telepathy, teleportation, and
> levitation actually makes someone more employable in Eugene!
>
I'm sure you can be even more inventive. Whatever you are taking it seems
to be working.
> > (Bzzzt, in case you hadn't noticed there is a big ditch between America and
> > New Zealand).
>
> Yes, and there's also a big ditch between rational thinking and whatever
> little obsessions are lurking in your mind. (NOTICE THE "BIG DITCH"
> REFERENCE THIS WEEK, FOLKS.)
>
How did you make this connection? For someone that claims to have
telepathy it seems rather remarkable that you even know what rational
thinking is.
> > She also claims she can talk to cats.
>
> I do -- and I talk to my dogs, my husband, my neighbors, my kids, my
> friends, my professors and academic peers. Sometimes I talk on the
> telephone, and I have been known to curse at my computer!
>
It's te cats talking back that worries me. Perhaps Jeff Han's remarkable
psychiatrist could be of some assistance for you?
> > Jeanne, do you believe you can levitate? Ever been to Mars?
>
> No, but I do float in water. I've never been to Mars, but one of my
> hubby's favorite movies is _Mars Needs Women_.
>
Didn't you mention above you can levitate? Which personality are you
now? Ever had problems with split personalities before? You really
should talk to Jeff Han's psychiatrist.
> > Have you ever had a conversation with your plants and they talk back?
>
> I just decide which houseplants to buy and which plants to put in our
> yard. My hubby takes care of them, but our cats get into them frequently.
> Does that count?
>
> > I am assuming a yes to all of these.
>
> Well, you've just demonstrated that a reality-impaired miscreant such as
> yourself shouldn't make assumptions.
>
Jeanne, in case you hadn't noticed in the world of reality people don't
have telepathy, however you claim that you do...
> > Jeff Han apparently has a good pyschiatrist. Perhaps you can
> > visit this pyschiatrist (I'd imagine he is very good, considering one of
> > his patients is Jeff Han).
>
> Tell us how to find a good shrink, Colin. I'm afraid my experiences are
> limited to TV therapists Fraizer Crane and Bob Newhart.
>
Ask Jeff Han, I haven't watched the above, so I am less experienced than
you are.
> > > > > > > I'm more interested in the really demented and ignorant posts.
> > > > > > > They get the biggest laughs from my liberal friends at the
> > > > > > > university.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I did not realize you kept your own posts Jeanne. Admittedly
> > > > > > lzaird, Mike Beebe and Sub-Genius get the biggest laughs.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have a great appreciation of the humor that is shared in these
> > > > > newsgroups. Your list of funny people was far too brief, I believe.
> > > > > Almost everyone who posts here should be added onto the roster.
> > > > >
> > > > True, the reason I didn't add any more liberals onto the list is quite
> > > > simply, I can't be bothered remembering their names.
> > >
> > > That's what a few volts to the noggin does to the memory.
> > >
> > If I recall correctly the brain operates at 5 volts. Moot point.
>
> Those shock treatments are hell on the memory aren't they, Sparky?
>
You're making the claim, I wouldn't know myself. I take it you know from
personal experience? Perhaps that is where you have got the idea that you
are telepathic.
> > > > > One of the greatest differences between the humorous posts of the w-p
> > > > > types and the 'liberals' is that the w-p types are clueless that
they've
> > > > > made ludicrous statements while the liberals' humor is intentional and
> > > > > acknowledged regardless of the source.
> > > > >
> > > > So you have witnessed lzaird's attempts at sarcasm?
> > > >
> > > > > > So I suppose you record their posts continually?
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't do anything continuously. It gets boring. You know how easily
> > > > > the liberals get bored, don't you Colin?
> > > > >
> > > > Yes, liberals don't get bored. Just have a look at the average
liberal TV
> > > > program. Same last week, same this week, same next week. Yet liberals
> > > > love it.
> > >
> > > Then why can't they tolerate you?
> > >
> > Quite simple, I know how to annoy people. No doubt you consider this
> > plain arrogance, I don't, it simply is. I know how to get to people. My
> > current task is prove that I can get a true blue liberal to think. I
> > believe this to be next to impossible, but that is why I am doing it (by
> > thinking I don't mean racist).
>
> Colin the Annoyer (tm), purveyor of absurdities, and proud recipient of
> the UseNet Brainfart Award. Yes, Colin -- you do make people think. They
> think that you're crazy, that you're a liar, that you're projecting your
> own delusions on those "true blue liberals" that you choose to fixate
> upon.
>
Are those shock treatments wrecking havoc on you?
> > > > > > I'll ask you the question Jeanne: Is literacy -- spelling and
grammar
> > > > > the sign of intelligence?
> > > > >
> > > > > You asked lzaird, "Is literacy, correct spelling and grammar signs of
> > > > > intelligence?" The question posed to me has slightly differently
> > > > > punctuation, so I'm not certain if you are asking me the same thing.
> > > > >
> > > > > In my culture, literacy is very important, and correct grammar and
> > > > > spelling are required in academic writing. Spoken language is much
> > > > > different -- people come from all over the world and have their own
> > > > > languages, dialects, and jargons (dependent on what is commonplace in
> > > > > their their family, occupation, social network, etc.).
> > > > >
> > > > > An intelligent person may never have the opportunity to receive
a formal
> > > > > education. He/she may not have a written language. He/she may have
> > > > > been raised in a household or community which is not literate or
> fluent in
> > > > > the dominate language. He/she may be dyslexic, have cerebral
> palsy, or be
> > > > > the survivor of a cerebral hemorrhage or traumatic brain injury.
He/she
> > > > > may be typing hurridly online without caring if a post is laced
> heavily with
> > > > > misspellings, lousy grammar, and haphazard punctuation (although you,
> > > > > being the proficient writer and master of cut and paste, could
> > > > > thoughtfully compose your offerings to UseNet using a word processing
> > > > > program *with* a spelling and grammar checker).
> > > > >
> > > > > You've asked an ambiguously complex question to which I can only
reply,
> > > > > "It depends, Colin." If you expect a simple yes or no, ask
someone like
> > > > > Les or Marcus. They have *all* the answers and, fortunately for the
> > > > > liberals, most of them are quite laughable.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Oh, I realize I have asked a complex (for a liberal) question.
The reason
> > > > you (and lzaird) refuse to answer it is you both know (assuming
> > > > intelligence) that I will tear either of you to shreads with any answer
> > > > except my own. To admit that I was right would do hurt your pride too
> > > > much. Since no answer (except my own) has been offered, I'll keep
asking
> > > > the question.
> > >
> > > No, you've asked an ambiguous question that can be interpreted in a number
> > > of ways. Whatever you think the answer might be does not matter, because
> > > you cannot even ask the question coherently in writing.
> >
> > Tis, always the liberals excuse.
>
> How's this for an answer: If literacy, spelling and grammar are signs of
> intelligence, then you are a bonehead; but if literacy, spelling and
> grammar are not signs of intelligence, then you are an uncaring slob. You
> fail either way, Colin! Is this the answer you were expecting?
>
Your connection with your second clause is poor. Then again this is
probably your first attempt at trying to be logical, so I shouldn't
complain.
However lets push your clauses to the fullest. If literacy, spelling and
grammar are signs of intelligence then you are a racist. Why? Because
before the white man arrived into Dark Africa the Negroes didn't have the
aforementioned. Therefore you are calling Negroes boneheads. If
literacy, spelling are not the signs of intelligence then all your
arguments that heavily rely on deducing the "lack of intelligence" are
void. In this case an apology to all those that you have insulted via
this clause should be forthcoming.
> > Then again how many liberals are logical? Case in point: lzaird, Sub-Genius,
> > Mike Beebe, Bearcat, Jeff Han, Jeanne, Elena, Pyramid00 and others.
> > Normally only a little bit of logic is needed to make the connection.
>
> This sounds like a few of the people who have questioned your sanity. BTW,
> what is the procedure required to institutionalize someone in New Zealand?
> If you need a character witness, contact me and I'll speak up for you! I
> even have some of your past writings where you speak of all of your
> knowledge and expertise!
>
Are you sane Jeanne? With both shock treatment and telepathy it's hard to
believe you are.
> > > I will admit that you make no sense and are full of crap, and I will never
> > > understand how your squirrely little mind works.
> > >
> > No, Mike Beebe is full of crap, he suffers continually from constipation
> > (he hates his colon).
>
> OBSESSION #2 OF THE WEEK.
>
So what was OBSESSION #1 Jeanne? Is your memory failing? Two is the
successor of one.
> > I'm quite glad you will never understand how "my squirrely little mind
works"
> > because you have no hope in ever beating me in an argument.
>
> Well, we can agree on that much. Hopefully my thinking will never match
> your level of, you know, wackiness.
>
I sincerely hope that Jeff Han will tell you the name of his
psychiatrist. You need help fast.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fake.
P.S Get well soon Jeanne.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 6 22:24:35 PDT 1995
Article: 7222 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!news.intermedia.com!emi.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln2.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Captain John Smith & Pocachontas
Date: 3 Aug 1995 03:51:41 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 44
Message-ID:
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7222 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7350
I thought I'd drag this subject back seeing as the jewish propaganda
machine over this movie has hit New Zealand.
First some history on Captain John Smith. His three successive duels
between three Turkish champions made him a hero. His coat of arms for
this feat featured three Turkish heads. In a latter battle he was to be
taken prisoner and enslaved by a Turkish master. Whose head he latter
smashed. His journey back to England involved defeating pirates. So
Captain John Smith was an accomplished military man. He was also known as
a good keen christian (unlikely to believe in wood spirits and so forth).
He arrived in the Americas in 1607. His meeting with Pocachontas occured
in 1608. Having been captured by the local indians, he was about to be
executed with a club (head smashed) when Pocachantas ripped off her top in
the act of submission and threw her hands around his head, appealing to
her father for his preservation. Pocachantas was an obese woman at this
time. If anything did occur between Captain John Smith and Pocachantas it
would have been remarkably brief as he left the Americas in 1609.
Pocachantas slimmed down and married an Englishman by the name of John
Rolfe (whom it is claimed she loved). Soon after her arrival in England
she died either to smallpox or influenza.
Going back to 1607 he arrived in Jamestown which was beleaguered by Indian
thieves (not much has changed). These Indians were christianized and were
therefore equal with the settlers (or so the liberal types of the time
maintained.) One blatant Indian that was stealing a valuable item from
the fort was witnessed by the Captain after which he drew his sword and
cut down the offender. Thieving stopped.
Here are some immortal words on the subject of the "in tune with nature"
noble savage indians by Captain John Smith. Note that it is in a foreign
language to liberals:
"The Turkies, and other beasts and Fowle, will exceedingly increase if we
beat the Savages out of the Country, for all times of the yeere they never
spare Male nor Female, old nor young, eggs nor birds, fat nor leane, in
season nor out of season with them all is one"*
ie., the "in tune with nature" indians ate everything and spared nothing.
Leaving no animals to continue breeding. Which would account for their
nomadic lifestyle.
* Capt. John Smith, The General Historie, Richmond 1819.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 6 22:24:47 PDT 1995
Article: 7236 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!news.intermedia.com!emi.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln2.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: Why bother?
Date: 3 Aug 1995 03:09:33 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 237
Message-ID:
References: <3tsasc$2on@ionews.io.org> <3u4p1f$8t9@ionews.io.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.nationalism.white:7357 alt.politics.white-power:7236
> > > > I seem to recall you saying I was going through a drug facility.
It seems
> > > > my hypothesis was correct. You based your assumption on your own
> > > > experiences.
> > >
> > > Nah, I said you were checking into "Loons R Us" for electroshock
> > > treatments and getting your meds adjusted.
> > >
> > I have never met a person with more grand delusions that Jeanne
> > Kowalewski. Not only does she have telepathy, but teleportation
>
> This is great stuff, Colin! I was looking for more things to pad out my
> resume, and having the abilities for telepathy, teleportation, and
> levitation actually makes someone more employable in Eugene!
>
I'm sure you can be even more inventive. Whatever you are taking it seems
to be working.
> > (Bzzzt, in case you hadn't noticed there is a big ditch between America and
> > New Zealand).
>
> Yes, and there's also a big ditch between rational thinking and whatever
> little obsessions are lurking in your mind. (NOTICE THE "BIG DITCH"
> REFERENCE THIS WEEK, FOLKS.)
>
How did you make this connection? For someone that claims to have
telepathy it seems rather remarkable that you even know what rational
thinking is.
> > She also claims she can talk to cats.
>
> I do -- and I talk to my dogs, my husband, my neighbors, my kids, my
> friends, my professors and academic peers. Sometimes I talk on the
> telephone, and I have been known to curse at my computer!
>
It's te cats talking back that worries me. Perhaps Jeff Han's remarkable
psychiatrist could be of some assistance for you?
> > Jeanne, do you believe you can levitate? Ever been to Mars?
>
> No, but I do float in water. I've never been to Mars, but one of my
> hubby's favorite movies is _Mars Needs Women_.
>
Didn't you mention above you can levitate? Which personality are you
now? Ever had problems with split personalities before? You really
should talk to Jeff Han's psychiatrist.
> > Have you ever had a conversation with your plants and they talk back?
>
> I just decide which houseplants to buy and which plants to put in our
> yard. My hubby takes care of them, but our cats get into them frequently.
> Does that count?
>
> > I am assuming a yes to all of these.
>
> Well, you've just demonstrated that a reality-impaired miscreant such as
> yourself shouldn't make assumptions.
>
Jeanne, in case you hadn't noticed in the world of reality people don't
have telepathy, however you claim that you do...
> > Jeff Han apparently has a good pyschiatrist. Perhaps you can
> > visit this pyschiatrist (I'd imagine he is very good, considering one of
> > his patients is Jeff Han).
>
> Tell us how to find a good shrink, Colin. I'm afraid my experiences are
> limited to TV therapists Fraizer Crane and Bob Newhart.
>
Ask Jeff Han, I haven't watched the above, so I am less experienced than
you are.
> > > > > > > I'm more interested in the really demented and ignorant posts.
> > > > > > > They get the biggest laughs from my liberal friends at the
> > > > > > > university.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I did not realize you kept your own posts Jeanne. Admittedly
> > > > > > lzaird, Mike Beebe and Sub-Genius get the biggest laughs.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have a great appreciation of the humor that is shared in these
> > > > > newsgroups. Your list of funny people was far too brief, I believe.
> > > > > Almost everyone who posts here should be added onto the roster.
> > > > >
> > > > True, the reason I didn't add any more liberals onto the list is quite
> > > > simply, I can't be bothered remembering their names.
> > >
> > > That's what a few volts to the noggin does to the memory.
> > >
> > If I recall correctly the brain operates at 5 volts. Moot point.
>
> Those shock treatments are hell on the memory aren't they, Sparky?
>
You're making the claim, I wouldn't know myself. I take it you know from
personal experience? Perhaps that is where you have got the idea that you
are telepathic.
> > > > > One of the greatest differences between the humorous posts of the w-p
> > > > > types and the 'liberals' is that the w-p types are clueless that
they've
> > > > > made ludicrous statements while the liberals' humor is intentional and
> > > > > acknowledged regardless of the source.
> > > > >
> > > > So you have witnessed lzaird's attempts at sarcasm?
> > > >
> > > > > > So I suppose you record their posts continually?
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't do anything continuously. It gets boring. You know how easily
> > > > > the liberals get bored, don't you Colin?
> > > > >
> > > > Yes, liberals don't get bored. Just have a look at the average
liberal TV
> > > > program. Same last week, same this week, same next week. Yet liberals
> > > > love it.
> > >
> > > Then why can't they tolerate you?
> > >
> > Quite simple, I know how to annoy people. No doubt you consider this
> > plain arrogance, I don't, it simply is. I know how to get to people. My
> > current task is prove that I can get a true blue liberal to think. I
> > believe this to be next to impossible, but that is why I am doing it (by
> > thinking I don't mean racist).
>
> Colin the Annoyer (tm), purveyor of absurdities, and proud recipient of
> the UseNet Brainfart Award. Yes, Colin -- you do make people think. They
> think that you're crazy, that you're a liar, that you're projecting your
> own delusions on those "true blue liberals" that you choose to fixate
> upon.
>
Are those shock treatments wrecking havoc on you?
> > > > > > I'll ask you the question Jeanne: Is literacy -- spelling and
grammar
> > > > > the sign of intelligence?
> > > > >
> > > > > You asked lzaird, "Is literacy, correct spelling and grammar signs of
> > > > > intelligence?" The question posed to me has slightly differently
> > > > > punctuation, so I'm not certain if you are asking me the same thing.
> > > > >
> > > > > In my culture, literacy is very important, and correct grammar and
> > > > > spelling are required in academic writing. Spoken language is much
> > > > > different -- people come from all over the world and have their own
> > > > > languages, dialects, and jargons (dependent on what is commonplace in
> > > > > their their family, occupation, social network, etc.).
> > > > >
> > > > > An intelligent person may never have the opportunity to receive
a formal
> > > > > education. He/she may not have a written language. He/she may have
> > > > > been raised in a household or community which is not literate or
> fluent in
> > > > > the dominate language. He/she may be dyslexic, have cerebral
> palsy, or be
> > > > > the survivor of a cerebral hemorrhage or traumatic brain injury.
He/she
> > > > > may be typing hurridly online without caring if a post is laced
> heavily with
> > > > > misspellings, lousy grammar, and haphazard punctuation (although you,
> > > > > being the proficient writer and master of cut and paste, could
> > > > > thoughtfully compose your offerings to UseNet using a word processing
> > > > > program *with* a spelling and grammar checker).
> > > > >
> > > > > You've asked an ambiguously complex question to which I can only
reply,
> > > > > "It depends, Colin." If you expect a simple yes or no, ask
someone like
> > > > > Les or Marcus. They have *all* the answers and, fortunately for the
> > > > > liberals, most of them are quite laughable.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Oh, I realize I have asked a complex (for a liberal) question.
The reason
> > > > you (and lzaird) refuse to answer it is you both know (assuming
> > > > intelligence) that I will tear either of you to shreads with any answer
> > > > except my own. To admit that I was right would do hurt your pride too
> > > > much. Since no answer (except my own) has been offered, I'll keep
asking
> > > > the question.
> > >
> > > No, you've asked an ambiguous question that can be interpreted in a number
> > > of ways. Whatever you think the answer might be does not matter, because
> > > you cannot even ask the question coherently in writing.
> >
> > Tis, always the liberals excuse.
>
> How's this for an answer: If literacy, spelling and grammar are signs of
> intelligence, then you are a bonehead; but if literacy, spelling and
> grammar are not signs of intelligence, then you are an uncaring slob. You
> fail either way, Colin! Is this the answer you were expecting?
>
Your connection with your second clause is poor. Then again this is
probably your first attempt at trying to be logical, so I shouldn't
complain.
However lets push your clauses to the fullest. If literacy, spelling and
grammar are signs of intelligence then you are a racist. Why? Because
before the white man arrived into Dark Africa the Negroes didn't have the
aforementioned. Therefore you are calling Negroes boneheads. If
literacy, spelling are not the signs of intelligence then all your
arguments that heavily rely on deducing the "lack of intelligence" are
void. In this case an apology to all those that you have insulted via
this clause should be forthcoming.
> > Then again how many liberals are logical? Case in point: lzaird, Sub-Genius,
> > Mike Beebe, Bearcat, Jeff Han, Jeanne, Elena, Pyramid00 and others.
> > Normally only a little bit of logic is needed to make the connection.
>
> This sounds like a few of the people who have questioned your sanity. BTW,
> what is the procedure required to institutionalize someone in New Zealand?
> If you need a character witness, contact me and I'll speak up for you! I
> even have some of your past writings where you speak of all of your
> knowledge and expertise!
>
Are you sane Jeanne? With both shock treatment and telepathy it's hard to
believe you are.
> > > I will admit that you make no sense and are full of crap, and I will never
> > > understand how your squirrely little mind works.
> > >
> > No, Mike Beebe is full of crap, he suffers continually from constipation
> > (he hates his colon).
>
> OBSESSION #2 OF THE WEEK.
>
So what was OBSESSION #1 Jeanne? Is your memory failing? Two is the
successor of one.
> > I'm quite glad you will never understand how "my squirrely little mind
works"
> > because you have no hope in ever beating me in an argument.
>
> Well, we can agree on that much. Hopefully my thinking will never match
> your level of, you know, wackiness.
>
I sincerely hope that Jeff Han will tell you the name of his
psychiatrist. You need help fast.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fake.
P.S Get well soon Jeanne.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 6 22:24:52 PDT 1995
Article: 7242 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!news.intermedia.com!emi.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln2.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: Jenn's chop-sockey boyfriend! (was: Black is Beautiful?)
Date: 3 Aug 1995 03:20:25 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 24
Message-ID:
References: <3uf2re$4kq@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <3uvfl7$6et@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> <3v23re$3me@ixnews4.ix.netcom.com> <3vjb0r$bmc@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
> >> >> It would seem Sylvie that you got confused between Jenn and her
> >> >> boyfriend. Her boyfriend is the paraplegic. He couldn't even hit a man
> >> >> if you paid him to--not even one he disagreed with.
> >> >
> >> > I wouldn't speak too quickly if I were you. My boyfriend's a
> >> > skinhead, and a martial-arts trained one at that. He's also on the
> >> > 'Net, probably reading this, and....ooh, you better turn around
> >> > McKinstry--I think that first shot's aimed at your head...
> >>
> >Oh I'm so scared, please don't hurt me. I can this without being
> >boastful: If you boyfriend foolishly attacked me I would at the very
> >least make sure he couldn't walk again. If he escaped with his life he'd
> >be lucky. The law still allows me the right to defend myself...
>
> You're starting to sound like Birdi, Colon, with those agressive brainfarts.
> Of course, you live can do that, living on the other side of the world as you
> do- no one would visit Kiwiland if they could help it...
>
Good, one less loser to visit New Zealand. Thanks for letting me know
your stance.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
P.S How's the psychiatric treatment going?
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 6 18:35:46 PDT 1995
Article: 25036 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!news1.digital.com!decwrl!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:32:12 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 23
Distribution: World
Message-ID:
References: <3vme8p$fea@earth.usa.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:25036 alt.politics.white-power:7186 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7328
> He has accused you of saying I fuck sheep. Only someone who
> has the brain power of a retarded snail would write such a
> thing, either that or someone experienced in such sexual
> practises...
>
> On the other hand, Mr. McKinstry has accused Jews of molesting "three-
> year-old girls" or "nine-year-old boys!" By Mr. McKinstry's own logic:
>
> Only someone who has the brain power of a retarded snail would
> write such a thing, either that or someone experienced in such
> sexual practises...
>
> So, Mr. McKinstry either "has the brain power of a retarded snail," or
> else he is a practicing pederast!
>
Flawed logic, the Talmud Sanhedrin 55a-55b allows Jews to molest
three-year-old girls and nine-year-old boys. There was no need to imagine
it, since it is clearly written down in the Talmud. However Richard
Schultz used his imagination and since there is a law against it, it
reflects his intellectual level. However he has since stated that was not
his meaning.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 6 18:35:48 PDT 1995
Article: 25037 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: 3 Aug 1995 22:37:29 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 23
Message-ID:
References: <3vcfif$99i@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vj9ug$1ntc@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vq0s6$ph2@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:25037 alt.politics.white-power:7187 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7329
> Your brain is like a mass of saltwater taffy that anyone can stretch or pull
> at will, Colon. It probably has to be that way, though, if you are going to
> be susceptible to the verbal ejaculations of morons like Less and Pidgin.
Too bad I thrashed you some time ago in an argument. Sort of goes against
your reasoning, but then you were never very good at derogatry remarks.
> Your responses are becoming tiresome- if I wanted an echo, I'd buy a
parrot, Colon. If you are going to flame, at least be original, OK?
>
Obviously the old methods still bite...
> BTW, I said to ease up on the Valium, Colon, not to go cold turkey off it.
> The symptoms of that were evident in that last echo of yours- you were ranting
> (again)...
>
Seeing as I have no experience with Valium and therefore have no knowledge
of it's effects, we must expect that you have gone through this
procedure. Is this what your psychiatrist prescribed?
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
P.S Get well soon.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Aug 7 18:17:31 PDT 1995
Article: 25158 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.dacom.co.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: Egypt, Greece and India
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 09:18:42 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 127
Message-ID:
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.politics.white-power:7254 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7374 alt.revisionism:25158 alt.skinheads:19225 alt.discrimination:27018
> : White supremcists, white nationalists and so forth have regularly stated
> : that the ancients of these nations were Aryan/white.
>
> I think I know where this is going...
>
> : Some liberals
> : contest this with some sort of proof (?).
>
> Who are these "liberals"?
>
> : I would suggest to these
> : liberals that they take a trip to a good museum and have a look at these
> : nations exhibits.
>
> OK.
>
> : Having just been around Auckland's War Museum (26/07/1995). I will now
> : share the results. First the Egyptian exhibit. On centre stage we have a
> : female mummy. On the lid we have a sculpture of her face. Thin lips,
> : high cheek bones, long head, and more importantly pure white paint.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> You lie.
Perhaps I should get a camera and a colour scanner.
>
> : Then
> : there is a hieroglyph of a red skinned man before one of the animal headed
> : egyptian gods (also red skinned). Then there are the statures of either
> : red skinned people or white skinned people.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> You lie, again.
I really need that camera.
>
> : Not one black (or brown)
> ^^^^^^^^
> The red skin of the Egyptians is just a shade of brown. Therefore, you
> are lying once more.
Not the statures at the Auckland War Museum. Either red or white.
>
> : stature among them and of course the flat nose and inflated lips are
> : nonexistent as well.
>
> Although the Egyptians were not black, there are many black African
> populations who do not have "the flat nose and inflated lips" you speak of.
> Most of these populations live in East Africa and are sometimes refered
> to as "Elongated Negroids" (Hiernaux was the first to use this term). You
> should not generalize.
>
> : Next is the greek exhibit. We have non painted statures of the greek men
> : and women (we could say Aryan but since liberals can't tell negro features
> : from Aryan features I'll move on). However the Museum possesses two
> : paintings of greek men. Which of course have pink skin and light brown
> : hair (sandy).
>
> The Greeks, although having olive skin, are European and therefore are
> considered to be a white people.
Current day Greeks are a mongrel people.
>
> : Lastly the Indian exhibit. There are several time periods. One of which
> : covers the Aryans. Again we have painted statures (and even a tapestry
> : from SE Asia of the Indian Aryans -- from trade links). Which of course
> : show the Aryan skin and face (white, pink or red).
>
> Before the Black Sea hordes (who were called "Arya" which means "noble" in
> Sanskrit) invaded India, it was populated by the Dravidians, a people
> that have affinities with the Australoid race. The inevitable mixing of
> these two peoples give us the present-day East Indians. They are
> definitly not considered "white". Your claim is delusional.
>
I never disputed your argument above. However there are enough losers
around that believe the Arya were negroid.
> : Somehow I doubt this will convince the liberals,
>
> Again I ask, who are these "liberals"?
>
People like yourself.
> : so I suggest you do your
> : own tour of a Museum.
>
> I think maybe YOU should visit the museum again. But this time don't take
> any hallucinogens before you go.
>
Actually I've been to the museum quite a bit. A few of my ancestors died
in both WWI and WWII. I don't take drugs, though we can assume you take
something quite heavy.
> : Though even after this I can expect lzaird to
> : continue to believe in Negro (sorry, Sub Saharan) high civilization of
> : Egypt.
>
> Lzaird is a misguided soul, but you take the cake.
>
> : Which indicates the level of intelligence lzaird has attained.
>
> Speak for yourself.
>
And you're the marking stick?
> : Of
> : course if a Museum is too much effort, a poor substitute is a good book on
> : the relevant time periods. It's a lot harder to dispute an actual exhibit
> : (though I'm sure lzaird will try).
>
> I see you do not like books very much. I think maybe you should open one
> since, from this post, I see you have no knowledge of this subject.
>
I have studied the Egyptian equation quite thoroughly, I thought that if
I talked about real artifacts that there be some effort from various
quarters to actually go see real artifacts. I somehow doubt you have
bothered to actually look. Rather you would like to believe some
charismatic figure. By the way, I have a deep respect for books. However
a lot of newly published books like to propagate modern propaganda, and
they are trying to find something the dark races can find pride in.
>
> The Egyptians were not a "white" people as we define it. Further, the
> "white" and "black" races depicted in the tombs and bas-reliefs were
> always seen as vassals or slaves. Try to disprove me.
>
Why don't you look at their religion? It was part of their belief in the
afterlife that made their statues and portraits so articulate. That way I
don't have to disprove you, you will know yourself. By your defensive
reply I couldn't in a thousand years try to convince you personally
otherwise.
Colin.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Aug 7 18:17:33 PDT 1995
Article: 25159 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.dacom.co.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: An abject apology
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 09:27:25 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 22
Message-ID:
References: <3vhq3a$shh@access2.digex.net> <3vi4i8$mej@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:25159 alt.politics.white-power:7256 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7375
> But, given that New Zealand is a quarter-world closer to Iran than we are
> here on the West Coast of North America, there are probably some sheep
> there that are descended from Persian sheep, and could properly be called
> Aryan.
>
> I never did find out what McKinstry's educational qualifications are. He
> responded that "ac" denotes academe, as if I didn't know that.
You haven't impressed so far that you can deduce anything. So it was
quite logical to put .ac. in my response. I have only a lowly B.Sc.
> But I
> still don't know his credentials. He could be a night watchman for all I
> know, or maybe he's an Aryan sheep whose species isn't allowed to attend
> degree-granting institutions in the Land of the Unremarkable. Or maybe
> they ARE allowed. That would be remarkable!
>
While I don't support New Zealand overly much, you are still ignorant.
Change from Land of the Unexceptional to the Land of the Unremarkable
doesn't disprove your blatant and wilful ignorance.
Colin.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Aug 7 18:17:36 PDT 1995
Article: 25160 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.port.island.net!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.dacom.co.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 09:31:32 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 39
Message-ID:
References: <3vcfif$99i@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vj9ug$1ntc@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.port.island.net alt.revisionism:25160 alt.politics.white-power:7257 alt.politics.nationalism.white:7376
> >> >Michael Stein is trying to drag you into the mire with him. He has
> >> >accused you of saying I fuck sheep. Only someone who has the brain power
> >> >of a retarded snail would write such a thing, either that or someone
> >> >experienced in such sexual practises. So I assume that Michael Stein is
> >> >bearing false witness against you. Guess Jews really don't like each
> >> >other?
> >>
> >> >If my assumption is wrong, you're one lousy backstabber. I didn't realize
> >> >Jews were into sheep as well as three year old girls and nine year old
> >> >boys.
> >>
> >> You are one to be talking about being `into sheep', Colon- you live
in New
> >> Zealand, the Land (island) of Sheep. You forgot your dose of Thorazine
> >> again... ^^^^^^^^^
> >>
> >Being hanging around Jeanne again? Jeanne is the one that takes
> >thorazine. How's your psychiatric councelling going? Getting better?
>
> Is this a standard response with you WS types, Colon?
>
> W.S.: Blah, blah
>
> Me (or some other `crackpot liberal'): Wrong .
>
> W.S.: Yeah, well, YOU TOO!!!
>
> Better try harder. Maybe it would help if you eased up on the Valium; that
> stuff is meant to help you, Colon, not to impede your thought (what
there is of it...)...
All this from someone that that *usually* can't say anything more than
idiot, idiot, fucking idiot. Did my comments get to you did they? Your
arguments are as weak as before without the idiot clause being repeated
like a scratched record. I sincerely hope that psychiatrist of yours can
wield miracles.
Colin.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Aug 7 23:42:09 PDT 1995
Article: 30221 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.dacom.co.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: Egypt, Greece and India
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 09:18:42 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 127
Message-ID:
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.politics.white-power:11362 alt.politics.nationalism.white:11824 alt.revisionism:30221 alt.skinheads:24686 alt.discrimination:32914
> : White supremcists, white nationalists and so forth have regularly stated
> : that the ancients of these nations were Aryan/white.
>
> I think I know where this is going...
>
> : Some liberals
> : contest this with some sort of proof (?).
>
> Who are these "liberals"?
>
> : I would suggest to these
> : liberals that they take a trip to a good museum and have a look at these
> : nations exhibits.
>
> OK.
>
> : Having just been around Auckland's War Museum (26/07/1995). I will now
> : share the results. First the Egyptian exhibit. On centre stage we have a
> : female mummy. On the lid we have a sculpture of her face. Thin lips,
> : high cheek bones, long head, and more importantly pure white paint.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> You lie.
Perhaps I should get a camera and a colour scanner.
>
> : Then
> : there is a hieroglyph of a red skinned man before one of the animal headed
> : egyptian gods (also red skinned). Then there are the statures of either
> : red skinned people or white skinned people.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> You lie, again.
I really need that camera.
>
> : Not one black (or brown)
> ^^^^^^^^
> The red skin of the Egyptians is just a shade of brown. Therefore, you
> are lying once more.
Not the statures at the Auckland War Museum. Either red or white.
>
> : stature among them and of course the flat nose and inflated lips are
> : nonexistent as well.
>
> Although the Egyptians were not black, there are many black African
> populations who do not have "the flat nose and inflated lips" you speak of.
> Most of these populations live in East Africa and are sometimes refered
> to as "Elongated Negroids" (Hiernaux was the first to use this term). You
> should not generalize.
>
> : Next is the greek exhibit. We have non painted statures of the greek men
> : and women (we could say Aryan but since liberals can't tell negro features
> : from Aryan features I'll move on). However the Museum possesses two
> : paintings of greek men. Which of course have pink skin and light brown
> : hair (sandy).
>
> The Greeks, although having olive skin, are European and therefore are
> considered to be a white people.
Current day Greeks are a mongrel people.
>
> : Lastly the Indian exhibit. There are several time periods. One of which
> : covers the Aryans. Again we have painted statures (and even a tapestry
> : from SE Asia of the Indian Aryans -- from trade links). Which of course
> : show the Aryan skin and face (white, pink or red).
>
> Before the Black Sea hordes (who were called "Arya" which means "noble" in
> Sanskrit) invaded India, it was populated by the Dravidians, a people
> that have affinities with the Australoid race. The inevitable mixing of
> these two peoples give us the present-day East Indians. They are
> definitly not considered "white". Your claim is delusional.
>
I never disputed your argument above. However there are enough losers
around that believe the Arya were negroid.
> : Somehow I doubt this will convince the liberals,
>
> Again I ask, who are these "liberals"?
>
People like yourself.
> : so I suggest you do your
> : own tour of a Museum.
>
> I think maybe YOU should visit the museum again. But this time don't take
> any hallucinogens before you go.
>
Actually I've been to the museum quite a bit. A few of my ancestors died
in both WWI and WWII. I don't take drugs, though we can assume you take
something quite heavy.
> : Though even after this I can expect lzaird to
> : continue to believe in Negro (sorry, Sub Saharan) high civilization of
> : Egypt.
>
> Lzaird is a misguided soul, but you take the cake.
>
> : Which indicates the level of intelligence lzaird has attained.
>
> Speak for yourself.
>
And you're the marking stick?
> : Of
> : course if a Museum is too much effort, a poor substitute is a good book on
> : the relevant time periods. It's a lot harder to dispute an actual exhibit
> : (though I'm sure lzaird will try).
>
> I see you do not like books very much. I think maybe you should open one
> since, from this post, I see you have no knowledge of this subject.
>
I have studied the Egyptian equation quite thoroughly, I thought that if
I talked about real artifacts that there be some effort from various
quarters to actually go see real artifacts. I somehow doubt you have
bothered to actually look. Rather you would like to believe some
charismatic figure. By the way, I have a deep respect for books. However
a lot of newly published books like to propagate modern propaganda, and
they are trying to find something the dark races can find pride in.
>
> The Egyptians were not a "white" people as we define it. Further, the
> "white" and "black" races depicted in the tombs and bas-reliefs were
> always seen as vassals or slaves. Try to disprove me.
>
Why don't you look at their religion? It was part of their belief in the
afterlife that made their statues and portraits so articulate. That way I
don't have to disprove you, you will know yourself. By your defensive
reply I couldn't in a thousand years try to convince you personally
otherwise.
Colin.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Aug 7 23:42:12 PDT 1995
Article: 30222 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.dacom.co.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: An abject apology
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 09:27:25 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 22
Message-ID:
References: <3vhq3a$shh@access2.digex.net> <3vi4i8$mej@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.revisionism:30222 alt.politics.white-power:11364 alt.politics.nationalism.white:11825
> But, given that New Zealand is a quarter-world closer to Iran than we are
> here on the West Coast of North America, there are probably some sheep
> there that are descended from Persian sheep, and could properly be called
> Aryan.
>
> I never did find out what McKinstry's educational qualifications are. He
> responded that "ac" denotes academe, as if I didn't know that.
You haven't impressed so far that you can deduce anything. So it was
quite logical to put .ac. in my response. I have only a lowly B.Sc.
> But I
> still don't know his credentials. He could be a night watchman for all I
> know, or maybe he's an Aryan sheep whose species isn't allowed to attend
> degree-granting institutions in the Land of the Unremarkable. Or maybe
> they ARE allowed. That would be remarkable!
>
While I don't support New Zealand overly much, you are still ignorant.
Change from Land of the Unexceptional to the Land of the Unremarkable
doesn't disprove your blatant and wilful ignorance.
Colin.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Aug 7 23:42:16 PDT 1995
Article: 30223 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.dacom.co.kr!news.kreonet.re.kr!usenet.kornet.nm.kr!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1995 09:31:32 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 39
Message-ID:
References: <3vcfif$99i@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vj9ug$1ntc@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.revisionism:30223 alt.politics.white-power:11365 alt.politics.nationalism.white:11826
> >> >Michael Stein is trying to drag you into the mire with him. He has
> >> >accused you of saying I fuck sheep. Only someone who has the brain power
> >> >of a retarded snail would write such a thing, either that or someone
> >> >experienced in such sexual practises. So I assume that Michael Stein is
> >> >bearing false witness against you. Guess Jews really don't like each
> >> >other?
> >>
> >> >If my assumption is wrong, you're one lousy backstabber. I didn't realize
> >> >Jews were into sheep as well as three year old girls and nine year old
> >> >boys.
> >>
> >> You are one to be talking about being `into sheep', Colon- you live
in New
> >> Zealand, the Land (island) of Sheep. You forgot your dose of Thorazine
> >> again... ^^^^^^^^^
> >>
> >Being hanging around Jeanne again? Jeanne is the one that takes
> >thorazine. How's your psychiatric councelling going? Getting better?
>
> Is this a standard response with you WS types, Colon?
>
> W.S.: Blah, blah
>
> Me (or some other `crackpot liberal'): Wrong .
>
> W.S.: Yeah, well, YOU TOO!!!
>
> Better try harder. Maybe it would help if you eased up on the Valium; that
> stuff is meant to help you, Colon, not to impede your thought (what
there is of it...)...
All this from someone that that *usually* can't say anything more than
idiot, idiot, fucking idiot. Did my comments get to you did they? Your
arguments are as weak as before without the idiot clause being repeated
like a scratched record. I sincerely hope that psychiatrist of yours can
wield miracles.
Colin.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Aug 7 23:44:17 PDT 1995
Article: 30320 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!news.duke.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Michael Stein: Portrait of a loser
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 1995 08:31:47 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 17
Message-ID:
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
> >> > Then again, Michael Stein is a Jew. Which I suppose lets him off
the hook
> >> > for being brave and facing his loss like a man.
> >>
> >> Uh-huh. And which race are you, that lets you off the hook for being brave
> >> and citing evidence to support your assertions?
> >>
> >Perhaps you would like to look at Scientific theories before shooting your
> >mouth off. The ones you no doubt propagate without thinking about.
>
> Answer the question. What race are you, that allows you to duck and
> run when challenged, never citing evidence to back up your assertions?
>
I'm afraid I won't fulfill your fetish of me being the teacher and you
being the student.
Colin.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Aug 7 23:44:20 PDT 1995
Article: 30322 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 1995 08:55:12 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 61
Message-ID:
References: <3vcfif$99i@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vj9ug$1ntc@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vq0s6$ph2@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vun3h$1b5q@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.revisionism:30322 alt.politics.white-power:11462 alt.politics.nationalism.white:11905
> >> Your brain is like a mass of saltwater taffy that anyone can
stretch or pull
> >> at will, Colon. It probably has to be that way, though, if you are
going to
> >> be susceptible to the verbal ejaculations of morons like Less and Pidgin.
>
> >Too bad I thrashed you some time ago in an argument. Sort of goes against
> >your reasoning, but then you were never very good at derogatry remarks.
> >
> Do I have to be in order to pull your chain? (hint: NO.)
>
Unfamiliar with your idiomatic reply. Either that or it is complete garbage.
> >> Your responses are becoming tiresome- if I wanted an echo, I'd buy a
> >parrot, Colon. If you are going to flame, at least be original, OK?
> >>
> >Obviously the old methods still bite...
>
> I was recommending certain medications for you, Colon, and not that
you start
> sniffing glue.
Unless you show me proof that these medications that you are taking are
not doing you harm, I won't be taking them. I expect clinical tests that
date back at least ten years. Judging from your letters I suspect that
these drugs you are taking are detrimental to one's mental health.
Therefore your recommendations are somewhat dubious. I only hope that
psychiatrist of yours isn't forcing you to take these drugs.
> I am impressed, though- I never imagined it possible for a man
> to perform fellatio upon himself...
>
I've heard the certain drugs expand your imagination. Do you take these
as well?
> >
> >> BTW, I said to ease up on the Valium, Colon, not to go cold turkey
off it.
> >> The symptoms of that were evident in that last echo of yours- you
were ranting
> >> (again)...
> >>
> >Seeing as I have no experience with Valium and therefore have no knowledge
> >of it's effects, we must expect that you have gone through this
> >procedure. Is this what your psychiatrist prescribed?
>
> You are almost TOO pathetic, Colon. Almost.
>
Ironical isn't it? For someone that cannot win even a simple argument, he
calls someone that can win an argument, pathetic. Perhaps your
psychiatrist could help you here.
> >Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
>
> Remember what I told you about fellatio, Colon. At least you could refrain
> from using the computer for it...
>
So now you are saying that you can perform fellatio upon yourself. I mean
that is what you told me about it isn't it? Heck, no wonder your
imagination could handle it, you've already have done it.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Aug 7 23:44:24 PDT 1995
Article: 30323 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news1.digital.com!decwrl!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 1995 09:07:38 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 36
Distribution: World
Message-ID:
References: <3vme8p$fea@earth.usa.net> <3vt2rv$skb@agate.berkeley.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.revisionism:30323 alt.politics.white-power:11463 alt.politics.nationalism.white:11906
> >However Richard Schultz used his imagination and since there is a law
> >against it, it reflects his intellectual level.
>
> There's a law against me using my imagination? Uh oh.
>
Amusing. Makes a change.
> >However he has since stated that was not his meaning.
>
> You should learn to read, son.
^^^
My mother never told me about you.
> All that I ever said was that my suggestion
> that they let you into University to keep the sheep safe *might* not have
> had a sexual meaning. Then again, it might have.
>
I seem to recall that when you wrote it you had thought of me stealing
fleece and/or meat rather than a sexual meaning.
> >Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
>
> The question is: who is dumber, Les Griswold, or someone who wishes he
> were Les Griswold?
It's quite amazing to think that there could be two racists isn't it? I
was trying to help the average liberal get his mind around this concept,
seeing as he cannot understand reality. Take Jeanne for instance, she has
incredible trouble differentiating between Les and Sylvie. Most liberals
think (?) they are intelligent, my justification is seeing whether they
could comprehend two things at once (perhaps I should restrict myself to
seeing whether a liberal can comprehend one thing.) In this case, the
possibility of two racists.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Aug 7 23:45:30 PDT 1995
Article: 30374 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!news.duke.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglt3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ARyans in Egypt and Greece? (LOL!!) (was RE: Egypt, Greece and India)
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 1995 18:14:22 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 248
Message-ID:
References: <3vledo$27m@transfer.stratus.com> <3vqca4$592@transfer.stratus.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglt3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.politics.white-power:11496 alt.politics.nationalism.white:11956 alt.revisionism:30374
> >> >White supremcists, white nationalists and so forth have regularly stated
> >> >that the ancients of these nations were Aryan/white. Some liberals
> >> >contest this with some sort of proof (?). I would suggest to these
> >> >liberals that they take a trip to a good museum and have a look at these
> >> >nations exhibits.
>
> >> Then why did the greeks write about the "Aryans"? Why did Caesar who
> >> was partial Greek (A roman was greek mixed in with various Italic
> >> tribes) write about the northern tribes (barbarians): he even identified
> >> them (paraphrased): "east of the rhine, they are tall in stature, light
> >> complexion and various hair colors, right of the rhine they are tall,
> >> light complexion Blonde and more barbaric than the people to the west;
> >> other than these features, they are almost identical as a people."
>
> >> Caesar was talking about the ancient "Celts" and the various "Germanic"
> >> tribes. The Celts occupied Northern Italy, France and Iberia (Spain)
> >> The Germanics were east of the Rhine River; the Slavs were to the east
> >> of the Germanics.
>
> >> Now, this is clear evidence that the ARyans were not the Greeks, because
> >> in order for them to be Greek, they would have had to also have been
> >> Roman.
>
> >> Various ARyan tribes, when hungry, used to attack towns in Greece.
>
> >> You can't get around that. Greek history gives us information about
> >> the ARyans. Who wrote it? Another group of ARyans, who described
> >> the Aryans as being "different"?????
>
> >Greeks were sandy haired. Romans also described the Germans as different
> >yet the early Romans were the same. Some Roman Catholic monks did similar
> >to the Vikings (during their raiding periods).
>
> You mean the early Italic tribes. They were Germanic, or Celtic,
> or probably both. The earliest Romans were probably full Greek. While
> generations later, they may have assimilated within the majority
> of various European tribes living in Italy and France.
>
> >> >Having just been around Auckland's War Museum (26/07/1995). I will now
> >> >share the results. First the Egyptian exhibit. On centre stage we
have a
> >> >female mummy. On the lid we have a sculpture of her face. Thin lips,
> >> >high cheek bones, long head, and more importantly pure white paint.
>
> >> I'd be real careful about that. There were reasons why the egyptians
> >> laid things out the way they did. There were reasons for almost every
> >> thing. From color to design etc. * <-- note
>
> >So this is an excuse for ignoring historical evidence?
>
> NO, I only said "i'd be careful". You can't go making a conclusion
> about a poeple based on a couple of artifacts. I've seen Egyptian
> drawings also and the people were brown.
>
Depends on which time period you are talking about. Egyptians today are
brown, and have been for a reasonable "chunk" of history. The "race" that
built the pyramids and so forth weren't brown (or black.)
> >Why would the most
> >powerful (at the time) nation want to have their progeny believe they were
> >white when they were Negroes? Also you should find out the Egyptian's
> >belief in the afterlife, it should disprove very succinctly your statement
> >above.
>
> I don't follow your last point.
>
If you knew Egyptian mythology and the importance of having accurate
portrails of oneself for the afterlife then you would not have bothered
stating *.
> The face of the Sphinx; do you believe it has Aryan features?
>
> I don't believe so, It looks Egyptian.
>
It's hard to say with the erosion and nose missing. However it is clearly
not negroid.
> >> And since when do Aryans have the market cornered with "high cheek
> >> bones and thin lips"?
>
> >lzaird believes the ancient egyptians were negro.
>
> I don't believe they were south of the Sahara types; I believe they
> were of a lighter skin.
>
> >> Egyptian people are not "Black"; they're more mediteranian. They can
> >> have European features.
>
> >> >Then
> >> >there is a hieroglyph of a red skinned man before one of the animal
headed
> >> >egyptian gods (also red skinned). Then there are the statures of either
> >> >red skinned people or white skinned people. Not one black (or brown)
> >> >stature among them and of course the flat nose and inflated lips are
> >> >nonexistent as well.
>
> >> I work with an Egyptian. She does not have "inflated lips and a flat
> >> nose'.
>
> >The current Egyptians are mongrels (ie., mixed breed).
>
> And probably so were the ancients.
>
Then why portray white or pink/red skin sculptures, portraits, statues,
hieroglyphics and so forth?
> >> >Next is the greek exhibit. We have non painted statures of the
greek men
> >> >and women (we could say Aryan but since liberals can't tell negro
features
> >> >from Aryan features I'll move on). However the Museum possesses two
> >> >paintings of greek men. Which of course have pink skin and light brown
> >> >hair (sandy).
>
> >> Greeks are European. They are not Germanic, but they are white.
>
> >> >Lastly the Indian exhibit. There are several time periods. One of
which
> >> >covers the Aryans. Again we have painted statures (and even a tapestry
> >> >from SE Asia of the Indian Aryans -- from trade links). Which of course
> >> >show the Aryan skin and face (white, pink or red).
>
> >> So because of one artist choice in color, you believe that ARyans
> >> were in India?
>
> >Do you have a better meaning? It seems very good evidence for proof that
> >they were fair and not dark. Why would they want the world to now that
> >such a powerful nation was white when they were dark?
>
> Before I make any conclusions, I'd have to actually look at what
> you are talking about.
>
> >> Maybe the color had other meaning? Have you thought of that? Maybe
> >> the artist wasn't a racist.
>
> >Maybe the artists were painting the everyday person.
>
> Or maybe the artist was painting the various races that migrate through.
> Or the various races he has seen or knows about.
> We all know that the European people (Germanics Celts, Picts, etc.) were
> Nomadic.
>
We do? The best "European" people that were nomadic were the Scythians.
Most of the aryan type people were settlers. On what basis do you make
the Picts nomadic? All there is on them is theories.
> >> >Somehow I doubt this will convince the liberals, so I suggest you do
your
> >> >own tour of a Museum.
>
> >> It wouldn't even convince a Libertarian like myself.
>
> >> >Though even after this I can expect lzaird to
> >> >continue to believe in Negro (sorry, Sub Saharan) high civilization of
> >> >Egypt.
>
> >> I would not classify Egyptians as "Negro". I think the closest
> >> articulation would be "mediteranian".
>
> >lzaird's beliefs again.
>
> WEll, race is a vague and broad term. It's too general.
Species then?
>
> >> >Which indicates the level of intelligence lzaird has attained.
>
> >> Of course, you couldn't show the readership how this indicates
> >> any level of intellect, could you?
>
> >No, but your reply indicates your own. You're a parrot that has never
> >bothered to examine evidence. You only believe some charismatic figure
> >that tells you differently to what is actually there.
>
> The evidence? Aryans were not greeks. There may have been aryan
> blood mixed in with the Greeks, as there probably is today, but
> in no way are the aryan tribes of Europe also the ancient Greeks.
>
They were an aryan people. Whether you classify them as coming from the
aryan tribes is irrelevant. By aryan I mean fair.
> We know this because of Greek writings.
>
> >> >Of
> >> >course if a Museum is too much effort, a poor substitute is a good
book on
> >> >the relevant time periods. It's a lot harder to dispute an actual
exhibit
> >> >(though I'm sure lzaird will try).
>
> >> Alls I can say is "dream on".
>
> >Dreamers tend to be highly successful. The tend to have goals whereas
> >parrots don't.
>
> It all depends much on what you dream.
>
> >> Our European ancestors (Gaul, Germania, Iberia, Brittania, Italia),
> >> were tribal, barbaric, and nomadic.
>
> >> About half were "Germanic" and the others were "Celtic". And the
> >> differences between these two groups is getting cloudier and cloudier
> >> as scientists try to reconstruct their cultures. Of course there were
> >> other groups in Europe: "Etruscans of Northern Italy", the "Picts" of
> >> Great Britain; these tribes were absorbed by either the Celts or the
> >> various Germanic tribes.
>
> >> Nobody knows anything about these ancient Europeans unless we refer to
> >> "Greek and Roman" literature. If it wasn't for Greek and Rome, we
> >> wouldn't have known anything about the Celts, Saxons, Goths,
Etruscans or
> >> the Gauls. ** <-- Note
>
> >Too bad they didn't leave any evidence, or skeletons or anything of that
> >nature to back up the Greek and Roman authors.
>
> They did. There are ancient Celtic artifacts found from Spain to Northern
> Turkey.
>
It's called being sarcastic. Thanks for playing. You have now undermined
your statement at **, but that was my intention.
> There's also evidence to suggest that Europeans have been in europe
> "all along". Cro-Magnon man and Neanderthals lived side by side in
> Europe (thought to be two species that could not breed together; altho'
> some scientists believe that crom-maggnon breeding with neandarthal
> gives us the European race, due to the fact that Neanderthals had
> very distinct facial features not unlike modern day Europeans).
>
> The jury isn't out yet on whether cro-magnons in europe either
> killed off the neanderthals or whether the two produced a hybrid
> offspring of the two species (I'm not sure if "species" is the
> proper term; but cro-magnons were quite different than neaderthals).
>
> >> So, to say the least, the very historical references we use to find
> >> information on the ARyans, were written by the Greeks and Romans: a
> >> different culture.
>
> >> Your theory is flawed.
>
> >Too bad I looked at actual artifacts, not Greek and Roman authors.
>
> When I look at greek and roman literature, I'm looking through the
> eyes of the ancients.
>
I take it you're blind then?
Colin.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Tue Aug 8 22:24:48 PDT 1995
Article: 30320 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!news.duke.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Michael Stein: Portrait of a loser
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 1995 08:31:47 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 17
Message-ID:
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
> >> > Then again, Michael Stein is a Jew. Which I suppose lets him off
the hook
> >> > for being brave and facing his loss like a man.
> >>
> >> Uh-huh. And which race are you, that lets you off the hook for being brave
> >> and citing evidence to support your assertions?
> >>
> >Perhaps you would like to look at Scientific theories before shooting your
> >mouth off. The ones you no doubt propagate without thinking about.
>
> Answer the question. What race are you, that allows you to duck and
> run when challenged, never citing evidence to back up your assertions?
>
I'm afraid I won't fulfill your fetish of me being the teacher and you
being the student.
Colin.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Tue Aug 8 22:24:52 PDT 1995
Article: 30322 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!ames!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 1995 08:55:12 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 61
Message-ID:
References: <3vcfif$99i@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vj9ug$1ntc@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vq0s6$ph2@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vun3h$1b5q@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.revisionism:30322 alt.politics.white-power:11462 alt.politics.nationalism.white:11905
> >> Your brain is like a mass of saltwater taffy that anyone can
stretch or pull
> >> at will, Colon. It probably has to be that way, though, if you are
going to
> >> be susceptible to the verbal ejaculations of morons like Less and Pidgin.
>
> >Too bad I thrashed you some time ago in an argument. Sort of goes against
> >your reasoning, but then you were never very good at derogatry remarks.
> >
> Do I have to be in order to pull your chain? (hint: NO.)
>
Unfamiliar with your idiomatic reply. Either that or it is complete garbage.
> >> Your responses are becoming tiresome- if I wanted an echo, I'd buy a
> >parrot, Colon. If you are going to flame, at least be original, OK?
> >>
> >Obviously the old methods still bite...
>
> I was recommending certain medications for you, Colon, and not that
you start
> sniffing glue.
Unless you show me proof that these medications that you are taking are
not doing you harm, I won't be taking them. I expect clinical tests that
date back at least ten years. Judging from your letters I suspect that
these drugs you are taking are detrimental to one's mental health.
Therefore your recommendations are somewhat dubious. I only hope that
psychiatrist of yours isn't forcing you to take these drugs.
> I am impressed, though- I never imagined it possible for a man
> to perform fellatio upon himself...
>
I've heard the certain drugs expand your imagination. Do you take these
as well?
> >
> >> BTW, I said to ease up on the Valium, Colon, not to go cold turkey
off it.
> >> The symptoms of that were evident in that last echo of yours- you
were ranting
> >> (again)...
> >>
> >Seeing as I have no experience with Valium and therefore have no knowledge
> >of it's effects, we must expect that you have gone through this
> >procedure. Is this what your psychiatrist prescribed?
>
> You are almost TOO pathetic, Colon. Almost.
>
Ironical isn't it? For someone that cannot win even a simple argument, he
calls someone that can win an argument, pathetic. Perhaps your
psychiatrist could help you here.
> >Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
>
> Remember what I told you about fellatio, Colon. At least you could refrain
> from using the computer for it...
>
So now you are saying that you can perform fellatio upon yourself. I mean
that is what you told me about it isn't it? Heck, no wonder your
imagination could handle it, you've already have done it.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Tue Aug 8 22:24:55 PDT 1995
Article: 30323 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news1.digital.com!decwrl!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 1995 09:07:38 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 36
Distribution: World
Message-ID:
References: <3vme8p$fea@earth.usa.net> <3vt2rv$skb@agate.berkeley.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.revisionism:30323 alt.politics.white-power:11463 alt.politics.nationalism.white:11906
> >However Richard Schultz used his imagination and since there is a law
> >against it, it reflects his intellectual level.
>
> There's a law against me using my imagination? Uh oh.
>
Amusing. Makes a change.
> >However he has since stated that was not his meaning.
>
> You should learn to read, son.
^^^
My mother never told me about you.
> All that I ever said was that my suggestion
> that they let you into University to keep the sheep safe *might* not have
> had a sexual meaning. Then again, it might have.
>
I seem to recall that when you wrote it you had thought of me stealing
fleece and/or meat rather than a sexual meaning.
> >Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
>
> The question is: who is dumber, Les Griswold, or someone who wishes he
> were Les Griswold?
It's quite amazing to think that there could be two racists isn't it? I
was trying to help the average liberal get his mind around this concept,
seeing as he cannot understand reality. Take Jeanne for instance, she has
incredible trouble differentiating between Les and Sylvie. Most liberals
think (?) they are intelligent, my justification is seeing whether they
could comprehend two things at once (perhaps I should restrict myself to
seeing whether a liberal can comprehend one thing.) In this case, the
possibility of two racists.
Colin. I'm the real Les Griswold, all others are fakes.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Tue Aug 8 22:25:38 PDT 1995
Article: 30374 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!news.duke.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglt3.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: ARyans in Egypt and Greece? (LOL!!) (was RE: Egypt, Greece and India)
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 1995 18:14:22 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 248
Message-ID:
References: <3vledo$27m@transfer.stratus.com> <3vqca4$592@transfer.stratus.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglt3.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.politics.white-power:11496 alt.politics.nationalism.white:11956 alt.revisionism:30374
> >> >White supremcists, white nationalists and so forth have regularly stated
> >> >that the ancients of these nations were Aryan/white. Some liberals
> >> >contest this with some sort of proof (?). I would suggest to these
> >> >liberals that they take a trip to a good museum and have a look at these
> >> >nations exhibits.
>
> >> Then why did the greeks write about the "Aryans"? Why did Caesar who
> >> was partial Greek (A roman was greek mixed in with various Italic
> >> tribes) write about the northern tribes (barbarians): he even identified
> >> them (paraphrased): "east of the rhine, they are tall in stature, light
> >> complexion and various hair colors, right of the rhine they are tall,
> >> light complexion Blonde and more barbaric than the people to the west;
> >> other than these features, they are almost identical as a people."
>
> >> Caesar was talking about the ancient "Celts" and the various "Germanic"
> >> tribes. The Celts occupied Northern Italy, France and Iberia (Spain)
> >> The Germanics were east of the Rhine River; the Slavs were to the east
> >> of the Germanics.
>
> >> Now, this is clear evidence that the ARyans were not the Greeks, because
> >> in order for them to be Greek, they would have had to also have been
> >> Roman.
>
> >> Various ARyan tribes, when hungry, used to attack towns in Greece.
>
> >> You can't get around that. Greek history gives us information about
> >> the ARyans. Who wrote it? Another group of ARyans, who described
> >> the Aryans as being "different"?????
>
> >Greeks were sandy haired. Romans also described the Germans as different
> >yet the early Romans were the same. Some Roman Catholic monks did similar
> >to the Vikings (during their raiding periods).
>
> You mean the early Italic tribes. They were Germanic, or Celtic,
> or probably both. The earliest Romans were probably full Greek. While
> generations later, they may have assimilated within the majority
> of various European tribes living in Italy and France.
>
> >> >Having just been around Auckland's War Museum (26/07/1995). I will now
> >> >share the results. First the Egyptian exhibit. On centre stage we
have a
> >> >female mummy. On the lid we have a sculpture of her face. Thin lips,
> >> >high cheek bones, long head, and more importantly pure white paint.
>
> >> I'd be real careful about that. There were reasons why the egyptians
> >> laid things out the way they did. There were reasons for almost every
> >> thing. From color to design etc. * <-- note
>
> >So this is an excuse for ignoring historical evidence?
>
> NO, I only said "i'd be careful". You can't go making a conclusion
> about a poeple based on a couple of artifacts. I've seen Egyptian
> drawings also and the people were brown.
>
Depends on which time period you are talking about. Egyptians today are
brown, and have been for a reasonable "chunk" of history. The "race" that
built the pyramids and so forth weren't brown (or black.)
> >Why would the most
> >powerful (at the time) nation want to have their progeny believe they were
> >white when they were Negroes? Also you should find out the Egyptian's
> >belief in the afterlife, it should disprove very succinctly your statement
> >above.
>
> I don't follow your last point.
>
If you knew Egyptian mythology and the importance of having accurate
portrails of oneself for the afterlife then you would not have bothered
stating *.
> The face of the Sphinx; do you believe it has Aryan features?
>
> I don't believe so, It looks Egyptian.
>
It's hard to say with the erosion and nose missing. However it is clearly
not negroid.
> >> And since when do Aryans have the market cornered with "high cheek
> >> bones and thin lips"?
>
> >lzaird believes the ancient egyptians were negro.
>
> I don't believe they were south of the Sahara types; I believe they
> were of a lighter skin.
>
> >> Egyptian people are not "Black"; they're more mediteranian. They can
> >> have European features.
>
> >> >Then
> >> >there is a hieroglyph of a red skinned man before one of the animal
headed
> >> >egyptian gods (also red skinned). Then there are the statures of either
> >> >red skinned people or white skinned people. Not one black (or brown)
> >> >stature among them and of course the flat nose and inflated lips are
> >> >nonexistent as well.
>
> >> I work with an Egyptian. She does not have "inflated lips and a flat
> >> nose'.
>
> >The current Egyptians are mongrels (ie., mixed breed).
>
> And probably so were the ancients.
>
Then why portray white or pink/red skin sculptures, portraits, statues,
hieroglyphics and so forth?
> >> >Next is the greek exhibit. We have non painted statures of the
greek men
> >> >and women (we could say Aryan but since liberals can't tell negro
features
> >> >from Aryan features I'll move on). However the Museum possesses two
> >> >paintings of greek men. Which of course have pink skin and light brown
> >> >hair (sandy).
>
> >> Greeks are European. They are not Germanic, but they are white.
>
> >> >Lastly the Indian exhibit. There are several time periods. One of
which
> >> >covers the Aryans. Again we have painted statures (and even a tapestry
> >> >from SE Asia of the Indian Aryans -- from trade links). Which of course
> >> >show the Aryan skin and face (white, pink or red).
>
> >> So because of one artist choice in color, you believe that ARyans
> >> were in India?
>
> >Do you have a better meaning? It seems very good evidence for proof that
> >they were fair and not dark. Why would they want the world to now that
> >such a powerful nation was white when they were dark?
>
> Before I make any conclusions, I'd have to actually look at what
> you are talking about.
>
> >> Maybe the color had other meaning? Have you thought of that? Maybe
> >> the artist wasn't a racist.
>
> >Maybe the artists were painting the everyday person.
>
> Or maybe the artist was painting the various races that migrate through.
> Or the various races he has seen or knows about.
> We all know that the European people (Germanics Celts, Picts, etc.) were
> Nomadic.
>
We do? The best "European" people that were nomadic were the Scythians.
Most of the aryan type people were settlers. On what basis do you make
the Picts nomadic? All there is on them is theories.
> >> >Somehow I doubt this will convince the liberals, so I suggest you do
your
> >> >own tour of a Museum.
>
> >> It wouldn't even convince a Libertarian like myself.
>
> >> >Though even after this I can expect lzaird to
> >> >continue to believe in Negro (sorry, Sub Saharan) high civilization of
> >> >Egypt.
>
> >> I would not classify Egyptians as "Negro". I think the closest
> >> articulation would be "mediteranian".
>
> >lzaird's beliefs again.
>
> WEll, race is a vague and broad term. It's too general.
Species then?
>
> >> >Which indicates the level of intelligence lzaird has attained.
>
> >> Of course, you couldn't show the readership how this indicates
> >> any level of intellect, could you?
>
> >No, but your reply indicates your own. You're a parrot that has never
> >bothered to examine evidence. You only believe some charismatic figure
> >that tells you differently to what is actually there.
>
> The evidence? Aryans were not greeks. There may have been aryan
> blood mixed in with the Greeks, as there probably is today, but
> in no way are the aryan tribes of Europe also the ancient Greeks.
>
They were an aryan people. Whether you classify them as coming from the
aryan tribes is irrelevant. By aryan I mean fair.
> We know this because of Greek writings.
>
> >> >Of
> >> >course if a Museum is too much effort, a poor substitute is a good
book on
> >> >the relevant time periods. It's a lot harder to dispute an actual
exhibit
> >> >(though I'm sure lzaird will try).
>
> >> Alls I can say is "dream on".
>
> >Dreamers tend to be highly successful. The tend to have goals whereas
> >parrots don't.
>
> It all depends much on what you dream.
>
> >> Our European ancestors (Gaul, Germania, Iberia, Brittania, Italia),
> >> were tribal, barbaric, and nomadic.
>
> >> About half were "Germanic" and the others were "Celtic". And the
> >> differences between these two groups is getting cloudier and cloudier
> >> as scientists try to reconstruct their cultures. Of course there were
> >> other groups in Europe: "Etruscans of Northern Italy", the "Picts" of
> >> Great Britain; these tribes were absorbed by either the Celts or the
> >> various Germanic tribes.
>
> >> Nobody knows anything about these ancient Europeans unless we refer to
> >> "Greek and Roman" literature. If it wasn't for Greek and Rome, we
> >> wouldn't have known anything about the Celts, Saxons, Goths,
Etruscans or
> >> the Gauls. ** <-- Note
>
> >Too bad they didn't leave any evidence, or skeletons or anything of that
> >nature to back up the Greek and Roman authors.
>
> They did. There are ancient Celtic artifacts found from Spain to Northern
> Turkey.
>
It's called being sarcastic. Thanks for playing. You have now undermined
your statement at **, but that was my intention.
> There's also evidence to suggest that Europeans have been in europe
> "all along". Cro-Magnon man and Neanderthals lived side by side in
> Europe (thought to be two species that could not breed together; altho'
> some scientists believe that crom-maggnon breeding with neandarthal
> gives us the European race, due to the fact that Neanderthals had
> very distinct facial features not unlike modern day Europeans).
>
> The jury isn't out yet on whether cro-magnons in europe either
> killed off the neanderthals or whether the two produced a hybrid
> offspring of the two species (I'm not sure if "species" is the
> proper term; but cro-magnons were quite different than neaderthals).
>
> >> So, to say the least, the very historical references we use to find
> >> information on the ARyans, were written by the Greeks and Romans: a
> >> different culture.
>
> >> Your theory is flawed.
>
> >Too bad I looked at actual artifacts, not Greek and Roman authors.
>
> When I look at greek and roman literature, I'm looking through the
> eyes of the ancients.
>
I take it you're blind then?
Colin.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Aug 9 17:11:13 PDT 1995
Article: 12150 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.skinheads,alt.revisionism,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: What colour the Egyptians? (Reply to Egypt, Greece and India)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 08:27:50 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 75
Message-ID:
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.politics.nationalism.white:12150 alt.politics.white-power:11732 alt.skinheads:25118 alt.revisionism:30652 alt.discrimination:33435
> Champollion the Younger is often referred to as the "Founder of
> Egyptology". This exerpt is from his thirteenth letter to his brother
> concerning the bas-reliefs on the tomb of Sesostris I. It represents the
> races (yes, I said races) of man known to the Egyptians and is the oldest
> complete ethnological document known...
>
> "Thus we have before our eyes the image of the various races of man known
> to the Egyptians and we learn at the same time the great geographical or
> ethnological divisions established during that early epoch. Men led by
> Horus, the shepherd of the peoples, belong to four distinct families. The
> first, the one closest to the god, has a DARK RED COLOUR, a
> well-proportioned body, kind face, nose slightly aquiline, long braided
> hair, and is dressed in white. The legends designate this species as
> Rot-en-ne-Rome, the race of men par excellence, i.e., the Egyptians.
> There can be no uncertainty about the racial identity of the man who
> comes next: he belongs to the BLACK RACE, designated under the general
> term Nahasi. The third represents a very different aspect; his skin color
> borders on YELLOW OR TAN; he has a strongly aquiline nose, thick beard,
> and wears a short garment of varied colours; these are called Namou.
> Finally, the last is what we call FLESH-COLOURED, a WHITE skin of most
> delicate shade, a nose straight or slightly arched, blue eyes, blond or
> reddish beard, tall stature and very slender, clad in a hairy ox-skin, a
> VERITABLE SAVAGE tattoed on various parts of his body; he is called Tamhou.
> ...
> The variations I observed fully convinced me that they had tried to
> represent here the inhabitants of the four corners of the earth,
> ACCORDING TO THE EGYPTIAN SYSTEM, namely:
> 1. the inhabitants of Egypt which, by itself, formed one part of the world...
> 2. the inhabitants of Africa proper: Blacks
> 3. Asians [read: Semitic-speakers of Asia and Medes (i.e., the pre-persians)]
> 4. finally (and I am ASHAMED TO SAY SO, since our race is the LAST AND
> MOST SAVAGE in the series), Europeans who, in these remote epochs,
> frankly did not cut too fine a figure in the world. In this category we
> must include ALL BLONDS AND WHITE-SKINNED PEOPLE living...in Europe..."
>
> From: Champollion-Figeac, *Ancient Egypt* Paris: Collection l'Univers,
> 1839, pp.30-31
>
>
> The fact is, the ancient Egyptians were not and did not consider themselves
> white or black. I see this black/white argument as political and not
> based on reality. You white and black nationalist types like to place the
> peoples or cultures that are neither white nor black (e.g., Egypt, India,
> Sumeria, etc..) in your camp just to prove that "we were better than
> you". In reality, neither group has any claim to these civilizations, the
> catalysts of the world we live in today. Such irony.
>
> I say again: try to disprove me.
>
Extremely interesting. However it would appear that Sesostris I had a
severe disliking of the Pheonicans or Libyans. It is reasonably well
known that they raided very similar to the Vikings (who were also
described as savage.) I would also like to bring your attention to the
Encyclopedia Brittanica 1990 volume 17 pp 443 Figure 2. It is a picture
taken from Cairo Museum with artifacts from the 4th Dynasty c2600 B.C.
Two statues are present; Prince Ra-hotep and Lady Nefret. Both of them
are of the white race (also neither are red.)
As for the skin colour dark red, that is not too hard to explain. Having
once a physics teacher whose nickname was Sav (short for saveloy.) A
saveloy (if you don't know) is similar to a sausage except it is contained
within a red skin. Why the nickname? He was literally red. One of the
words for men in the Pheonician and Hebrew language is pronounced
aw-dawm. Which means to show ruddy red. For example when I get angry I
literally turn red, the greater the anger the darker the red. When I put
my body through physical duress (e.g., bench press) I also turn a dark
red. Light exercise means only a slight red complexion. The reason for
turning red is that my blood vessels are close to the surface of my skin.
It's quite feasible for the Ancient Egyptians to have even closer blood
vessels to the skin which would result in a continual red complexion (as
the forementioned physics teacher.) Is there another race that can show
red in the face other than the white race? What about the current
Egyptians, are they red?
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Aug 9 17:11:21 PDT 1995
Article: 12158 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: Oi! CyberHate's back
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 09:48:03 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 14
Message-ID:
References: <3urs4t$qg1@bell.maths.tcd.ie> <3vcf9n$r5d@news1.best.com> <3vhmss$r37@news1.best.com> <3vrt0p$e0o@news1.best.com> <405b52$v2@news1.best.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.politics.white-power:11742 alt.politics.nationalism.white:12158
> : I couldn't really care what you believe Mike. If you don't want to
> : believe I'm built like a brick shithouse, fine. If you want to make an
> : issue of it, go for it. I really couldn't care less.
>
> For someone who doens't give a shit, Colon, you sure waste
> a lot of bandwidth telling people how little a shit you give.
>
I found with experimentation that liberal types respond only to
repetition. It appears that's the only way they learn -- whether it be
true or false. After I repeat it a few hundred times you will eventually
learn. I doubt that you believe I couldn't careless whether you believe I
used to do bodybuilding or not. Just as an example.
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Aug 9 18:14:40 PDT 1995
Article: 11732 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.skinheads,alt.revisionism,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: What colour the Egyptians? (Reply to Egypt, Greece and India)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 08:27:50 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 75
Message-ID:
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.politics.nationalism.white:12150 alt.politics.white-power:11732 alt.skinheads:25118 alt.revisionism:30652 alt.discrimination:33435
> Champollion the Younger is often referred to as the "Founder of
> Egyptology". This exerpt is from his thirteenth letter to his brother
> concerning the bas-reliefs on the tomb of Sesostris I. It represents the
> races (yes, I said races) of man known to the Egyptians and is the oldest
> complete ethnological document known...
>
> "Thus we have before our eyes the image of the various races of man known
> to the Egyptians and we learn at the same time the great geographical or
> ethnological divisions established during that early epoch. Men led by
> Horus, the shepherd of the peoples, belong to four distinct families. The
> first, the one closest to the god, has a DARK RED COLOUR, a
> well-proportioned body, kind face, nose slightly aquiline, long braided
> hair, and is dressed in white. The legends designate this species as
> Rot-en-ne-Rome, the race of men par excellence, i.e., the Egyptians.
> There can be no uncertainty about the racial identity of the man who
> comes next: he belongs to the BLACK RACE, designated under the general
> term Nahasi. The third represents a very different aspect; his skin color
> borders on YELLOW OR TAN; he has a strongly aquiline nose, thick beard,
> and wears a short garment of varied colours; these are called Namou.
> Finally, the last is what we call FLESH-COLOURED, a WHITE skin of most
> delicate shade, a nose straight or slightly arched, blue eyes, blond or
> reddish beard, tall stature and very slender, clad in a hairy ox-skin, a
> VERITABLE SAVAGE tattoed on various parts of his body; he is called Tamhou.
> ...
> The variations I observed fully convinced me that they had tried to
> represent here the inhabitants of the four corners of the earth,
> ACCORDING TO THE EGYPTIAN SYSTEM, namely:
> 1. the inhabitants of Egypt which, by itself, formed one part of the world...
> 2. the inhabitants of Africa proper: Blacks
> 3. Asians [read: Semitic-speakers of Asia and Medes (i.e., the pre-persians)]
> 4. finally (and I am ASHAMED TO SAY SO, since our race is the LAST AND
> MOST SAVAGE in the series), Europeans who, in these remote epochs,
> frankly did not cut too fine a figure in the world. In this category we
> must include ALL BLONDS AND WHITE-SKINNED PEOPLE living...in Europe..."
>
> From: Champollion-Figeac, *Ancient Egypt* Paris: Collection l'Univers,
> 1839, pp.30-31
>
>
> The fact is, the ancient Egyptians were not and did not consider themselves
> white or black. I see this black/white argument as political and not
> based on reality. You white and black nationalist types like to place the
> peoples or cultures that are neither white nor black (e.g., Egypt, India,
> Sumeria, etc..) in your camp just to prove that "we were better than
> you". In reality, neither group has any claim to these civilizations, the
> catalysts of the world we live in today. Such irony.
>
> I say again: try to disprove me.
>
Extremely interesting. However it would appear that Sesostris I had a
severe disliking of the Pheonicans or Libyans. It is reasonably well
known that they raided very similar to the Vikings (who were also
described as savage.) I would also like to bring your attention to the
Encyclopedia Brittanica 1990 volume 17 pp 443 Figure 2. It is a picture
taken from Cairo Museum with artifacts from the 4th Dynasty c2600 B.C.
Two statues are present; Prince Ra-hotep and Lady Nefret. Both of them
are of the white race (also neither are red.)
As for the skin colour dark red, that is not too hard to explain. Having
once a physics teacher whose nickname was Sav (short for saveloy.) A
saveloy (if you don't know) is similar to a sausage except it is contained
within a red skin. Why the nickname? He was literally red. One of the
words for men in the Pheonician and Hebrew language is pronounced
aw-dawm. Which means to show ruddy red. For example when I get angry I
literally turn red, the greater the anger the darker the red. When I put
my body through physical duress (e.g., bench press) I also turn a dark
red. Light exercise means only a slight red complexion. The reason for
turning red is that my blood vessels are close to the surface of my skin.
It's quite feasible for the Ancient Egyptians to have even closer blood
vessels to the skin which would result in a continual red complexion (as
the forementioned physics teacher.) Is there another race that can show
red in the face other than the white race? What about the current
Egyptians, are they red?
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Aug 9 18:14:50 PDT 1995
Article: 11742 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: Oi! CyberHate's back
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 09:48:03 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 14
Message-ID:
References: <3urs4t$qg1@bell.maths.tcd.ie> <3vcf9n$r5d@news1.best.com> <3vhmss$r37@news1.best.com> <3vrt0p$e0o@news1.best.com> <405b52$v2@news1.best.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.politics.white-power:11742 alt.politics.nationalism.white:12158
> : I couldn't really care what you believe Mike. If you don't want to
> : believe I'm built like a brick shithouse, fine. If you want to make an
> : issue of it, go for it. I really couldn't care less.
>
> For someone who doens't give a shit, Colon, you sure waste
> a lot of bandwidth telling people how little a shit you give.
>
I found with experimentation that liberal types respond only to
repetition. It appears that's the only way they learn -- whether it be
true or false. After I repeat it a few hundred times you will eventually
learn. I doubt that you believe I couldn't careless whether you believe I
used to do bodybuilding or not. Just as an example.
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Aug 9 19:38:02 PDT 1995
Article: 25118 of alt.skinheads
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.skinheads,alt.revisionism,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: What colour the Egyptians? (Reply to Egypt, Greece and India)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 08:27:50 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 75
Message-ID:
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.politics.nationalism.white:12150 alt.politics.white-power:11732 alt.skinheads:25118 alt.revisionism:30652 alt.discrimination:33435
> Champollion the Younger is often referred to as the "Founder of
> Egyptology". This exerpt is from his thirteenth letter to his brother
> concerning the bas-reliefs on the tomb of Sesostris I. It represents the
> races (yes, I said races) of man known to the Egyptians and is the oldest
> complete ethnological document known...
>
> "Thus we have before our eyes the image of the various races of man known
> to the Egyptians and we learn at the same time the great geographical or
> ethnological divisions established during that early epoch. Men led by
> Horus, the shepherd of the peoples, belong to four distinct families. The
> first, the one closest to the god, has a DARK RED COLOUR, a
> well-proportioned body, kind face, nose slightly aquiline, long braided
> hair, and is dressed in white. The legends designate this species as
> Rot-en-ne-Rome, the race of men par excellence, i.e., the Egyptians.
> There can be no uncertainty about the racial identity of the man who
> comes next: he belongs to the BLACK RACE, designated under the general
> term Nahasi. The third represents a very different aspect; his skin color
> borders on YELLOW OR TAN; he has a strongly aquiline nose, thick beard,
> and wears a short garment of varied colours; these are called Namou.
> Finally, the last is what we call FLESH-COLOURED, a WHITE skin of most
> delicate shade, a nose straight or slightly arched, blue eyes, blond or
> reddish beard, tall stature and very slender, clad in a hairy ox-skin, a
> VERITABLE SAVAGE tattoed on various parts of his body; he is called Tamhou.
> ...
> The variations I observed fully convinced me that they had tried to
> represent here the inhabitants of the four corners of the earth,
> ACCORDING TO THE EGYPTIAN SYSTEM, namely:
> 1. the inhabitants of Egypt which, by itself, formed one part of the world...
> 2. the inhabitants of Africa proper: Blacks
> 3. Asians [read: Semitic-speakers of Asia and Medes (i.e., the pre-persians)]
> 4. finally (and I am ASHAMED TO SAY SO, since our race is the LAST AND
> MOST SAVAGE in the series), Europeans who, in these remote epochs,
> frankly did not cut too fine a figure in the world. In this category we
> must include ALL BLONDS AND WHITE-SKINNED PEOPLE living...in Europe..."
>
> From: Champollion-Figeac, *Ancient Egypt* Paris: Collection l'Univers,
> 1839, pp.30-31
>
>
> The fact is, the ancient Egyptians were not and did not consider themselves
> white or black. I see this black/white argument as political and not
> based on reality. You white and black nationalist types like to place the
> peoples or cultures that are neither white nor black (e.g., Egypt, India,
> Sumeria, etc..) in your camp just to prove that "we were better than
> you". In reality, neither group has any claim to these civilizations, the
> catalysts of the world we live in today. Such irony.
>
> I say again: try to disprove me.
>
Extremely interesting. However it would appear that Sesostris I had a
severe disliking of the Pheonicans or Libyans. It is reasonably well
known that they raided very similar to the Vikings (who were also
described as savage.) I would also like to bring your attention to the
Encyclopedia Brittanica 1990 volume 17 pp 443 Figure 2. It is a picture
taken from Cairo Museum with artifacts from the 4th Dynasty c2600 B.C.
Two statues are present; Prince Ra-hotep and Lady Nefret. Both of them
are of the white race (also neither are red.)
As for the skin colour dark red, that is not too hard to explain. Having
once a physics teacher whose nickname was Sav (short for saveloy.) A
saveloy (if you don't know) is similar to a sausage except it is contained
within a red skin. Why the nickname? He was literally red. One of the
words for men in the Pheonician and Hebrew language is pronounced
aw-dawm. Which means to show ruddy red. For example when I get angry I
literally turn red, the greater the anger the darker the red. When I put
my body through physical duress (e.g., bench press) I also turn a dark
red. Light exercise means only a slight red complexion. The reason for
turning red is that my blood vessels are close to the surface of my skin.
It's quite feasible for the Ancient Egyptians to have even closer blood
vessels to the skin which would result in a continual red complexion (as
the forementioned physics teacher.) Is there another race that can show
red in the face other than the white race? What about the current
Egyptians, are they red?
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Thu Aug 10 06:04:15 PDT 1995
Article: 30726 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!CTCnet!news.math.psu.edu!ra.nrl.navy.mil!lamarck.sura.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglr2.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN: Robert Schultz
Date: 10 Aug 1995 02:34:47 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 23
Message-ID:
References: <3vcfif$99i@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vj9ug$1ntc@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vq0s6$ph2@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <3vun3h$1b5q@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <406nv7$1j5g@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglr2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.revisionism:30726 alt.politics.white-power:11770 alt.politics.nationalism.white:12183
> Pathetic: Term used by myself to describe Colon's attempts at turning my
> less-than-complimentary remarks concerning him back at myself.
>
> `One who can not even win a simple argument'- as I believe, Colon, that
> `simple argument' (it started that way but became more trying as your
credulous
> stupidity became more obvious) began over your ridiculous claim that the Aztec
> royal line was `white'. I am certain that even you can see that it
would be in
> your best interests not to dredge up that old potty-sludge again...
>
Want to lose again?
> BTW, Colon, you are supposed to take V-A-L-I-U-M, not P-C-P.
>
It's that what your psychiatrist recommended for you after he found out
you were taking P-C-P? After all, I have no experience with such
substances, therefore we must assume that you are well experienced with
such things.
Cailean.
P.S How do you take P-C-P?
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Thu Aug 10 06:04:42 PDT 1995
Article: 30745 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglr2.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.usenet.kooks
Subject: Re: McKinstry's latest lie
Date: 10 Aug 1995 02:41:50 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 43
Message-ID:
References: <3uo8ov$7ks@agate.berkeley.edu> <3vqc6e$l2k@agate.berkeley.edu> <3vt961$8ia@access5.digex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglr2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.revisionism:30745 alt.usenet.kooks:18326
> [>Richard Schultz wrote:]
> >> Face it: you made a claim, and that claim was shown to be false.
> >> No matter how much you try to weasel out of it, that's what happened.
> >
> >It would appear that I was in error. Going even back to 1764, the
> >dictionaries do not use the word Jew (Iew, Iewe or other derivative).
> >They give a good description of a Jew but they don't list those three
> >particular letters.
>
> In other words, after much weaseling Mr. McKinstry finally provides
> grudging admission that his claim is not true [that the Webster's 1950's,
> or _some_ dictionary, lists "Jew" under the definition of "parasite] - but
> it really _should_ be true, he's sure it was just an oversight on the part
> of the dictionary publishers, so somehow he didn't _really_ lie.
>
>
> >Here is the definition of parasite by Murray's Dictionary 1864,
> >predecessor to the Oxford.
> >
> >"One who eats at the table or at the expense of another; always with
> >opprobious application: 'One that frequents rich tables and earns his
> >welcome by flattery' (J.);
>
> Just in case you're wondering, the "J." refers to Johnson's
> dictionary.
>
> >one who obtains the hospitality, patronage, or
> >favour of the wealthy or powerful by obsequiousness and flattery; a
> >hangeron from interested motives; a 'toady'."
> >
> >An adequate description of a typical Jew.
>
>
> The Compact OED from the Book-of-the-Month Club gives the same
> definition as Murray's. Turning to the entry for "liar" we find:
>
> "One who lies or tells a falsehood; an untruthful person."
>
> An adequate description of Colin McKinstry.
Unfortunately Mike I said I was in error. Was I lying about that?
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Thu Aug 10 07:02:19 PDT 1995
Article: 30773 of alt.revisionism
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!philabs!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglr2.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: McKinstry's latest lie
Date: 10 Aug 1995 02:47:39 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 20
Message-ID:
References: <409c7n$1d9g@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglr2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
> : We now know, fellow readers, that McKinstry is a confirmed, proven
> : liar.
>
> And by no means here for the first time!
>
> : Why, exactly, should anyone have any further interest in the
> : statements of such a creature?
>
Obviously I get to you Jeffrey. Otherwise why do always post and email to
me? Is this some teacher/student fetish of yours?
> Because he's certain to lie again, and just as certain to be equally
> incompetant at covering up that lie? Hey, there is some comedic value.
True Adam, I say that I was in error when I am wrong (or some
equivalent.) Obviously a lousy liar. I was reasonably sure I had read
the term (in slang) jew under parasite in a 1930's Webster Dictionary (the
1950's was a typo.) I still endeavour to find that reference.
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Thu Aug 10 11:06:56 PDT 1995
Article: 12186 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!philabs!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: Captain John Smith & Pocahontas
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 09:35:01 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 231
Message-ID:
References: <3vv7hl$dap@nbc.ksu.ksu.edu> <403ot5$46c@cbs.ksu.ksu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.politics.white-power:11773 alt.politics.nationalism.white:12186
> >> >I thought I'd drag this subject back seeing as the jewish propaganda
> >> >machine over this movie has hit New Zealand.
> >>
> >> And when we make fun of this ZOG conspiracy theory you guys go on
> >> about, you start crying, "We never said anything!" Remember this, kids.
> >> Proof that at least Colin believes in a Jewish conspiracy. Although what
> >> Jewish people have to do with "Pocahontas" is beyond me.
> >>
> >Who are the directors?
>
> What the... Disney? The company? Is a Jewish conspiracy?
> Well, since I don't have my handy Pocket Guide to Jewish-Owned
> Businesses (tm), maybe someone could tell me what the hell Colin is
> talking about here?
> Hey, Colin -- how's the vibrating buttock microchip?
>
Could you please read out the credits on who are the directors of most
Hollywood movies or is that too hard?
I didn't realize they had invented "the vibrating buttock microchip?" Is
it any good?
> [snip]
> >> >He was also known as
> >> >a good keen christian (unlikely to believe in wood spirits and so forth).
> >>
> >> Damn you, Colin. Some of my bestest friends are wood sprites.
> >>
> >Well as I was saying earlier, liberals have trouble with comprehending
> >reality. By earlier I mean an earlier comment on another thread.
>
> Erm, Colin... I was talking about my friends, the wood sprites. John
> Smith didn't believe wood had spirits and so... jeez. Nevermind.
> Explaining a joke is tiring.
>
If it was funny I would have laughed.
> [snipped story of how an "obese" Pocahontas rescued John Smith]
>
> >> Ok, Colin. First off, what the hell does Pocahontas' alleged weight
> >> have to do with anything?
> [snip]
>
> >I object to the promotion of interacial marriage, which is exactly the
> >message being portrayed. It's okay for white men to take the savage's
> >women. Children are incredibly influential.
>
> Well, what about John Rolfe, the guy who really did marry her? That's
> history. You saying we cannot tell children in school that he married
> her, because they might get the idea that non-whites are pretty cool
> human beings? *
> Not to mention your entire story was relating how Pocahontas rescued
> Smith and how large she was; nothing at *all* about interracial
> marriages.
>
The reason I am annoyed with the movie Pocachantos (and it should obvious
knowing my racial stance) is with it's interacial promotion. Also I
dislike the promotion of the noble savage when they weren't. They made a
hero (Capt. John Smith) into a race mixer when he wasn't, it appears he
disliked Indians immensely for a start. So you are know saying it is all
right to promote falsehoods as an extension of *? Seeing as John Rolfe is
not mentioned and that the Indians weren't savages.
>
> >> >Going back to 1607 he arrived in Jamestown which was beleaguered by Indian
> >> >thieves (not much has changed).
> >>
> >> And the white Europeans who stole the land were...? What? Liberating
> >> it?
> >>
> >Aren't Indians nomads (at least in that time period?)
>
> Even if they were, forcing people out of where they lived for that
> season/month/whatever just 'cause you're groovin' on something called
> Manifest Destiny doesn't make it right.
By what standard was it wrong? The savages weren't doing anything useful
with it anyway.
> It was stealing, pure and
> simple.
So you have donoted your entire belongings to the Savages then? Otherwise
you are a thief, pure and simple.
> And what if the native Americans *weren't* nomadic?
>
Right of conquest.
>
> >> >These Indians were christianized and were
> >> >therefore equal with the settlers (or so the liberal types of the time
> >> >maintained.) One blatant Indian
> >>
> >> Bahahaha!!! Dammit, he wasn't a subtle Indian, he was a *blatant*
> >> one! You could tell he was Indian from eight miles off!
> >> Sheesh, Colin, this is getting thick.
> >>
> >Again, most liberals have trouble with comprehending reality. Take
> >lzaird, he cannot tell apart negro features and european features.
>
> What the hell are you talking about? Yeah, ok, so it was a cheap shot
> to make fun of your grammar, especially when there was so much else you
> wrote that could be used to make fun of you.
>
Obviously you couldn't make fun of anything else I wrote, otherwise you
would have already done it.
>
> >> >that was stealing a valuable item from
> >> >the fort was witnessed by the Captain after which he drew his sword and
> >> >cut down the offender. Thieving stopped.
> >>
> >> YAY!!!! What a noble and wonderful assassin... erm, keeper of the peace.
> >>
> >Interesting that thieving stopped.
>
> Interesting how the Europeans kept right on stealing all the land they
> could. Was this person who stole from the fort maybe taking what was his
> in the first place? Wouldn't that be just wonderful, chopping off the
> head of some guy because he wanted his own stuff back.
>
So what things did the Indians possess that could be classed as valuable
back then?
>
> >> > Note that it is in a foreign
> >> >language to liberals:
> >>
> >> Oh, fuck you, Colin. This is beneath even you, to insult people who
> >> haven't even read your damned post.
> >>
> >It's an attack upon the stupidity of this argument:
> >#1
> >#2 Your illiterate, therefore what you wrote is garbage.
>
> No one had made that argument, Colin.
Perhaps you don't read your compatriot's posts too often. It happens
quite regularly.
> You attacked the stupidity of an
> argument that had not been made (unless you were fighting with yourself
> in your head); not only that, "this is in a foreign language to
> liberals" is a direct insult to people who do not hold your viewpoints.
> It says absolutely *nothing* about grammar or punctuation.
>
Believe what you want to believe. Yes it was meant to be an insult and
was against those people who can do nothing in their lives apart from
point faults at other people (in this case grammar.)
>
> >> >"The Turkies, and other beasts and Fowle, will exceedingly increase if we
> >> >beat the Savages out of the Country,
> >>
> >> Yeah, like how the buffalo increased once the white people moved
> >> westward. Boy, isn't Cap'n Smith here a marvel?
> >>
> >The buffalo are doing reasonably well these days aren't they?
>
> No thanks to the Europeans, Colin. The reason they were almost extinct
> is that they were shot for sport and left to rot. The native Americans
> would use the entire carcass; just looking at the amount of time it took
> for the buffalo to disappear (not long) versus the length of time the
> native Americans were here and enjoyed a large buffalo population, it
> becomes clear that the invading Europeans were not at all concerned with
> the "exceeding increase" of wildlife.
Unlike savages, europeans tend to stop when it is pointed out to them.
Take for example wild bird populations. Unlike the savage Maori, European
New Zealanders actually try and preserve bird populations.
> It's been a long, long time and the buffalo are still a bit of a
> rarity. They are most common in the region I live in, and you have to go
> out of your way to see them.
>
Yet they will eventually increase, so long as the other races don't get to
numerous (and eat them.)
>
> >> >for all times of the yeere they never
> >> >spare Male nor Female, old nor young, eggs nor birds, fat nor leane, in
> >> >season nor out of season with them all is one"*
> >>
> >> >ie., the "in tune with nature" indians ate everything and spared nothing.
> >>
> >> You would expect them to willingly starve?
>
> >Perhaps there is a racial difference? Why couldn't they be more
> >productive and use horticultural or agricultural techniques?
>
> You are saying they didn't? How could they have survived at all if
> they had no ability to successfully hunt or farm?
Tell as about this farming Stacia.
> They lived in the area
> for a long time, Colin; some European with visions of grandeur and
> racist opinions hops in and immediately assesses the situation -- no
> wonder he was wrong. Wasn't Smith writing to the Queen, making arguments
> to justify taking the land?
>
So?
>
> >> They'd lived in that area for
> >> centuries, if I recall correctly. If they were depleting the natural
> >> wildlife, they would have done it a long time before 1608.
> >>
> >They lived in an incredibly large area that could support their
> >devastating eating habits.
>
> Then it wasn't devastating. If the land supports you, Colin, it is
> *not* devastating.
>
So why was the west a desert?
>
> >> >Leaving no animals to continue breeding. Which would account for their
> >> >nomadic lifestyle.
> >>
> >> Source, please.
>
> >Compare western culture with indian culture. Which could support the
> >largest population per square foot? What happened with a population boom
> >amongst Indians? *
>
> Woah, wait, are you getting the middle eastern Indians confused with
> the native Americans? If you are, it looks like your racist syntax kinda
> screwed you over.
No, I'm not getting confused. If you can think about my comments at *
then you will know for yourself. It is an argument that doesn't need
sources, only the ability to think.
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Thu Aug 10 14:12:30 PDT 1995
Article: 11773 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!philabs!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: Captain John Smith & Pocahontas
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 09:35:01 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 231
Message-ID:
References: <3vv7hl$dap@nbc.ksu.ksu.edu> <403ot5$46c@cbs.ksu.ksu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.politics.white-power:11773 alt.politics.nationalism.white:12186
> >> >I thought I'd drag this subject back seeing as the jewish propaganda
> >> >machine over this movie has hit New Zealand.
> >>
> >> And when we make fun of this ZOG conspiracy theory you guys go on
> >> about, you start crying, "We never said anything!" Remember this, kids.
> >> Proof that at least Colin believes in a Jewish conspiracy. Although what
> >> Jewish people have to do with "Pocahontas" is beyond me.
> >>
> >Who are the directors?
>
> What the... Disney? The company? Is a Jewish conspiracy?
> Well, since I don't have my handy Pocket Guide to Jewish-Owned
> Businesses (tm), maybe someone could tell me what the hell Colin is
> talking about here?
> Hey, Colin -- how's the vibrating buttock microchip?
>
Could you please read out the credits on who are the directors of most
Hollywood movies or is that too hard?
I didn't realize they had invented "the vibrating buttock microchip?" Is
it any good?
> [snip]
> >> >He was also known as
> >> >a good keen christian (unlikely to believe in wood spirits and so forth).
> >>
> >> Damn you, Colin. Some of my bestest friends are wood sprites.
> >>
> >Well as I was saying earlier, liberals have trouble with comprehending
> >reality. By earlier I mean an earlier comment on another thread.
>
> Erm, Colin... I was talking about my friends, the wood sprites. John
> Smith didn't believe wood had spirits and so... jeez. Nevermind.
> Explaining a joke is tiring.
>
If it was funny I would have laughed.
> [snipped story of how an "obese" Pocahontas rescued John Smith]
>
> >> Ok, Colin. First off, what the hell does Pocahontas' alleged weight
> >> have to do with anything?
> [snip]
>
> >I object to the promotion of interacial marriage, which is exactly the
> >message being portrayed. It's okay for white men to take the savage's
> >women. Children are incredibly influential.
>
> Well, what about John Rolfe, the guy who really did marry her? That's
> history. You saying we cannot tell children in school that he married
> her, because they might get the idea that non-whites are pretty cool
> human beings? *
> Not to mention your entire story was relating how Pocahontas rescued
> Smith and how large she was; nothing at *all* about interracial
> marriages.
>
The reason I am annoyed with the movie Pocachantos (and it should obvious
knowing my racial stance) is with it's interacial promotion. Also I
dislike the promotion of the noble savage when they weren't. They made a
hero (Capt. John Smith) into a race mixer when he wasn't, it appears he
disliked Indians immensely for a start. So you are know saying it is all
right to promote falsehoods as an extension of *? Seeing as John Rolfe is
not mentioned and that the Indians weren't savages.
>
> >> >Going back to 1607 he arrived in Jamestown which was beleaguered by Indian
> >> >thieves (not much has changed).
> >>
> >> And the white Europeans who stole the land were...? What? Liberating
> >> it?
> >>
> >Aren't Indians nomads (at least in that time period?)
>
> Even if they were, forcing people out of where they lived for that
> season/month/whatever just 'cause you're groovin' on something called
> Manifest Destiny doesn't make it right.
By what standard was it wrong? The savages weren't doing anything useful
with it anyway.
> It was stealing, pure and
> simple.
So you have donoted your entire belongings to the Savages then? Otherwise
you are a thief, pure and simple.
> And what if the native Americans *weren't* nomadic?
>
Right of conquest.
>
> >> >These Indians were christianized and were
> >> >therefore equal with the settlers (or so the liberal types of the time
> >> >maintained.) One blatant Indian
> >>
> >> Bahahaha!!! Dammit, he wasn't a subtle Indian, he was a *blatant*
> >> one! You could tell he was Indian from eight miles off!
> >> Sheesh, Colin, this is getting thick.
> >>
> >Again, most liberals have trouble with comprehending reality. Take
> >lzaird, he cannot tell apart negro features and european features.
>
> What the hell are you talking about? Yeah, ok, so it was a cheap shot
> to make fun of your grammar, especially when there was so much else you
> wrote that could be used to make fun of you.
>
Obviously you couldn't make fun of anything else I wrote, otherwise you
would have already done it.
>
> >> >that was stealing a valuable item from
> >> >the fort was witnessed by the Captain after which he drew his sword and
> >> >cut down the offender. Thieving stopped.
> >>
> >> YAY!!!! What a noble and wonderful assassin... erm, keeper of the peace.
> >>
> >Interesting that thieving stopped.
>
> Interesting how the Europeans kept right on stealing all the land they
> could. Was this person who stole from the fort maybe taking what was his
> in the first place? Wouldn't that be just wonderful, chopping off the
> head of some guy because he wanted his own stuff back.
>
So what things did the Indians possess that could be classed as valuable
back then?
>
> >> > Note that it is in a foreign
> >> >language to liberals:
> >>
> >> Oh, fuck you, Colin. This is beneath even you, to insult people who
> >> haven't even read your damned post.
> >>
> >It's an attack upon the stupidity of this argument:
> >#1
> >#2 Your illiterate, therefore what you wrote is garbage.
>
> No one had made that argument, Colin.
Perhaps you don't read your compatriot's posts too often. It happens
quite regularly.
> You attacked the stupidity of an
> argument that had not been made (unless you were fighting with yourself
> in your head); not only that, "this is in a foreign language to
> liberals" is a direct insult to people who do not hold your viewpoints.
> It says absolutely *nothing* about grammar or punctuation.
>
Believe what you want to believe. Yes it was meant to be an insult and
was against those people who can do nothing in their lives apart from
point faults at other people (in this case grammar.)
>
> >> >"The Turkies, and other beasts and Fowle, will exceedingly increase if we
> >> >beat the Savages out of the Country,
> >>
> >> Yeah, like how the buffalo increased once the white people moved
> >> westward. Boy, isn't Cap'n Smith here a marvel?
> >>
> >The buffalo are doing reasonably well these days aren't they?
>
> No thanks to the Europeans, Colin. The reason they were almost extinct
> is that they were shot for sport and left to rot. The native Americans
> would use the entire carcass; just looking at the amount of time it took
> for the buffalo to disappear (not long) versus the length of time the
> native Americans were here and enjoyed a large buffalo population, it
> becomes clear that the invading Europeans were not at all concerned with
> the "exceeding increase" of wildlife.
Unlike savages, europeans tend to stop when it is pointed out to them.
Take for example wild bird populations. Unlike the savage Maori, European
New Zealanders actually try and preserve bird populations.
> It's been a long, long time and the buffalo are still a bit of a
> rarity. They are most common in the region I live in, and you have to go
> out of your way to see them.
>
Yet they will eventually increase, so long as the other races don't get to
numerous (and eat them.)
>
> >> >for all times of the yeere they never
> >> >spare Male nor Female, old nor young, eggs nor birds, fat nor leane, in
> >> >season nor out of season with them all is one"*
> >>
> >> >ie., the "in tune with nature" indians ate everything and spared nothing.
> >>
> >> You would expect them to willingly starve?
>
> >Perhaps there is a racial difference? Why couldn't they be more
> >productive and use horticultural or agricultural techniques?
>
> You are saying they didn't? How could they have survived at all if
> they had no ability to successfully hunt or farm?
Tell as about this farming Stacia.
> They lived in the area
> for a long time, Colin; some European with visions of grandeur and
> racist opinions hops in and immediately assesses the situation -- no
> wonder he was wrong. Wasn't Smith writing to the Queen, making arguments
> to justify taking the land?
>
So?
>
> >> They'd lived in that area for
> >> centuries, if I recall correctly. If they were depleting the natural
> >> wildlife, they would have done it a long time before 1608.
> >>
> >They lived in an incredibly large area that could support their
> >devastating eating habits.
>
> Then it wasn't devastating. If the land supports you, Colin, it is
> *not* devastating.
>
So why was the west a desert?
>
> >> >Leaving no animals to continue breeding. Which would account for their
> >> >nomadic lifestyle.
> >>
> >> Source, please.
>
> >Compare western culture with indian culture. Which could support the
> >largest population per square foot? What happened with a population boom
> >amongst Indians? *
>
> Woah, wait, are you getting the middle eastern Indians confused with
> the native Americans? If you are, it looks like your racist syntax kinda
> screwed you over.
No, I'm not getting confused. If you can think about my comments at *
then you will know for yourself. It is an argument that doesn't need
sources, only the ability to think.
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Thu Aug 10 16:44:35 PDT 1995
Article: 11773 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!philabs!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: Captain John Smith & Pocahontas
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 09:35:01 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 231
Message-ID:
References: <3vv7hl$dap@nbc.ksu.ksu.edu> <403ot5$46c@cbs.ksu.ksu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: news.island.net alt.politics.white-power:11773 alt.politics.nationalism.white:12186
> >> >I thought I'd drag this subject back seeing as the jewish propaganda
> >> >machine over this movie has hit New Zealand.
> >>
> >> And when we make fun of this ZOG conspiracy theory you guys go on
> >> about, you start crying, "We never said anything!" Remember this, kids.
> >> Proof that at least Colin believes in a Jewish conspiracy. Although what
> >> Jewish people have to do with "Pocahontas" is beyond me.
> >>
> >Who are the directors?
>
> What the... Disney? The company? Is a Jewish conspiracy?
> Well, since I don't have my handy Pocket Guide to Jewish-Owned
> Businesses (tm), maybe someone could tell me what the hell Colin is
> talking about here?
> Hey, Colin -- how's the vibrating buttock microchip?
>
Could you please read out the credits on who are the directors of most
Hollywood movies or is that too hard?
I didn't realize they had invented "the vibrating buttock microchip?" Is
it any good?
> [snip]
> >> >He was also known as
> >> >a good keen christian (unlikely to believe in wood spirits and so forth).
> >>
> >> Damn you, Colin. Some of my bestest friends are wood sprites.
> >>
> >Well as I was saying earlier, liberals have trouble with comprehending
> >reality. By earlier I mean an earlier comment on another thread.
>
> Erm, Colin... I was talking about my friends, the wood sprites. John
> Smith didn't believe wood had spirits and so... jeez. Nevermind.
> Explaining a joke is tiring.
>
If it was funny I would have laughed.
> [snipped story of how an "obese" Pocahontas rescued John Smith]
>
> >> Ok, Colin. First off, what the hell does Pocahontas' alleged weight
> >> have to do with anything?
> [snip]
>
> >I object to the promotion of interacial marriage, which is exactly the
> >message being portrayed. It's okay for white men to take the savage's
> >women. Children are incredibly influential.
>
> Well, what about John Rolfe, the guy who really did marry her? That's
> history. You saying we cannot tell children in school that he married
> her, because they might get the idea that non-whites are pretty cool
> human beings? *
> Not to mention your entire story was relating how Pocahontas rescued
> Smith and how large she was; nothing at *all* about interracial
> marriages.
>
The reason I am annoyed with the movie Pocachantos (and it should obvious
knowing my racial stance) is with it's interacial promotion. Also I
dislike the promotion of the noble savage when they weren't. They made a
hero (Capt. John Smith) into a race mixer when he wasn't, it appears he
disliked Indians immensely for a start. So you are know saying it is all
right to promote falsehoods as an extension of *? Seeing as John Rolfe is
not mentioned and that the Indians weren't savages.
>
> >> >Going back to 1607 he arrived in Jamestown which was beleaguered by Indian
> >> >thieves (not much has changed).
> >>
> >> And the white Europeans who stole the land were...? What? Liberating
> >> it?
> >>
> >Aren't Indians nomads (at least in that time period?)
>
> Even if they were, forcing people out of where they lived for that
> season/month/whatever just 'cause you're groovin' on something called
> Manifest Destiny doesn't make it right.
By what standard was it wrong? The savages weren't doing anything useful
with it anyway.
> It was stealing, pure and
> simple.
So you have donoted your entire belongings to the Savages then? Otherwise
you are a thief, pure and simple.
> And what if the native Americans *weren't* nomadic?
>
Right of conquest.
>
> >> >These Indians were christianized and were
> >> >therefore equal with the settlers (or so the liberal types of the time
> >> >maintained.) One blatant Indian
> >>
> >> Bahahaha!!! Dammit, he wasn't a subtle Indian, he was a *blatant*
> >> one! You could tell he was Indian from eight miles off!
> >> Sheesh, Colin, this is getting thick.
> >>
> >Again, most liberals have trouble with comprehending reality. Take
> >lzaird, he cannot tell apart negro features and european features.
>
> What the hell are you talking about? Yeah, ok, so it was a cheap shot
> to make fun of your grammar, especially when there was so much else you
> wrote that could be used to make fun of you.
>
Obviously you couldn't make fun of anything else I wrote, otherwise you
would have already done it.
>
> >> >that was stealing a valuable item from
> >> >the fort was witnessed by the Captain after which he drew his sword and
> >> >cut down the offender. Thieving stopped.
> >>
> >> YAY!!!! What a noble and wonderful assassin... erm, keeper of the peace.
> >>
> >Interesting that thieving stopped.
>
> Interesting how the Europeans kept right on stealing all the land they
> could. Was this person who stole from the fort maybe taking what was his
> in the first place? Wouldn't that be just wonderful, chopping off the
> head of some guy because he wanted his own stuff back.
>
So what things did the Indians possess that could be classed as valuable
back then?
>
> >> > Note that it is in a foreign
> >> >language to liberals:
> >>
> >> Oh, fuck you, Colin. This is beneath even you, to insult people who
> >> haven't even read your damned post.
> >>
> >It's an attack upon the stupidity of this argument:
> >#1
> >#2 Your illiterate, therefore what you wrote is garbage.
>
> No one had made that argument, Colin.
Perhaps you don't read your compatriot's posts too often. It happens
quite regularly.
> You attacked the stupidity of an
> argument that had not been made (unless you were fighting with yourself
> in your head); not only that, "this is in a foreign language to
> liberals" is a direct insult to people who do not hold your viewpoints.
> It says absolutely *nothing* about grammar or punctuation.
>
Believe what you want to believe. Yes it was meant to be an insult and
was against those people who can do nothing in their lives apart from
point faults at other people (in this case grammar.)
>
> >> >"The Turkies, and other beasts and Fowle, will exceedingly increase if we
> >> >beat the Savages out of the Country,
> >>
> >> Yeah, like how the buffalo increased once the white people moved
> >> westward. Boy, isn't Cap'n Smith here a marvel?
> >>
> >The buffalo are doing reasonably well these days aren't they?
>
> No thanks to the Europeans, Colin. The reason they were almost extinct
> is that they were shot for sport and left to rot. The native Americans
> would use the entire carcass; just looking at the amount of time it took
> for the buffalo to disappear (not long) versus the length of time the
> native Americans were here and enjoyed a large buffalo population, it
> becomes clear that the invading Europeans were not at all concerned with
> the "exceeding increase" of wildlife.
Unlike savages, europeans tend to stop when it is pointed out to them.
Take for example wild bird populations. Unlike the savage Maori, European
New Zealanders actually try and preserve bird populations.
> It's been a long, long time and the buffalo are still a bit of a
> rarity. They are most common in the region I live in, and you have to go
> out of your way to see them.
>
Yet they will eventually increase, so long as the other races don't get to
numerous (and eat them.)
>
> >> >for all times of the yeere they never
> >> >spare Male nor Female, old nor young, eggs nor birds, fat nor leane, in
> >> >season nor out of season with them all is one"*
> >>
> >> >ie., the "in tune with nature" indians ate everything and spared nothing.
> >>
> >> You would expect them to willingly starve?
>
> >Perhaps there is a racial difference? Why couldn't they be more
> >productive and use horticultural or agricultural techniques?
>
> You are saying they didn't? How could they have survived at all if
> they had no ability to successfully hunt or farm?
Tell as about this farming Stacia.
> They lived in the area
> for a long time, Colin; some European with visions of grandeur and
> racist opinions hops in and immediately assesses the situation -- no
> wonder he was wrong. Wasn't Smith writing to the Queen, making arguments
> to justify taking the land?
>
So?
>
> >> They'd lived in that area for
> >> centuries, if I recall correctly. If they were depleting the natural
> >> wildlife, they would have done it a long time before 1608.
> >>
> >They lived in an incredibly large area that could support their
> >devastating eating habits.
>
> Then it wasn't devastating. If the land supports you, Colin, it is
> *not* devastating.
>
So why was the west a desert?
>
> >> >Leaving no animals to continue breeding. Which would account for their
> >> >nomadic lifestyle.
> >>
> >> Source, please.
>
> >Compare western culture with indian culture. Which could support the
> >largest population per square foot? What happened with a population boom
> >amongst Indians? *
>
> Woah, wait, are you getting the middle eastern Indians confused with
> the native Americans? If you are, it looks like your racist syntax kinda
> screwed you over.
No, I'm not getting confused. If you can think about my comments at *
then you will know for yourself. It is an argument that doesn't need
sources, only the ability to think.
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Fri Aug 11 15:44:09 PDT 1995
Article: 12323 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!skypoint.com!news3.mr.net!mr.net!uunet!in2.uu.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: Stone Them Bastards
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 08:47:30 +0000
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 114
Message-ID:
References: <3urscc$nkj@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <3usgam$t2o@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <3v9hv9$9sn@news1.databank.com> <3vhgqe$khm@news1.databank.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglg4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
> > > > Rev. Ron. You have mentioned a number of times how the Bible condemns
> > > > race mixers. Can you give me the reference? I was always under the
> > > > impression that believers ought to marry believers, but never knew
> > > > about "race-mixers" being stoned. Perhaps you could help me out.
> > > >
> > > Deut 23 talks about (in the KJV) a bastard, which in the hebrew is
> > > mamzer. Which means halfbreed. The other references come from lying with
> > > a beast (biped) in which case they'd be put to death.
> > >
> > Upon checking your references, I must admit I am still a bit confused.
> > Deuteronomy 23:2 states:
> > A bastard (mamzer) shall not enter into the assembly of the Jehovah;
> > even to the 10th generation shall none of his enter into the
> > assembly of Jehovah.
> >
> > The word "mamzer" (bastard) has a primary meaning of "bastard, child of
> > incest, illegitimate". A figurative use is "mixed population". Based
> > on the context (purity rules), I see no other reason to translate it
> > other than the way other translators did (Darby, AV, ASV), namely
> > "bastard".
> >
> > The second reference deals with bestiality (Ex 22:19, Le 20:15)
> > Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death. - Ex 22:19
> >
> > The word "beast" (behemah) means "beast, cattle, animal", and deals
> > bestiality rather than race mixing. Perhaps you can elucidate on how
> > the two verses are related, and where your parenthetical remark
> > "biped" comes from.
> >
> >
> I refer you to reading Gesenius. The lexicon (assuming Strong's) is based
> upon Gesenius with a lot of modications.
>
It seems I was in error, Gesenius makes no comment on biped, just opposed
to reptiles, fish and fowl.
However here is a collection of scriptures describing a beast as other
than a quadrapid.
Genesis 9:5 "... hand of every beast..."
Exodus 19:13 "There shall not an hand touch it, but he shall surely be
stoned or shot through; whether it be beast or man..."
Exodus 23:19 "I will not drive them from before thee in one year; lest the
land become desolate and the beast of the field multiply against thee"
Leviticus 18:23 and Leviticus 20:16 Woman lying with a beast (is it
feasible for a non human to have intercourse with a woman?)
Jonah 3:7-8 "And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through
Ninevah by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man
nor beast, herd nor flock, taste anything: let them not feed, nor drink
water: But let man and beast (note) be covered with sackcloth, and cry
mightily unto God; yea, let them turn everyone from his evil way, and from
the violence that is in their hands"
How can say a donkey cry mightily unto God?
I forgot to get the reference from Daniel as well, concerning
Nebuchadnezzar when he went mad as was looked after by the beasts of the
field.
> > > > By the way, didn't Moses have a black wife? (Nu 12:1)
> > > >
> > > Her father was a priest of whom? Hint: a person in the biblical
> > > genealogies. Also Ethiopian is a mistranslation, Cushite is a better
> > > translation. The land of Cush being mainly Afganistan today.
> > >
> > Contrary to your assertion about Afghanistan, Moses indeed had a black
> > wife. The word "Ethiopian" IS better translated "Cushite", and is
> > translated that way by Darby. "Cush" means:
> >
> > 1. The son of Ham and grandson of Noah and the progenitor of the
> > southernmost peoples of Africa.
> >
> > 2. The land occupied by the descendants of Cush located around the
> > southern parts of the Nile (Ethiopia)
> >
> > --Strongs Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (OLB Version) #03568
> >
> Strongs is not an authority on the subject. While useful it is hardly
reliable.
> Also for the place called Cush, you could try locating a map of the
> ancient world. A map from the Grecian empire times will reveal two such
> places, pre-Grecian will reveal only one place.
I was wrong in placing Cush in Afghanistan. It is in Iraq instead. Refer
you too the Thompson Chain Reference 4th edition Map No.2 EF 11,12,13
where it labels Cush.
Not that modern day Ethiopia was called Nubia and not Cush (though
admittedly Sesostris I called the people Cashi.)
>
> > It would make a whole lot of sense that Ethiopians would be escaping
> > Egypt with the Hebrews in the Exodus, as Ethiopia was also conquered
> > on and off by the Egyptians during the Exodus period. Also, there is
> > a continuing relationship between the Ethiopians and Hebrews throughout
> > Scripture (e.g. the visit of the Queen of Sheba to Solomon
> > (II Ch 9:1-12) and the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch by Philip
> > (Acts 8:26-40)). I fail to see how the Afghans would be involved.
> > Perhaps you have some info I have not seen?
> >
> So you are hypothesising that the Queen of Sheba is Ethiopian, on what
> grounds do you make this claim? Most biblical historians believe that the
> Queen of Sheba came from some place in today's Saudi Arabia.
>
> As far as Philip and the Eunuch goes, why would a black man be reading
> Isaiah for? Seeing as they had no claim into Israel. Again the Ethiopian
> should be translated Cushite, while there is ambiguity on which place this
> refers too (seeing as there were now two places called Cush (thanks to the
> Greeks)) understanding that a black man has no place in the tribes of
> Israel and that the Israelites had been dispersed north of Judaea should
> help narrow down which land of Cush the Eunuch came from.
>
It's even better now that the land of Cush is near Babylon, as Josephus
told, not all the Judaeans returned from Babylon to Judaea.
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Aug 23 08:38:31 PDT 1995
Article: 45 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!esol.intermedia.com!emi.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Brief News
Date: 23 Aug 1995 00:56:59 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 27
Message-ID:
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:52 alt.politics.nationalism.white:45
To be brief;
Has anyone read the International Express dated 17th August 1995?
On the front page it mentions 60% of Solo mothers in England (Note,
England and not London) are black.
In New Zealand 19th August 1995, five young polynesian males stole a car
(nothing new here), got drunk, speed and drove off a road bank, one
survived (pity.) The insult was that the owner of the car has had (or
having) his car tested for roadworthiness. Fortunately the Police
understood for once that the car was delibrately off road needing to be
fixed, otherwise we could see yet another case of the victim as the
criminal. No doubt the insurance company will have some clause for
unroadworthy cars being stolen. It just illustrates the absurdities of
the liberal mind, that if your car gets stolen, then it has to be road
worthy, so the thief can steal it without being put at risk. Yes, the
liberals are already complaining about the poor unfortunate polynesian.
No doubt he'll be let off and given a lot of taxpayers money for
compensation. Probably the best illustration of all in New Zealand on
liberals is when a prisoner attempting to escape by jumping off the wall,
broke his leg. He was awarded quite a bit of compensation of tax payers
money. Incidentally, he was polynesian (Maori to be precise.) The
justification was that he should have been able to escape without breaking
his leg. I assume such absurd laws also exist in both Canada and the USA.
I'll be back in a couple of weeks,
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Aug 23 08:38:33 PDT 1995
Article: 68 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugln4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: Injun trouble!
Date: 23 Aug 1995 01:03:30 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 12
Message-ID:
References: <412tv9$cm7@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:68 alt.politics.white-power:76
> * McKinstry "Protocols" are banned -- isn't real
> - Bearcat
Bearcat, I've long since dropped the above. I even wrote an apology on my
assertion that the UN banned it. And no, I haven't taken back my stance
of the book in New Zealand. While I'll admit that it isn't on the banned
list as yet, I'm sure the Police will if need be, prosecute on such a
possession. After all it does contravene NZ's Film and Classification
Act.
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 27 23:04:38 PDT 1995
Article: 4939 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.skinheads,,alt.conspiracy,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: ATTN: Jeffrey Brown, Tony Q & other losers
Date: 27 Aug 1995 22:16:29 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 28
Message-ID:
References: <41md6u$aa0@grivel.une.edu.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:4939 alt.politics.white-power:588 alt.politics.nationalism.white:552 alt.skinheads:1479 alt.conspiracy:3086 alt.discrimination:34702
> : Forgive me if Tony Q of Wellington New Zealand doesn't reside here. Could
> : someone notify him of this letter? Thanks in advance.
> :
> : Here is name and address of the person who stated the finds of Pheonician
> : artifacts in New Zealand (as well as Australia):
> :
> : Dr Rex Gilroy
> : Director
> : Museum of Natural History
> : The Butterfly Farm
> : Putty Road
> : Wilberforce 2756,
> : New South Wales
> : Australia
> :
>
> I have just rung information and asked for the telephone number
> of the "Museum of Natural History", somewhere in New South Wales.
> I was, told that there is no listing for such a place anywhere
> in New South Wales.
>
The address I quoted was from a 1983 journal, titled Lords of the Soil.
You could try information and find Rex Gilroy instead. As far as I am
aware, he still does occasional lecturing, so perhaps you can keep a look
out for him.
Regards,
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 27 23:04:39 PDT 1995
Article: 4942 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.skinheads,alt.revisionism,alt.discrimination,aus.flame,soc.culture.african.america,soc.culture.african,sci.archaeology,soc.culture.australian,soc.culture.egyptian
Subject: Re: What colour the Egyptians? (Reply to Egypt, Greece and India)
Date: 27 Aug 1995 22:54:27 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 194
Message-ID:
References: <4071a7$8vl@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <40nssl$n1g@transfer.stratus.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:554 alt.politics.white-power:589 alt.skinheads:1480 alt.revisionism:4942 alt.discrimination:34704 soc.culture.african:32924 sci.archaeology:22684 soc.culture.australian:32582 soc.culture.egyptian:3120
> : > : >What is an "Abo"?
> : >
> : > : I think the poster meant "aboriginal". I've been told by many
many others
> : > : that Native Americans resemble Egyptians.
>
> I have never heard this before.
>
> : > My use of the word "abo" is an undocumented feature in my usage of
English.
> : > Abo=aborigine. An Aussie Aborigine looks a lot like the "Americans of
> : > African Aboriginal Descent", although they are separate races.
> : >
> : > I visited Alexandria Egypt thd those people did not look like indiginous
> : > Americans. They looked like Americans of African Aboriginal Descent.
> : >
> : > BTW, my web page has a personal .faq file that explains this language bug
> : > of mine. :) Get poulosio.faq or read it with a web browser.
>
> Whatever...
>
> : Not meaning to offend, but there is quite a bit of difference in the
> : physical appearance of Australian Aborigines and African Negroes.
>
> The Aborigine is the most deviant genetically from the black African.
>
> : Granted
> : they both have woolly hair as well as similar skin pigmentation. The skull
> : for one is much thicker and the forehead is more slopped (though not as
> : much a mature Jew's forehead, compare Barbara Steisand side profile as an
> : example.) It would be amusing to see if a negro's skull can withstand the
> : crushing power of a crocodile jaw as an aborigine's skull can (this is
> : true, recently a crocodile bit the head of an aborigine, who's reflex
> : action was to poke the croc in the eye with his finger -- he walked away
> : as happy as Larry.) Also the aborigine is far more primitive than the
> : Negro. The Australian Aborigine has a piercing stare. It was amusing to
> : see two negroes meeting an aborigine, the two negroes fled. Because of
> : their extreme primitiveness they also never believed in a higher being (or
> : a god, if you prefer.) You cannot say that the aborigine was one with
> : nature either. They wiped out most kangaroo species for one. Their own
> : myths relate how all of Australia was fruitful. Most Americans should be
> : aware of the Australian outback being a desert.
>
> Where did you get this stuff? I assume it is from "Hitler's Book of
> Favorite Fairytales." Regarding the "primitiveness"(sic) of the Aborigine,
> they are adapted to their environment and surviving quite well. Certainly,
> if we were to put you, a white man, in the outback I would highly doubt that
> you would be able to survive more than a week. Uhh... make that two days.
>
And? Is this supposed to be proof that the Australian aborigines aren't
primitive? Hab, is it feasible for your mind to comprehend the ability
for an average white to actually come up with a way to survive in a
desert? I can give you tips if you can't think of it's possibility. For
example, burying yourself during the day helps against the sun.
Collecting dew in a container in the morning and so forth. Or even
developing an automobile to withstand these problems (I wonder if it's
already been done?) or even to help with this scenario, roads. I wonder
whether they exist or not? I wonder who put them there, so whites could
survive in the desert.
> : Incidentally hasn't this thread lost it's topic? That is the original
> : race of the ancient Egyptians. I'll agree with Hab on the fact that it
> : seems unlikely the Summerians/Assyrians were white. Summerian simply
> : means black headed ones
>
> Yes, they were not "white" as we define it. BTW, "black headed ones"
> refers to the black skull cap they used to wear and is still worn by some
> people of this region of the Gulf.
>
Is this confirmed?
> : and the most popular theory is they were the
> : predecessors to the Chinese (though the Chinese were wanderers or nomads
> : at that time.)
>
> "Most popular theory"? Are you serious! The most popular theory is in
> fact that they are related to the "marsh Arabs" of southern Iraq.
>
Depends on which side of the globe you are on. One of lecturers for
instance, stated the Chinese.
> : Though Hab cannot rule out the possibility of white
> : involvement in the rise of that civilisation either.
>
> It is doubtful that any European people entered the scene at this early a
> date.
>
There are semite names on the King lists for a start. Nabonidas puts
Sargon of Akkad at circa 3800 B.C, Professor H.V Hetchpt (name is probably
wrong) an Assyriologist also proposes the date of 3800 B.C, for those that
came in late, the common theory is that Sargon ruled circa 2800 B.C.
> : It should be noted
> : that nobody knows the physiogomy of the Summerians as their are no (at
> : least not surviving) statues or arts depicting their form.
>
> True. But there are hints.
>
> : However I
> : digress, the ancient egyptians were white.
>
> !!!!!
>
> : They misecegenated and became
> : the mulatto and useless race they are today.
>
> I have heard this theory from black nationalists also (i.e., that the
> present day Egyptians are mulatto). If that is the case, then most of the
> Middle East and parts of Europe are also "mulatto". And what is this
> about a "useless race"!
>
Yes, most of the middle east and south east europe is mulatto. So what do
the Egyptians achieve these days?
> : Prior to 2000 B.C the
> : paintings and statues were white, and 2000 B.C and on, were often (in the
> : case of men) depicted as red.
>
> You are mistaken.
>
They are? There are statues in Cairo Museum that state otherwise (via the
Encyclopedia Brittanica 1990.) One of the colour palettes I already
quoted.
> : Hab unfortunately mentioned Sesostris I to
> : back his claim. Since the name is out we can now safely say (thanks Hab)
> : that Sesostris I had it enforced by law that any negro caught in Egypt was
> : to be killed. It should be a downer for the so called black civilisation
> : seekers of Egypt. So for all pro white supporters out there remember the
> : name Sesostris I.
>
> Although it is true that Sesostris I made this law regarding the "Nahasi"
> (translated as blacks), he also separated the Egyptians from the "Tamhou"
> (translated as whites) who (as you may recall) were on the lowest echelon
> of man and were "veritable savages" according to the Egyptian system.
>
> : Niggers were to be killed in at least his reign.
>
> "Niggers"? Now is it really necessary to use this offensive term? I know you
> have certain intellectual deficits, but you do not have to be such an asshole
> racist as well.
>
Surely you are not being monocultural by restricting myself from using
terms from other cultures?
According to the mailer at Werle@aol.com, nigger comes from both Spain and
Latin. Therefore calling someone of the dark skin "nigger" is non
offensive in a true multicultural society. Obviously you object to true
multicultural terms.
> : Hab
> : must also realize the misecegenation of the Egyptians (he likes to claim
> : they were brown (a black/white mix.))
>
> "Brown" is not a black/white mix (at least, as I use it). The south-west
> Asian and North African "brown" is in fact the second oldest racial form
> known. It is a mutant form of the "black", the oldest racial form. The
> "whites" of Europe are in turn a mutant form of the "brown".
>
> [Note: the above is a simplified version of *The History and Geography of
> Human Genes* by Cavalli-Sforza, et al]
>
Ho hum. Have you ever done a course in mutantology? If you have then
you'd give up such fanciful notions. For a start, there have been NO
beneficial mutant strains. Only harmful variants, for example, down's
syndrome. Of course they like to say there were successful mutant strains
in the past, but they don't happen today. Obviously you must have faith
in such a system.
> : Of course his commendable discourse
> : from the Egyptologist Champollian was interesting in regard that Sesostris
> : I separated himself from the Phoenicians as a different race. This can be
> : explained by the similarity between the Vikings and say France and what
> : the Monks wrote of them. For those unaware, the Phoenicians and the
> : Vikings went through a similar "stage" in raiding, trading and settling.
>
> The fact that Sesostris I separated the Egyptians from the Phoenicians
> (who were friends of the Egyptians) attests to the fact that this was in
> fact a *racial* classification and separation.
>
So we have on one hand, the Phoenicians being savage, yet being successful
mariners (and of course raiders) and still being friends of the high
civilisation of Egypt? Have you ever bothered to think about what you
write?
> Judging from this post, I see now that you are one of the biggest racist
> morons on the Internet. Idiot...
>
You must be some intellectual calling someone an idiot. If only I could
be your equal and call people an idiot like you do. How many years did it
take you before you were certified to call someone an idiot? Is there
some special program that you took? Is there some sort of degree
associated with such an ability?
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 27 23:04:40 PDT 1995
Article: 4943 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!tcsi.tcs.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.skinheads,alt.revisionism,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: What colour the Egyptians? (Reply to Egypt, Greece and India)
Date: 27 Aug 1995 23:05:25 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 102
Message-ID:
References: <4071a7$8vl@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <40nssl$n1g@transfer.stratus.com> <41ls2u$p7c@grivel.une.edu.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:555 alt.politics.white-power:590 alt.skinheads:1481 alt.revisionism:4943 alt.discrimination:34705
> : Not meaning to offend, but there is quite a bit of difference in the
> : physical appearance of Australian Aborigines and African Negroes. Granted
> : they both have woolly hair as well as similar skin pigmentation. The skull
> : for one is much thicker and the forehead is more slopped (though not as
> : much a mature Jew's forehead, compare Barbara Steisand side profile as an
> : example.) It would be amusing to see if a negro's skull can withstand the
> : crushing power of a crocodile jaw as an aborigine's skull can (this is
> : true, recently a crocodile bit the head of an aborigine, who's reflex
> : action was to poke the croc in the eye with his finger -- he walked away
> : as happy as Larry.)
>
> Please provide more information on this. I saw/heard no mention of
> it in the media here. References?
>
I can't help it if you wish to remain ignorant. It happened about two
years ago, and I never bothered to keep the newspaper article.
> : Also the aborigine is far more primitive than the Negro.
>
> They're so primitive that they managed to survive in regions where
> the superior "whites" can only survive by flying
> or trucking in supplies. That's what I call primitive!
>
Depends on how you classify primitive I suppose. Obviously you have
decided that technological advances are primitive, and been stone age is
advanced.
>
> : The Australian Aborigine has a piercing stare.
>
> Not true of any I've met or seen.
>
> : It was amusing to
> : see two negroes meeting an aborigine, the two negroes fled.
>
> When and where?
Sydney, 1989. I don't know why you wanted to know though. It's not as
though the media recorded it.
>
> : Because of
> : their extreme primitiveness they also never believed in a higher being (or
> : a god, if you prefer.)
>
> Go read about the Dreamtime and the Rainbow Serpents and other stories
> of how the world came about to realise that even they were not free
> from our tendency to create myths to explain things we have no sensible
> answers for.
>
Creating myths and higher beings are not necessarily related. Most
mythology has it's non god element. For example, have you heard of fey
folk in mythology?
> : You cannot say that the aborigine was one with
> : nature either. They wiped out most kangaroo species for one.
>
> Que???
>
> : Their own
> : myths relate how all of Australia was fruitful. Most Americans should be
> : aware of the Australian outback being a desert.
>
> But a fruitful one. Go and see the vast expanses of colourful flowers
> once the rains have come. There are indeed large stretches of desert,
> but most of the outback is *not* san-dunes.
I never said it was. Though it hardly rains, therefore it doesn't provide
a lot to live on. A desert doesn't necessarily mean sand dunes either.
Antartica is often referred to a desert, as a contrary example.
> :
> : Incidentally hasn't this thread lost it's topic? That is the original
> : race of the ancient Egyptians. I'll agree with Hab on the fact that it
> : seems unlikely the Summerians/Assyrians were white. Summerian simply
> : means black headed ones and the most popular theory is they were the
> : predecessors to the Chinese (though the Chinese were wanderers or nomads
> : at that time.) Though Hab cannot rule out the possibility of white
> : involvement in the rise of that civilisation either. It should be noted
> : that nobody knows the physiogomy of the Summerians as their are no (at
> : least not surviving) statues or arts depicting their form. However I
> : digress, the ancient egyptians were white. They misecegenated and became
> : the mulatto and useless race they are today. Prior to 2000 B.C the
> : paintings and statues were white, and 2000 B.C and on, were often (in the
> : case of men) depicted as red. Hab unfortunately mentioned Sesostris I to
> : back his claim. Since the name is out we can now safely say (thanks Hab)
> : that Sesostris I had it enforced by law that any negro caught in Egypt was
> : to be killed. It should be a downer for the so called black civilisation
> : seekers of Egypt. So for all pro white supporters out there remember the
> : name Sesostris I. Niggers were to be killed in at least his reign. Hab
> : must also realize the misecegenation of the Egyptians (he likes to claim
> : they were brown (a black/white mix.)) Of course his commendable discourse
> : from the Egyptologist Champollian was interesting in regard that Sesostris
> : I separated himself from the Phoenicians as a different race. This can be
> : explained by the similarity between the Vikings and say France and what
> : the Monks wrote of them. For those unaware, the Phoenicians and the
> : Vikings went through a similar "stage" in raiding, trading and settling.
>
> Sure this is tangential to the original thread, but that s not uncomon here.
> In any event, there is a number of contributors who resist your attempt to
> spread what is usually reserved for gardens requiring high concentrations
> of nitrogen and other organic compostable material of from bovine source.
>
Not bad.
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 27 23:04:41 PDT 1995
Article: 4944 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.mindlink.net!agate!tcsi.tcs.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.skinheads,,alt.conspiracy,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: ATTN: Jeffrey Brown, Tony Q & other losers
Date: 27 Aug 1995 23:35:18 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 86
Message-ID:
References: <41gs7o$8ss@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.revisionism:4944 alt.politics.white-power:591 alt.politics.nationalism.white:556 alt.skinheads:1482 alt.conspiracy:3095 alt.discrimination:34706
> > Here is name and address of the person who stated the finds of
> Pheonician
> > artifacts in New Zealand (as well as Australia):
>
> McKistry, learn how to spell things which you discuss, e.g., Phoenician.
Oh my God, a spelling mistake! Too bad the Phoenician language didn't use
vowels in it's written language, otherwise you might actually have
something credible to say for once. You know they wrote in phonetics
don't you? Could you please prove from etymological sources that my
rendering of the name is incorrect.
>
> BTW- I'm still anxious to learn of your own academic qualifications.
> You don't have to tell me that "ac" denotes academe.
>
I've mentioned them once, so you are unlikely to remember again.
> > Here is name and address of the person who stated the finds of
> Pheonician
> > artifacts in New Zealand (as well as Australia):
>
> You did it again, goddammit.
>
See above, you linguist expert.
>
> > Dr Rex Gilroy
> > Director
> > Museum of Natural History
> [in NSW, Australia]
> ...
> > Rex Gilroy has a doctorate in archeology.
>
> Sounds like me-tooism to me, McKistry. The Phoenicians were
> intrepid seafarers, no doubt, but they keep turning up awfully far from
> home.
> As you perhaps know, one Andrew Fell (professor of zoology at Harvard)
> claims that Danny Thomas' cousins came to America
> several hundred years before Jesus lived. His book is called _America
> BC_.
> It has been claimed elsewhere that Fell in moments of candidness has
> shown a wicked smile when asked whether he believes it all or
> not, meaning that his book is one big joke on the pseudo-scholars, such
> as Mormons. He specializes in "decoding" Oghamic writing on
> rocks with plow marks.
>
You don't know your subject very well, then again you call NZ the land of
the unexceptional, so we shouldn't be surprised.
> And so what if Phoenicians and other Semites did reach New Zealand?
> What's the implication? That the Europeans are all descended from
> some "right" tribe of Israel?
>
No. Fortunately for people like myself, you are unable to guess my true
implication, therefore you are going to flounder about and make yourself
look like a fool once more.
> Your thinking is mighty queer, boy. You hate Jews just because that's
> the crackpot European thing to do. Who cares about you? You
> represent nothing in a land of the unexceptional.
>
And you rate? So who is Jim Collier? I mean if he doesn't know anything
about New Zealand (he calls it the land of the unexceptional) then he can
hardly claim to be a scholar of any merit. Especially a liberal scholar.
Did he know New Zealand was the first country to make the mistake of
giving women the right to vote? He probably wishes to remain ignorant of
the facts being a Jew anyway, so I'll enlighten him a bit. The Beer
Barons basically dominated government, and because men love beer, they did
not complain about the living conditions of their wives and children at
the time. So who were the Beer Barons, I wonder if it's those hooked nose
variety of the human race? Gee, guess I'm right. In fact they still have
their beaks hooked into the ol' beer market in NZ. For example L.D
Nathans (Lion Red) is controlled by Jews to this day. We also have beer
label Steinlager, as another example of the early dominance of Jews and
beer in NZ. So basically, NZ gave women the vote to break Jewish power
through the beer market. Which, no doubt, he didn't wish to read. Oh, I
mentioned L.D Nathans because they make my favourite beer.
Have you heard of Lord Rutherford or are you an ignorimus? Any Physicist
worth his salt knows about Lord Rutherford. I wonder which country he
hailed from?
Yourself being a multiculturalist should love New Zealand, it's the most
multicultural nation on the globe.
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 27 23:41:55 PDT 1995
Article: 562 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!spool.mu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: Brief News
Date: 28 Aug 1995 01:43:45 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 27
Message-ID:
References: <41epca$6ee@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:603 alt.politics.nationalism.white:562
> So, Colon, wanna talk about the `white' Aztec royal line? That's right,
> keep on running...
>
> JeFf hAN
It's good to see some things are still consistent. Jeff Han, is still the
best example of a sore loser. Whats the matter Jeff, that pyschiatrist of
yours not doing his job well enough?
How many times do you have to lose before you give up Jeff? Is it worth
my while even arguing someone of your low calibre? I mean I love arguing,
and at times even a little bit sadistically, but your masochistic attitude
towards losing takes the joy out of it. I mean, that argument which you
lost badly goes to show how little research you put in. All I used was
the Encyclopedia Brittanica, not even specialised or controversial books.
You illustrated perfectly the liberal argument ability. I continually
provided proof, all you said was idiot. Which sums up your ability to
reason and contribute (you can't.) I was prepared to go a lot further
with you on the subject, except you terminated it. Therefore, you now
have to come up with the reasons why I should bother with such a loser
like yourself. Your ineffectual comments on calling me coward sum up your
ability here. It wasn't me that ran Jeff, you did. You disappeared for
months, if you think you have recovered some of your posture, you are
wrong. You continually show your sore loser potential therefore you have
lost even more standing. Even Mike Beebe is a better arguer than you are.
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 27 23:42:27 PDT 1995
Article: 602 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!skypoint.com!umn.edu!spool.mu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: What's wrong with you WP types?
Date: 28 Aug 1995 01:03:32 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 192
Message-ID:
References: <----2608950244520001@cserv19.csubak.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
> It's 1:40 a.m., I'm tired but I have to ask you guys something that is on
> my mind tonight. I just briefly browsed Reuben Logsdon's updated Aryan
> Crusader's Library Web Pages and I can't believe how anti-Semitic and hate
> filled toward minorities it is.
>
Doesn't sound that bad then does it?
> My question is why you WP guys are making such a big fuss about race and
> generations to come when you don't even care about so many of the people
> living today. How can you say you care about the quality of life that
> white people will live years from now when you don't care about minorities
> or white people with differing views today? I asked Lester if he cared
> about whites who are Muslim, whites who are homosexual, or whites who are
> socialist. He said that being white was only one of the qualities he uses
> to judge people.
>
No, we care about the nation (or at least I do), whether some individuals
happen to disagree with it, then too bad. Not every law system suits
everybody. Basically, we are destroying ourselves, and it must be
reversed. What has the minorities got to do with anything? You fail to
make a connection.
> So if the world moved toward Nazi ideals and if the world was
> predominately white due to war and ethnic extermination, would everything
> be peachy? I don't think so. Lester himself has demonstrated his dislike
> of Christianity in several posts. Is he willing to live with white
> Christians? Or does he want his future society segregated by race,
> religion, sexual preference, political views, class, etc?
That is up to Les. Les Griswold thinks nationally and therefore these
differences (if any) can be easily resolved. Also Les doesn't like
homosexuals. Anyone with a national thought also thinks likewise. Class
is always going to be segregated, but so what? So long as there are no
Jews it will work fine.
> You WP people
> don't have to bring people home for dinner you don't like. But are you so
> scared of different people that you don't want your daughter or son to
> mingle with them? Are you afraid your children might find someone too
> different from you to marry? You don't think they have the intelligence to
> decide for themselves who it is best to marry?
Obviously you have never bothered to look at todays society. If choosing
your spouse was so successful, then why such a high divorce rate, broken
families and so forth? Have you heard of the saying "Love is blind?" To
elaborate, the average man becomes infatuated with his girlfriend,
ignoring her faults and so forth, he is literally blinded by his lust (the
same for the girlfriend.) However their parents are not in such a
position. They can act rationally in the decision, not like their
lust-filled progeny.
> It all comes down to the
> power of choice and decision making. It seems that you people want to take
> rights and decision making ability from other people, including your
> children.
>
Have you ever heard of the term leader? If everybody could be judges,
then why aren't they? Most people follow the leader.
> Even if the world ever 100% white that would not mean the end to
> differences. There is only so much wealth to go around the class
> differences shall remain.
This is wrong? Why should someone capable be levelled to the lowest
common dominator?
> Political differences and opposing views on a
> wide variety of social issues will remain. Different cultures will still
> develop even if the people had a common background. So what is the
> defining line between the differences you are willing to tolerate? The
> people of the future are separated from you in time and space. Genetically
> they will grow different from you as time goes on. So what is your
> justification of intolerance? No reason you give today will prevent or
> reverse the genetic and cultural changes occurring now and in the future.
> The people of tomorrow, simply stated, will be nothing like the people of
> today. The further you go into the future the more different they will be.
>
Hopefully not, however nations go through cycles. Eventually the people
of today will sicken of their state, and revolt. No doubt the concept of
common law will again be heard in the ears of all.
> You WP types don't care about the people living far away across borders,
> speaking different languages, thinking different thoughts, and having
> different values. Yet unless you adopt an Amish type mentality, inbreed
> and have a static culture, the people living in the future will be a
> different breed of people. So it's your choice. Evolve and learn to
> tolerate differences or be a dinosaur.
Only nations unified have strength. Toleration breeds diversity and
therefore weakness.
> If its fighting to make people
> conform that you desire, then be prepared to live and die brutally. In our
> comfortable living in a first world country with thousands of luxuries,
> what worse fear can there be than war or poverty? We can all fall back
> into fighting, destitution, sickness, and ignorance. It is only a
> difficult constant struggle to keep above those ills that gives us a
> decent lifestyle.
>
You forget the necessary war cycles that have put you where you are
today. It is only the white man's concept of civilisation that affords
you such luxury. While the media likes to harpen on how life was so
difficult in the past, they are wrong. There are always the poor, true.
It exists today, yesterday and tomorrow. If the poor lack the motivation
to be successful, then so be it.
> You have to find solutions to poverty, war, and ignorance. If we close our
> minds to the poor of the world and ignore their pleas for help, we shall
> always have them. We will never be free of them. We need to attack the
> roots of the problem and not the people. Some people associate minorities
> with poverty and ignorance. What if the minorities were gone? The
> underlying social imbalances and problems would create more poverty and
> ignorance out of some the remaining whites.
And what do you place you theory on? I've thought about the poor people
problem in reasonable depth. Basically they lack motivation. You can try
to say it's environmental based, but that is rubbish. There have been
many successful people that were once poor.
>
> If you WP types are worried about overpopulation in third world nations,
> then do something about it! Get involved with family planning efforts,
> education efforts, and
> improving the health and quality of life for those people.
I'm quite prepared to let them be our equal and bring themselves out of
their condition. I mean, they are our equal aren't they?
> But if you
> advocate isolationism or war like policies, then all you will do is impose
> tyranny and misery on people.
I'm sure that since they are every bit the white man's equal, they will
improve themselves without our help.
> Every life you hope to improve will be
> offset by pain and the hellish existence of someone else.
It happens everyday, unless you are completely unselfish, you, yourself
always makes your life better to the detriment of somebody else. For
example, a retailer makes his life better by you losing money to him. If
you overspend, that is not the retailers problem, but it did bring about
your hellish existence.
> What value would
> there be of human life in such a world? What if slavery came back. What if
> for every master living the good life there were ten slaves living in
> misery.
Slaves were not automatically in misery. Some people have no motivation,
and would thereby be content as a slave (no worries about food, shelter
clothing etc.) Think about it, if I as your master, continually made your
life miserable, are you going to put your best effort in to your labours?
Slavery is back by the way. Called under another name, but it is still
there. An illustration of this is a typical job. You are taught that it
is not slavery, but it is. You are bound to work nine to five, five days
a week, do what the boss tells you. Take lunch breaks only when told to.
Required to wear particular cloths. You can only take holidays when the
boss says you can. You are only given so many sick days. Therefore if
you get seriously sick you are placed in detrimental circumstances. You
are required to work overtime when needed. Basically you dance to the
bosses tune. You also need to live within a certain distance from work,
the worker cannot give up work either, he might be able to change jobs,
but that is the extent of it. A job is slavery under another term. Is
the typical man upset with his life? No, of course not. You also get bad
employers and good employers. All that has changed is that the you can
change jobs within limits and the boss doesn't directly feed, cloth or
provide shelter.
> Human existence would be a kind of lottery where if you were lucky
> you might be born into a good life. How much money is lost in lotteries?
> Most people suffer for the benefit of the few.
>
That's life, communism doesn't work either. If the poor desire to be
rich, then they are going to find the motivation to do so. Surely you
had motivations to get something in your life. Perhaps it was a car. If
you really want it then you go for it, some call it goal setting.
However, because you got the motivation to get this thing, why should you
be penalised for your efforts? Why should you give up your
hard-fought-for car to some bum who couldn't get off his lazy butt? That
is what get today.
> Find general solutions to help all people. Not solutions to help "whites"
> or solutions to help "blacks" or "Christians", but solutions to help all
> people.
>
I am not interested in helping all people. Some people just don't have
the motivation to succeed. Under todays law system I am forced to help
them, by paying exorbitant taxes and so forth. Also I have no interest in
helping non-whites, I was taught that they are every bit my equal,
therefore I'm going to use such propaganda to my own advantage.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 27 23:42:27 PDT 1995
Article: 603 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!agate!spool.mu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: Brief News
Date: 28 Aug 1995 01:43:45 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 27
Message-ID:
References: <41epca$6ee@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:603 alt.politics.nationalism.white:562
> So, Colon, wanna talk about the `white' Aztec royal line? That's right,
> keep on running...
>
> JeFf hAN
It's good to see some things are still consistent. Jeff Han, is still the
best example of a sore loser. Whats the matter Jeff, that pyschiatrist of
yours not doing his job well enough?
How many times do you have to lose before you give up Jeff? Is it worth
my while even arguing someone of your low calibre? I mean I love arguing,
and at times even a little bit sadistically, but your masochistic attitude
towards losing takes the joy out of it. I mean, that argument which you
lost badly goes to show how little research you put in. All I used was
the Encyclopedia Brittanica, not even specialised or controversial books.
You illustrated perfectly the liberal argument ability. I continually
provided proof, all you said was idiot. Which sums up your ability to
reason and contribute (you can't.) I was prepared to go a lot further
with you on the subject, except you terminated it. Therefore, you now
have to come up with the reasons why I should bother with such a loser
like yourself. Your ineffectual comments on calling me coward sum up your
ability here. It wasn't me that ran Jeff, you did. You disappeared for
months, if you think you have recovered some of your posture, you are
wrong. You continually show your sore loser potential therefore you have
lost even more standing. Even Mike Beebe is a better arguer than you are.
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Aug 27 23:42:28 PDT 1995
Article: 604 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.bc.net!news.uoregon.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: WHITE MEN ARE JEALOUS OF BLACK MEN..
Date: 28 Aug 1995 01:26:17 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 26
Message-ID:
References: <41ie7b$o0u@warp.cris.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglm5.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
> MANY Black men get white women cause they're better in bed and can
> have sex longer than a white-devil. I guess you white-devils are just
> jealous that the average white-devil cock is 5 inches and the average
> black mans cock is 7 inches..... 2 inches caused all this?
> Get a life and get a job...
How was this proved (penis size)? Was there an official size measurement
survey done? The Polynesian are well known for sodomy (for example, Rengt
Danielsson "Love in the South Seas.") I could be wrong (since I have no
experience here nor want too) but doesn't sodomy require a smaller penis?
The vagina is well known to expand or contract. However there is no
equivalent for the rectum. Therefore one would assume that the dark races
(being more involved with sodomy) would have smaller penises. Which would
make it easier for sodomy to be enacted. The polynesian are also known to
rape and sodomise women. Therefore one would assume the involuntary act
on the women's behalf would refuse to accommadate a large penis.
Basically, no research has been done (just propaganda) and the negroes are
more heavily involved with both entrances, so the obvious conclusion is
that they have small penises. I'm not really interested in this argument,
but every so often someone tries to extend their intelligence and
formulate this argument. While I admire someone that tries to go forward
in their thinking, rather than continuing in their low state, could you
please try a bit harder?
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Aug 28 07:34:44 PDT 1995
Article: 4978 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!kryten.awinc.com!netnet2.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglo4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.discrimination,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Les scuttles under the carpet -- as usual (was: Why, you're welcome, Chuck!)
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 15:28:46 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 53
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglo4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:645 alt.politics.nationalism.white:573 alt.discrimination:34712 alt.revisionism:4978
> [Les tells us who's white]
> >>> White is anyone of wholly Northern European ancestry.
> >>
> >> So, Italians aren't white? How 'bout the French, are they white?
> >> Poles? Russians? Which of these groups are or aren't white?
> >>
> >> Perhaps it will be easier if you just state which nations are
> >> white. Northern Europe.. Is this a hemispheric parallel thing,
> >> or can you just specify countries? What about the Finnish?
> >
> >Lane, Lane, Lane...
> >
> >It's so enjoyable to have you here making an ass out of
> >yourself. It's almost too easy: I just wind you up and set
> >you off, like a good little robot.
>
> Damn. And you were doing so well. You had +actually answered
> a question in the first go around. This pathetic attempt to
> deflect attention from the hideous truth about your pathetic
> belief system fools nobody.
>
> Let's just translate your feeble non sequitur / non response:
>
> Les doesn't want all you white folks out there, who comprise
> the majority of American whites, to know that in his little
> pantheon, you're not white.
>
> Because, if you were white, he'd have to come up with some reason
> why, for instance, Jews, and quite a few others whom he'll never
> see as white, aren't white.
>
> This would require that he get into the scientific aspects of
> "whiteness" which really don't exist. What is he going to do --
> snap photos of everyone holding up a gray-card? Those who reflect
> less than x% of light aren't white, and everyone else is?
>
DNA testing will suffice.
> >"Give Lane a gun, and watch her shoot herself in the foot..."
>
> And this has what to do with the question?
>
> One thing we can always count on you for is resorting to such
> infantile insults just as soon as someone squeezes you into
> a substantive corner, where you'll actully have to come up
> with an honest and revealing answer, or be faced with crawling
> back under the carpet with all the other putrid, racist
> cockroaches.
>
Yawn,
Cailean.
P.S This is an old question answered many times.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Aug 28 08:20:36 PDT 1995
Article: 591 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!kryten.awinc.com!netnet2.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglo4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Competition for replying to spelling mistakes
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 16:21:59 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 62
Message-ID:
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglo4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:591 alt.politics.white-power:667
> Sara aka Perrrfect (schwartz@infinet.com) wrote:
>
> : First of all, marc, you have assembled quite a collection of quotes, some
> : attributed to Ken McVay, and some that I know did not come from him but
> : that are unattributed.
> :
> : Tsk. This is extremely bad nettiquette, Marc, and you should know it.
>
> So is creating and quoting a huge message simply to pick apart a few
> simple spelling and grammar mistakes. Why is every message from you like
> this? It is always crap like "there should be a comma after "computer"!
> What is the point?
>
Here we have from Sara this concept of pointing out spelling mistakes.
Admittedly this is the best form of argument that she can provide (and is
true of most liberals.) Liberals go through this stage, which is a fool
thing to do, seeing that at some stage they will make such an error. Of
course, it is an illustration on the finality of the liberal mind or to
simply put: their best argument.
The competition is to come up with the best stinging reply possible, one
that we can keep (and sometimes modify) for when these liberals stuff
up. Mike Beebe once pointed out spelling mistakes in one of my posts. I
illustrated the uselessness of his counterattack using Shakespeare.
However, Mike regularly stuffs up. Ron got him a beauty with WWIII, but
this is not enough. It's probably useful to keep reminding Mike about his
history of WWIII. Mike deserves it of course, if he is going to make
stupid remarks about someone's elses spelling (e.g., mine) then he
deserves getting harassed every time he makes such a mistake.
Basically this is the only avenue the liberals have and to be sadistic, we
should knock down this only stronghold of theirs'. Remember this is the
pillar that all liberals are founded upon; pedantic and pathetic
responses.
Any of the regular liberals have gone through this period, so you are
99.999% likely of getting a bite into any liberals argument whenever they
make a spelling mistake.
Just think, 99% of what a liberal says will be nullified by their own
tactics. This is a worthwhile venture. You can play by their own rules
and beat them at it. Like most losers, they can give it, but they can't
take it. All you need do is come up with a witty, viscious, bone cutting
reply. The rewards can be shared by all intelligent posters (ie., us) on
these two newsgroups.
The idea is to use the comments only against liberals that have ever made
comments about someone else's (or your own) spelling. Fortunately, most
of them have done it.
It will safe enough to post them here directly. Most liberals don't truly
read what anyone says anyway. Though my account is open to those that
wish to remain anonymous -- email it too "The Competition"
cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz
I also suggest that the liberals be the judges -- we'll know we're onto a
winner by their reply or lack of it.
Cailean.
P.S The lucky winner will receive nothing but the sheer thrill of knowing
he will burn the arse of the liberals for years to come.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Aug 28 08:23:10 PDT 1995
Article: 667 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!kryten.awinc.com!netnet2.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglo4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Competition for replying to spelling mistakes
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 1995 16:21:59 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 62
Message-ID:
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglo4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:591 alt.politics.white-power:667
> Sara aka Perrrfect (schwartz@infinet.com) wrote:
>
> : First of all, marc, you have assembled quite a collection of quotes, some
> : attributed to Ken McVay, and some that I know did not come from him but
> : that are unattributed.
> :
> : Tsk. This is extremely bad nettiquette, Marc, and you should know it.
>
> So is creating and quoting a huge message simply to pick apart a few
> simple spelling and grammar mistakes. Why is every message from you like
> this? It is always crap like "there should be a comma after "computer"!
> What is the point?
>
Here we have from Sara this concept of pointing out spelling mistakes.
Admittedly this is the best form of argument that she can provide (and is
true of most liberals.) Liberals go through this stage, which is a fool
thing to do, seeing that at some stage they will make such an error. Of
course, it is an illustration on the finality of the liberal mind or to
simply put: their best argument.
The competition is to come up with the best stinging reply possible, one
that we can keep (and sometimes modify) for when these liberals stuff
up. Mike Beebe once pointed out spelling mistakes in one of my posts. I
illustrated the uselessness of his counterattack using Shakespeare.
However, Mike regularly stuffs up. Ron got him a beauty with WWIII, but
this is not enough. It's probably useful to keep reminding Mike about his
history of WWIII. Mike deserves it of course, if he is going to make
stupid remarks about someone's elses spelling (e.g., mine) then he
deserves getting harassed every time he makes such a mistake.
Basically this is the only avenue the liberals have and to be sadistic, we
should knock down this only stronghold of theirs'. Remember this is the
pillar that all liberals are founded upon; pedantic and pathetic
responses.
Any of the regular liberals have gone through this period, so you are
99.999% likely of getting a bite into any liberals argument whenever they
make a spelling mistake.
Just think, 99% of what a liberal says will be nullified by their own
tactics. This is a worthwhile venture. You can play by their own rules
and beat them at it. Like most losers, they can give it, but they can't
take it. All you need do is come up with a witty, viscious, bone cutting
reply. The rewards can be shared by all intelligent posters (ie., us) on
these two newsgroups.
The idea is to use the comments only against liberals that have ever made
comments about someone else's (or your own) spelling. Fortunately, most
of them have done it.
It will safe enough to post them here directly. Most liberals don't truly
read what anyone says anyway. Though my account is open to those that
wish to remain anonymous -- email it too "The Competition"
cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz
I also suggest that the liberals be the judges -- we'll know we're onto a
winner by their reply or lack of it.
Cailean.
P.S The lucky winner will receive nothing but the sheer thrill of knowing
he will burn the arse of the liberals for years to come.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Aug 28 17:09:10 PDT 1995
Article: 5044 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!gl_5.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.skinheads,alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The National Socialist Comedy Hour
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 07:52:00 +0100
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 124
Message-ID:
References: <41ol6f$nbc@ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gl_5.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.0b27.2
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:619 alt.skinheads:1534 alt.politics.white-power:710 alt.revisionism:5044
> I was recently priviliged to hear a radio show on l9.33 megahertz
> SW which was a roundtable discussion by all of our favorite
> nazis and revisinazis. This is an accurate transcription ofthe
> discussion.
>
> Rev. Ron: Welcome to National Socialist Week In Review, where all the
> burning questions of our day are freely discussed. My name
> is Rev. Ron Schoedel and I will be your host for the
> following discussion. And don't forget to visit my new
> Christian ID WWW Store for all your holy nazi needs. And
> remember to make all checks out to "Ron Schoedel"
> that's spelled S -C -H -O -E -D -E- L. All funds will of
> course go to furthering the noble aryan race, which will
> include the purchase of a new American made Jeep to keep our
> poor white workers employed.
> We are fortunate to have with us today the
> leading stars of the netkreig against ZOG, the mudders, and
> those despicable race traitors, Hi Jeanne!, who are
> preventing us from having our "White Christmas!" Praise to
> Aryan Jesus! Heil and Amen!
> Lester: Cut the Christian crap, I'm a nazi thru and thru. Screw
> your Jew God!
> Crusader: Now, now Les, Jesus was no Jew. We're the real Jews didn't
> you read the pamphlet?
> Baron: That's right! I've proven in my research that the Jews now
> are the spawn of Satan, and we're the true Yids.
> Muscles
> Mckinstry: That's right. Petrified bagels were discovered in N.
> Zealand proving that the white folks are the real kikes of
> today.
> Wyatt
> Pagan: Screw Jeeesus! Lets sacrifice a virgin to Wotan.
> Vic Noble: I've got a big supply of black candles!
> Marlow: Virgin Aryan girl! Wow you guys are radical hee hee.
> I'll bring the burgers and beer!
> Sylvie: Over my dead body!
> Rev. Ron: Gentleman! We must show a united front! You should all be
> ashamed of yourselves!!
> All: Heil! Heil! Heil!
> Rev. Ron: And now a word from our sponsor.
>
> Are you tired of debating with your friends about ZOG, black ape
> like creatures, inferior Asians, and deluded race traitors, Hi Mike!,
> without the proper documentation? Just visit Schoedel's one stop
> nazichristian web store for all your aryan needs. Never again will you
> foolishly burn your fingers while lighting that cross! Get our free
> cross burning guide included with every order over fifty dollars! And
> you get more! With every order we'll include our free 3-D glasses that
> let you spot a Jew from blocks away! And remember: All checks are
> made payable to Schoedel, that's spelled S-C-H-O-E-D-E-L.
> This is a non-profit organization and will be fully audited by his
> holiness Ron Schoedel to make sure all funds go to aiding the white
> Jeep, er............race.
>
> Rev. Ron: Well Les, how's things going over at the National Alliance?
> Lester: Just great Rev. We sure shoved it up the butt of those libs
> who like rock music. The polka is now the official dance of
> the movement.
> Burdi: Now just wait a god damn minute. Are you calling me a race
> traitor?
> Lester: If the jackboots fit.
> Crusader: Do we really have to gas Barry Manilow? I always wanted a
> pet Jew.
> Kleim: No doubt he will be convicted of crimes against the Aryan
> race. And besides rock has negroid beginnings.
> Burdi: No way I'm going to a nazi skin concert and playing some `
> Polish Polka! The Poles are just non-white slavic scum
> anyway!
> Griswold: Your a jerk Burdi! We killed the Poles last time. But now
> we call them white! Read the latest revision of our ideas
> before you spout off Zippy!
> Rev. Ron: Gentleman, gentleman, we must be united under a single `
> banner!
> All: Heil, Heil, Heil.
>
> Rev. Ron: Now lets talk about a subject that we're all expert in.
> Lets discuss the Joooish Question. What do you all think
> should be done with them?
> Baron: I for one have nothing against Jews. Just make it a
> painless death. Unless of course their rich Yids. Don't
> worry, I'll forgive you afterwards.
> Burdi: Shoot them, and then torture them!
> Griswold: Gas em, torture them, and then interrogate them. We got to
> find out where the money is hidden. To help the white race
> of course!
> Rev. Ron: Yes, yes, to help the white race! That's spelled
> S-C-H-O-E-D-E-L.
> Crusader: But couldn't I just keep Manilow?
> Kleim: Burn em!
> Wyatt
> Pagan: At the stake!
> Marlow: Yea, next time will have steaks and beer! I hope Angie will
> be there. What an aryan babe! She looks like she could
> have loads of babies, hee hee.
> Sylvie: Shut the fuck up you loser. You couldn't get laid if you
> had a pre-paid coupon from a legal Nevada whorehouse.
> SexNazi: Let Rueben keep Manilow. You know how moody he gets.
> Muscles
> Mckinstry: We could use my new "Jewish Pressure Cooker" it's almost
> ready!
> Griswold: Nah, we'll just ship em off to the next Burdi concert. That
> will kill em for sure!!
> Burdi: Eat it polka pinhead!
> Griswold: Wait till we ship out the partial southern Italians, no
> white man has that many pimples! Let's see you blush
> I-talian boy.
> Rev. Ron: Holy Aryan Mary! Dignity above all else ChristianNazi
> Gentlemen!
> All: Heil!, Heil! Heil!
> Rev. Ron: Well thanks for listening, and remember, the correct
> spelling is S-C-H-O-E-D-E-L. And always repeat the 14
> words!
>
> " If National Socialism couldn't fool the white losers the last
> time, try try again!"
>
> Chuck
Only a mediocre effort this time Chuck? This still has a long way to go
to beat "Commique from Zog." Even your "Secret sex lives of Nazis" was
much better than this.
Better luck next time,
Cailean.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Aug 28 17:09:11 PDT 1995
Article: 5045 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!gl_5.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.skinheads,alt.revisionism,alt.discrimination,aus.flame,soc.culture.african.america,soc.culture.african,sci.archaeology,soc.culture.australian,soc.culture.egyptian
Subject: Re: What colour the Egyptians? (Reply to Egypt, Greece and India)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 08:00:52 +0100
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 53
Message-ID:
References: <4071a7$8vl@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <40nssl$n1g@transfer.stratus.com>