Shofar FTP Archive File: people/m/mckinstry.colin/1995/mckinstry.0995
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 3 14:23:21 PDT 1995
Article: 1121 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 08:37:28 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 69
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1419 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1121 alt.discrimination:34957 alt.revisionism:6008
> >> Indeed. I think some elaboration is in order. Please answer the
> >> following:
> >>
> >> (1) Which nucleotide sequences make one "white"?
> >>
> >See *
> >> (2) Who determined this?
> >>
> >See *
> >> [...deletia...]
> >> (5) What studies exist to confirm that DNA testing is, in fact,
> >> capable of determining the "whiteness" of an individual?
> >>
> >See *
>
> >* Please do some research (for a change) into the area of human genetics
> >on migration (forget it's official name.) They specialize in this field,
> >so, no doubt you could learn something.
>
> McKinstry demonstrates for us once more the essential bankruptcy of
> his views.
>
> He put forth the proposition that "DNA testing will suffice" to
> determine "whiteness". I challenged him to back up this assertion with
> facts. But McKinstry has none -- he can't even tell us what field of
> scientific study would provide evidence for his claim.
>
> So, rather than actually admit his error, he blithely asserts that it
> is _my_ duty to find the evidence to back up _his_ claims.
>
> There can be only one reason for this action on McKinstry's part: he
> can't back up his claims, and he knows it. To admit this, however,
> would be fatal to the aura of superiority to other Usenet participants
> that McKInstry has claimed for himself.
>
> McKinstry has attempted to arrogate to himself the position of
> "teacher", supposedly to "educate" his fellow netizens on the alleged
> inferiority of all non-whites -- never mind that he cannot define who
> is "white". He has nothing to teach us on that subject, for he knows
> nothing about it. He has, however, done an excellent job teaching us
> about two of the primary characteristics of the racist mind: ignorance
> and cowardice. For that, the rest of us should be grateful.
>
> Now, answer the question, coward: what facts can you present that
> support your contention that DNA testing can determine "whiteness"?
>
> _You_ made the claim. _You_ support it.
I gave you a title Jeffrey, if you wish to remain ignorant, then that is
your choice. You see Jeffrey, I won't fulfill your fetish of me being the
teacher and you the pupil. If you sincerely wish to know, you can always
find a book on human genetics and read it. Those geneticists that
research human migration specialize in this topic, I don't claim on being
an expert in this field, which is why I haven't given any hypothesises
concerning the aforementioned topic. However you done an excellent job
teaching us about two of the primary characteristics of the liberal mind:
slothfulness and closemindeness. For that, the rest of us should be
grateful.
Do you wish me to find the exact title for this area of genetic research
or are you afraid of doing a lot of reading?
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 3 14:23:22 PDT 1995
Article: 1123 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!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!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 08:46:09 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 26
Message-ID:
References: <41epca$6ee@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <41roa6$rum@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <423qsb$cru@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1422 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1123
> >To the sore loser Jeff Han, I've already started the debate again.
> >Somewhere in the mists of the Lords of the Soil you'll find something
> >relating to you. You'll have to read some of it first, which should make
> >a change (reading that is.)
>
> TRANSLATION: I am too much of a chickenshit to rehash my flatulence in the
> same NG where it was exposed for the lie that it is, so I decided to run away
> and `start the debate' again in alt.sex.sheep.
>
According to my newsbrowser, Lords of the Soil exists in this newsgroup.
So your comments are a little naive. If they didn't get through I can
always repost it, but then again you are a sore loser as well as a coward.
> You are flattering yourself again, Colon. You are still running. I
will say
> it again: `enlighten' me further on the `white' Aztec royal line, HERE, or
> crawl back under your pebble. Your evasions are becoming tiresome...
>
I suggest you do some reading Jeff Han. Hopefully it won't be too much of
change for you.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 3 14:23:23 PDT 1995
Article: 1124 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!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!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 08:47:32 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 12
Message-ID:
References: <41epca$6ee@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <41roa6$rum@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <423qut$ujs@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1423 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1124
>
>
> You are *still* runniiiing, Colon...
Jeff, I am not running. You are a loser. Please read Lords of the Soil
before you give us any more verbal diarrhaea.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 3 14:25:41 PDT 1995
Article: 1418 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: This board...
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 08:25:10 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 46
Message-ID:
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
> >> >...When was
> >> >the last time a liberal showed any research connected with their posts?
> >> >Take for example their responses on this thread, all of them without
> >> >exception are not thought out.
> >>
> >> Take for example your assertion that a 1950s (or was it 1930's?)
> >> "Webster's Dictionary" gave "Jew" as a definition of "parasite". How
> >> much "research" went into that gem?
> >>
> >Before I answer your question Jeffrey, could we have an example of your
> >research, so far I witnessed from your department a big fat ZERO.
>
> I don't make claims I can't back up, coward. I do point out your
> failures of logic and evidence. Pisses you off big time, does it?
You'd have to be successful at pointing out my failures of logic and
evidence first, Jeffrey. Perhaps I would get pissed off then, for someone
like you, who has only majored in being pedantic, it seems highly
unlikely. Unlike you Jeffrey, I don't mind been pointed out where I'm
wrong. Which is why you never post anything of value isn't it? You're
afraid of been proven wrong.
> Then
> quit shooting off your mouth before you know what you're talking
> about. Ignorance and cowardice are a fatal mixture when you're trying
> to impress others with your "superiority".
>
I don't have to try to impress others with my "superiority" Jeffrey, you
like the others try to impress me with your "inferiority." Which you
successfully do.
> Quit dodging, coward, and answer the question: how much research did
> you do before posting that "definition" crap?
>
Sounds more like you are the coward Jeffrey, are you afraid of research?
Afraid of a little work?
To answer your question, I did little research before posting the
definition, I did plenty afterwards, however. I even loosely said it once
as well Jeffrey. Though I imagine your pride got in the way.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 3 14:25:42 PDT 1995
Article: 1419 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 08:37:28 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 69
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1419 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1121 alt.discrimination:34957 alt.revisionism:6008
> >> Indeed. I think some elaboration is in order. Please answer the
> >> following:
> >>
> >> (1) Which nucleotide sequences make one "white"?
> >>
> >See *
> >> (2) Who determined this?
> >>
> >See *
> >> [...deletia...]
> >> (5) What studies exist to confirm that DNA testing is, in fact,
> >> capable of determining the "whiteness" of an individual?
> >>
> >See *
>
> >* Please do some research (for a change) into the area of human genetics
> >on migration (forget it's official name.) They specialize in this field,
> >so, no doubt you could learn something.
>
> McKinstry demonstrates for us once more the essential bankruptcy of
> his views.
>
> He put forth the proposition that "DNA testing will suffice" to
> determine "whiteness". I challenged him to back up this assertion with
> facts. But McKinstry has none -- he can't even tell us what field of
> scientific study would provide evidence for his claim.
>
> So, rather than actually admit his error, he blithely asserts that it
> is _my_ duty to find the evidence to back up _his_ claims.
>
> There can be only one reason for this action on McKinstry's part: he
> can't back up his claims, and he knows it. To admit this, however,
> would be fatal to the aura of superiority to other Usenet participants
> that McKInstry has claimed for himself.
>
> McKinstry has attempted to arrogate to himself the position of
> "teacher", supposedly to "educate" his fellow netizens on the alleged
> inferiority of all non-whites -- never mind that he cannot define who
> is "white". He has nothing to teach us on that subject, for he knows
> nothing about it. He has, however, done an excellent job teaching us
> about two of the primary characteristics of the racist mind: ignorance
> and cowardice. For that, the rest of us should be grateful.
>
> Now, answer the question, coward: what facts can you present that
> support your contention that DNA testing can determine "whiteness"?
>
> _You_ made the claim. _You_ support it.
I gave you a title Jeffrey, if you wish to remain ignorant, then that is
your choice. You see Jeffrey, I won't fulfill your fetish of me being the
teacher and you the pupil. If you sincerely wish to know, you can always
find a book on human genetics and read it. Those geneticists that
research human migration specialize in this topic, I don't claim on being
an expert in this field, which is why I haven't given any hypothesises
concerning the aforementioned topic. However you done an excellent job
teaching us about two of the primary characteristics of the liberal mind:
slothfulness and closemindeness. For that, the rest of us should be
grateful.
Do you wish me to find the exact title for this area of genetic research
or are you afraid of doing a lot of reading?
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 3 14:25:42 PDT 1995
Article: 1420 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 08:42:00 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 13
Message-ID:
References: <423b1p$u66@koala.scott.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
> Sounds like you're going through a bad bout of extreme penis envy.
Besides, it's
> more normal to stick your dick in someone's ass that into a sheep... You
suck...
>
How is it normal for someone to shove his dick in the sewer? Also whats
this about sheep, you into beastility as well?
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 3 14:25:43 PDT 1995
Article: 1422 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!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!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 08:46:09 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 26
Message-ID:
References: <41epca$6ee@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <41roa6$rum@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <423qsb$cru@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1422 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1123
> >To the sore loser Jeff Han, I've already started the debate again.
> >Somewhere in the mists of the Lords of the Soil you'll find something
> >relating to you. You'll have to read some of it first, which should make
> >a change (reading that is.)
>
> TRANSLATION: I am too much of a chickenshit to rehash my flatulence in the
> same NG where it was exposed for the lie that it is, so I decided to run away
> and `start the debate' again in alt.sex.sheep.
>
According to my newsbrowser, Lords of the Soil exists in this newsgroup.
So your comments are a little naive. If they didn't get through I can
always repost it, but then again you are a sore loser as well as a coward.
> You are flattering yourself again, Colon. You are still running. I
will say
> it again: `enlighten' me further on the `white' Aztec royal line, HERE, or
> crawl back under your pebble. Your evasions are becoming tiresome...
>
I suggest you do some reading Jeff Han. Hopefully it won't be too much of
change for you.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 3 14:25:44 PDT 1995
Article: 1423 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!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!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 08:47:32 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 12
Message-ID:
References: <41epca$6ee@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <41roa6$rum@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <423qut$ujs@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1423 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1124
>
>
> You are *still* runniiiing, Colon...
Jeff, I am not running. You are a loser. Please read Lords of the Soil
before you give us any more verbal diarrhaea.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 3 14:37:58 PDT 1995
Article: 6008 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 08:37:28 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 69
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1419 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1121 alt.discrimination:34957 alt.revisionism:6008
> >> Indeed. I think some elaboration is in order. Please answer the
> >> following:
> >>
> >> (1) Which nucleotide sequences make one "white"?
> >>
> >See *
> >> (2) Who determined this?
> >>
> >See *
> >> [...deletia...]
> >> (5) What studies exist to confirm that DNA testing is, in fact,
> >> capable of determining the "whiteness" of an individual?
> >>
> >See *
>
> >* Please do some research (for a change) into the area of human genetics
> >on migration (forget it's official name.) They specialize in this field,
> >so, no doubt you could learn something.
>
> McKinstry demonstrates for us once more the essential bankruptcy of
> his views.
>
> He put forth the proposition that "DNA testing will suffice" to
> determine "whiteness". I challenged him to back up this assertion with
> facts. But McKinstry has none -- he can't even tell us what field of
> scientific study would provide evidence for his claim.
>
> So, rather than actually admit his error, he blithely asserts that it
> is _my_ duty to find the evidence to back up _his_ claims.
>
> There can be only one reason for this action on McKinstry's part: he
> can't back up his claims, and he knows it. To admit this, however,
> would be fatal to the aura of superiority to other Usenet participants
> that McKInstry has claimed for himself.
>
> McKinstry has attempted to arrogate to himself the position of
> "teacher", supposedly to "educate" his fellow netizens on the alleged
> inferiority of all non-whites -- never mind that he cannot define who
> is "white". He has nothing to teach us on that subject, for he knows
> nothing about it. He has, however, done an excellent job teaching us
> about two of the primary characteristics of the racist mind: ignorance
> and cowardice. For that, the rest of us should be grateful.
>
> Now, answer the question, coward: what facts can you present that
> support your contention that DNA testing can determine "whiteness"?
>
> _You_ made the claim. _You_ support it.
I gave you a title Jeffrey, if you wish to remain ignorant, then that is
your choice. You see Jeffrey, I won't fulfill your fetish of me being the
teacher and you the pupil. If you sincerely wish to know, you can always
find a book on human genetics and read it. Those geneticists that
research human migration specialize in this topic, I don't claim on being
an expert in this field, which is why I haven't given any hypothesises
concerning the aforementioned topic. However you done an excellent job
teaching us about two of the primary characteristics of the liberal mind:
slothfulness and closemindeness. For that, the rest of us should be
grateful.
Do you wish me to find the exact title for this area of genetic research
or are you afraid of doing a lot of reading?
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 3 23:22:32 PDT 1995
Article: 6008 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 08:37:28 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 69
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1419 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1121 alt.discrimination:34957 alt.revisionism:6008
> >> Indeed. I think some elaboration is in order. Please answer the
> >> following:
> >>
> >> (1) Which nucleotide sequences make one "white"?
> >>
> >See *
> >> (2) Who determined this?
> >>
> >See *
> >> [...deletia...]
> >> (5) What studies exist to confirm that DNA testing is, in fact,
> >> capable of determining the "whiteness" of an individual?
> >>
> >See *
>
> >* Please do some research (for a change) into the area of human genetics
> >on migration (forget it's official name.) They specialize in this field,
> >so, no doubt you could learn something.
>
> McKinstry demonstrates for us once more the essential bankruptcy of
> his views.
>
> He put forth the proposition that "DNA testing will suffice" to
> determine "whiteness". I challenged him to back up this assertion with
> facts. But McKinstry has none -- he can't even tell us what field of
> scientific study would provide evidence for his claim.
>
> So, rather than actually admit his error, he blithely asserts that it
> is _my_ duty to find the evidence to back up _his_ claims.
>
> There can be only one reason for this action on McKinstry's part: he
> can't back up his claims, and he knows it. To admit this, however,
> would be fatal to the aura of superiority to other Usenet participants
> that McKInstry has claimed for himself.
>
> McKinstry has attempted to arrogate to himself the position of
> "teacher", supposedly to "educate" his fellow netizens on the alleged
> inferiority of all non-whites -- never mind that he cannot define who
> is "white". He has nothing to teach us on that subject, for he knows
> nothing about it. He has, however, done an excellent job teaching us
> about two of the primary characteristics of the racist mind: ignorance
> and cowardice. For that, the rest of us should be grateful.
>
> Now, answer the question, coward: what facts can you present that
> support your contention that DNA testing can determine "whiteness"?
>
> _You_ made the claim. _You_ support it.
I gave you a title Jeffrey, if you wish to remain ignorant, then that is
your choice. You see Jeffrey, I won't fulfill your fetish of me being the
teacher and you the pupil. If you sincerely wish to know, you can always
find a book on human genetics and read it. Those geneticists that
research human migration specialize in this topic, I don't claim on being
an expert in this field, which is why I haven't given any hypothesises
concerning the aforementioned topic. However you done an excellent job
teaching us about two of the primary characteristics of the liberal mind:
slothfulness and closemindeness. For that, the rest of us should be
grateful.
Do you wish me to find the exact title for this area of genetic research
or are you afraid of doing a lot of reading?
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 3 23:22:33 PDT 1995
Article: 6019 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!ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: One stupid question asked of Les Griswold, answered
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 09:20:01 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 39
Message-ID:
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:1127 alt.politics.white-power:1430 alt.revisionism:6019
> : Hopefully the liberals that like to triumph this question have the courage
> : to admit their mistake.
>
> : The American Indian question: From the Encyclopedia Brittanica 1990, vol.
> : 18, pp 851, The Races of Mankind, The American Indian geographic race.
>
> : "Though some groups developed high civilization and then disappeared *,
> : there also has been considerable continuity in many areas with living
> : populations closely resembling those recovered from ancient burials. Many
> : American Indian groups were eliminated as a result of disease, colonial
> : expansion, and forced relocation: but others have come to exceed their
> : pre-Columbian numbers with varying degrees of admixture from Europe and
> : Africa"
>
> Just as it is today, California was the most populous area in north
> America five hundred years ago. There were numerous highly complex
> cultures with exquisite artistic and social achievements, dozens of
> distinct languages. More than one million Natives are estimated to
> have lived there.
>
> Where are they? Primarily wiped out (murdered through slavery and
> torture) by the Spanish padres, whose every mission and road was
> built by these forgotten people.
>
> In northern California, they were hunted and annihilated by MkKinstries
> and Griswolds and the like, genocide in its pure form. Now they would
> be lucky to count their numbers in thousands, with only one or two
> tribes managing to survive.
>
> You're severely lacking, Colin.
>
The question asked of Les, was concerning Canada, not northern
California. Hopefully you can distinguish the distinction.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 3 23:22:33 PDT 1995
Article: 6020 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!oleane!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: Egyptian's colour (was What colour the Egyptians?)
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 09:54:58 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 84
Message-ID:
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:1128 alt.politics.white-power:1431 alt.skinheads:2230 alt.revisionism:6020 alt.discrimination:34960
I was originally planning on finding a children's picture book on Ancient
Egypt, so you will have to accuse the more adult's reading books. Sorry
to all those children out there that cannot discern racial types.
A Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses, George Hart 1986,
ISBN 0-7102-0167-2
Front cover - two white gods.
Egyptian Magic, E.A Wallis Budge 1988, ISBN 1-85063-106-9
Front cover - white woman.
Man and his Gods, encycolpedia of the world's religion, General Editor
Geoffrey Parrinder.
pp 120 pictures 1&2
1. statue of the hereticking Akhenaten (Amenaphis IV) - white
2. The god Saraphis, creation of Ptolemy I Sofer, portrayed Osiris-Apis
in human form - white.
pp 123 5. A granite statue of Chefren, king of the second pyramid at
Gizeh, one will not the side profile.
Tutankhamen, Christiane Dosroches-Noblecourt 1978
ISBN 0-8212-0151-4
pp 29 Painted ivory plague of Tutankhamen and Ankhesenamun - pinkish white.
pp 30 red depiction
pp 54 light skinned female mourners at the tomb of Woserhet.
pp 70 Side profile, showing caucasion features (non painted).
pp 80 painted box of red Tutankhamen.
pp 81a. Tutankhamen destroying black Africans
pp 81b. Tutankhamen destroying Asians - note that the Asians are depicted
exactly the same as Tutankhamen (same colour skin and face.)
pp 82 lower ends of ceremonial canes showing two adversares of Egypt,
black African and a white Asian (refer to 81b.)
pp 105 Side profile of Bust of Queen Nefertiti - white
pp 171 One of the many ushabtis of Tutankhamen, face corroded, but note
pink hands.
pp 194 Pink skinned "dummy" of Tutankhamen.
The Making of the Past, The Egyptian Kingdoms, A. Rosche David, Phd 1975.
pp 68 Senufer (Red) and his wife (white)
pp 74 12th Dynasty, showing a woman with a lotus flower (she is white.)
pp 77 Ma'at, goddess of truth. She receives adoration from Ramesses VI
(both white.)
pp 80 Funeral wall painting in a tomb at Deir-el-Medineh, Thebes all 9 are
pinkish white.
pp 89 Painted relief of Sethos I, lifting up a tray of food offering to
Isis. From the temple of the Pharoah Sethos I as Abydos (pink)
pp 103 painting on plaster of the lady Thepeu - white statue of Methyethy
(pink.)
pp 107 tomb model of serving girl (white)
pp 130 Painting from a tomb at Thebes, showing building workers (pink.)
pp 132 Painting from the tomb of Ipy, pinkish brown.
Life in Ancient Egypt, Eugen Stouhal 1992
ISBN 0521440939
pp 25 Father and his naked children (off white)
pp 26-27 girls playing - pink
pp 32 vizier Ptahhotep pink
pp 38 Two ladies chatting pink
pp 39 Lady playing the lyre pink
pp 42 Banquet - pink people
pp 43 acrobatic female dancer - white
pp 53 Nofret and Rahotp (Nofret pink, Rahotep white)
pp 58 Man & wife ploughing field (he is red, she is white)
pp 77 Women & serving girl pink
pp 82 From the Book of the Dead - pink
pp 83 Princess Nefertaibt (white)
pp 84 young woman statuette - white
pp 90 painting of dark pink man ploughing
pp 107 Lady Cheritwebeshet before Horus - white
pp 126 Bakers pink
pp 127 Women grinding corn (off white)
pp 158 unfinished quartite of one of Akhenaten's six daughters pink
pp 159 Queen Nefertiti (off white)
pp 214 A scribe pink
pp 246 Achondroplastic dwarf & his family (4) two pink, two white.
A lot of white people for children to see in books.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 3 23:22:35 PDT 1995
Article: 6070 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!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.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism
Subject: Iberia = Hebrew or some stupid question like that
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 14:29:57 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 43
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:1150 alt.politics.white-power:1467 alt.revisionism:6070
One of the least talented liberals came up with some stupid question for
me about whether Iberia = Hebrew. Personally, I don't know why such a
question was posed of me, seeing I have never mentioned it, but then
liberals aren't known for there intelligence, only their laziness and
wilful ignorance.
Acomprehensive Etymogical Dictionary of the English Language 1966, Ernest
Klein 1966.
Hebrew n., and adj, - ME Ebreu fr.OF Ebreu, Ebrieu (F. Hebreu), fr. L
Hebraeus, fr. gk Ebpaios fr. Aram ibhray, 'ebhray' fr. hb. ibhri 'Hebrew'
lit. 'he who came across (the river)', fr 'ebher' region across, side from
the stem of 'abhar' he passed across or over', which is rel. to Aram. Syr
abhar, Arab abara, 'he passed over', Akkad eberu 'to pass over' Heb ebhra
'fury anger' (lit. overflow) Mishnaic Heb 'abhera' transressionism' Habaru
iberia n., the ancient name of the Spanish peninsula - [Hiberia, Iberia
'Spain' pro P 'country of the Hiberes or Ibores fr. Gk Ibnoes 'the
Spaniards' also the name of an ancient Asiatic people near the Caucasus.
Its feasible that eberu, Ebreu, Ebrieu, abara could be Iberia. From a
phonetic view it could be possible. A changing accent will change how a
word will be spelt -- in reference to the vowels. Whether such a
connection is viable will result in the need for more research. I'm more
interested in the reference to the Caucasus. If anybody does some
research here I would be interested.
>From the Oxford English Dictionary (I)
Iberian
2. An inhabitant of ancient Iberia in Asia.
1601 Holland, Phiny I, 119 You enter into the Iberian region who are
separated from the Albanois (Ed's note. curious, Ancient Britain was
called similar) by the river Alazon, which runneth downe from the
Caucasion Hills.
Who was the liberal genius saying that the part of the white race didn't
come from the Caucasus mountions?
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Sep 4 00:46:24 PDT 1995
Article: 1147 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.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.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: The word nigger for those pedantic
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 13:58:57 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 48
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.white-power:1460 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1147
Lloyd's Dictionary Vol. V 1895.
"nigger (2) *neger [a corruption of negro (q.v)]"
"negro, neger [Sp. negro = a black man, from Lat. nigrum, accus. of niger;
Ital., Span., & Port. negro; Fr. negre.]
A. As substantive:
Anthrop: The distinctly dark, as opposed to the fair, yellow, and brown
varieties of mankind. Their original home was probably all Africa south
of the Sahara, India south of the Indo-Gengetic plains, Malaysia and the
greater part of Australisia." Also included is the comparison of a negro
to a caucasion.
"1. The abnormal length of the arm, sometimes reaching to the knee-pan.
2. Prognathism (Facial Angle 70 deg., in Caucasion 82 deg.)
3. Weight of brain, 35 oz (in gorilla 20 oz, average European, 45 oz)
4. Full black eye, black iris, and yellowish sclerotic coat.
5. Short, flat, snub nose, broad at extremity, with dilated nostrils and
concave ridge.
6. Thick, protruding lips, showing inner surfaces.
7. Very large zygomatic arches.
8. Exceedingly thick cranium, enabling him to use the head as a weapon of
attack.
9. Weak lower limbs, terminating in a broad, flat foot, with low instip,
projecting and somewhat prehensile toe, and "lark heel."
10. Complexion deep brown, blackish, or even black, not due to any
special pigment, but to the greater abundance of colouring matter in the
malpighan mucous membrane.
11. Short, black hair, distinctly woolly, not frizzly.
12. Thick epidermis, cool, soft, and velvety, mostly hairless, and
emitting a peculiar odour, described by Pruner Bey as hircine.
13. Frame of medium height, thrown somewhat out of the perpendicular by
the shape of the pelvis, the spine, the backward projection of the headm
and anatomical structure.
14. The cranial sutares, which close much earlier in the Negro than in
other races.
Negro "Minsheu gives the form neger; this is from the O.F negre (mod.F.
negre), 'a negro' (Cot.), and answers to mod.E. nigger."
I'll take it back about the spelling of the Spanish. So we get the word
nigger from the French and the Latin, instead of the Spanish and the
Latin. Either way I'm being more culturally aware than you
multiculturalists.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Sep 4 00:47:15 PDT 1995
Article: 1428 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 08:55:35 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 28
Message-ID:
References: <----2608950244520001@cserv19.csubak.edu> <42589u$hai@grivel.une.edu.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
> : Have you ever heard of the term leader? If everybody could be judges,
> : then why aren't they?
>
> By your "argument" only the "leaders" win in lotteries. After
> all, if everyone who purchased a ticket could win first prize,
> why don't they all do so?
You are confusing motivation with chance. It's feasible for anyone with
the motivation to become a judge. Motivation with game of chances does
not mean success.
>
> : Most people follow the leader.
>
> Most people of limited perception and intellect ascribe
> to all others their own charactristics. This is understandable
> but mistaken. Your ovine instinct, I can assure you, is not
> shared by the human race.
>
Actually I view you d.A as more of the bovine instinct. You follow the
leader, if you hadn't noticed I am not following the government's creed or
propaganda, which you are following.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Sep 4 00:47:15 PDT 1995
Article: 1429 of alt.politics.white-power
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!ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: Injun trouble!
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 09:15:17 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 16
Message-ID:
References: <412tv9$cm7@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <421abo$kmo@silver.ksu.ksu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
> Well, I can tell I've been gone too long. Not only is Jeanne's sig
> changed, but her husband is posting now (Hi, Rob! *Stacia waves so
> vigorously she falls over* :) ... and Colin has changed his name.
> Mind if I ask what that is, Colin? The Celtic spelling? And why?
> Please feel free to bean me over the head with a variety of fruits if I'm
> asking a tired old question.
>
Cailean is gaelic for Colin. At least in the Scottish dialect (haven't
checked the Irish.) Why? Because I prefer the name, as well as a fan of
all things Scottish.
Cailean. Up "Scotland the Brave"
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Sep 4 00:47:16 PDT 1995
Article: 1460 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.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.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: The word nigger for those pedantic
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 1995 13:58:57 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 48
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.white-power:1460 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1147
Lloyd's Dictionary Vol. V 1895.
"nigger (2) *neger [a corruption of negro (q.v)]"
"negro, neger [Sp. negro = a black man, from Lat. nigrum, accus. of niger;
Ital., Span., & Port. negro; Fr. negre.]
A. As substantive:
Anthrop: The distinctly dark, as opposed to the fair, yellow, and brown
varieties of mankind. Their original home was probably all Africa south
of the Sahara, India south of the Indo-Gengetic plains, Malaysia and the
greater part of Australisia." Also included is the comparison of a negro
to a caucasion.
"1. The abnormal length of the arm, sometimes reaching to the knee-pan.
2. Prognathism (Facial Angle 70 deg., in Caucasion 82 deg.)
3. Weight of brain, 35 oz (in gorilla 20 oz, average European, 45 oz)
4. Full black eye, black iris, and yellowish sclerotic coat.
5. Short, flat, snub nose, broad at extremity, with dilated nostrils and
concave ridge.
6. Thick, protruding lips, showing inner surfaces.
7. Very large zygomatic arches.
8. Exceedingly thick cranium, enabling him to use the head as a weapon of
attack.
9. Weak lower limbs, terminating in a broad, flat foot, with low instip,
projecting and somewhat prehensile toe, and "lark heel."
10. Complexion deep brown, blackish, or even black, not due to any
special pigment, but to the greater abundance of colouring matter in the
malpighan mucous membrane.
11. Short, black hair, distinctly woolly, not frizzly.
12. Thick epidermis, cool, soft, and velvety, mostly hairless, and
emitting a peculiar odour, described by Pruner Bey as hircine.
13. Frame of medium height, thrown somewhat out of the perpendicular by
the shape of the pelvis, the spine, the backward projection of the headm
and anatomical structure.
14. The cranial sutares, which close much earlier in the Negro than in
other races.
Negro "Minsheu gives the form neger; this is from the O.F negre (mod.F.
negre), 'a negro' (Cot.), and answers to mod.E. nigger."
I'll take it back about the spelling of the Spanish. So we get the word
nigger from the French and the Latin, instead of the Spanish and the
Latin. Either way I'm being more culturally aware than you
multiculturalists.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Tue Sep 5 00:22:21 PDT 1995
Article: 6108 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!vanbc.wimsey.com!news.rmii.com!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!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,alt.discrimination,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: 5 Sep 1995 02:11:17 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 42
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1503 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1169 alt.discrimination:34983 alt.revisionism:6108
> > >* Please do some research (for a change) into the area of human genetics
> > >on migration (forget it's official name.) They specialize in this field,
> > >so, no doubt you could learn something.
> >
> > McKinstry demonstrates for us once more the essential bankruptcy of
> > his views.
> >
> > He put forth the proposition that "DNA testing will suffice" to
> > determine "whiteness". I challenged him to back up this assertion with
> > facts. But McKinstry has none -- he can't even tell us what field of
> > scientific study would provide evidence for his claim.
>
> [snip]
>
> > Now, answer the question, coward: what facts can you present that
> > support your contention that DNA testing can determine "whiteness"?
> >
> > _You_ made the claim. _You_ support it.
>
> Your silence on this question has been noted, McKinstry. It is your
> standard tactic when you are challenged to actually back up your
> pronouncements with fact.
>
> We are still waiting for an answer: what facts can you present that
> support your contention that DNA testing can determine "whiteness"?
>
Thank you Jeffrey Brown. Now beyond all shadow of doubt, we can
officially call you a fool. As all the net can give witness on your
attempt to play the hero, has turned on you, and made you into an utter
fool. You should have read my last post before opening yourself for
ridicule, perhaps now you will have learned the lesson, on not to play the
pedantic fool. No doubt you will cling to your claim on me not answering
"Which nucleotide sequences make one white?" and so forth. I have never
postulated that I knew such sequences, yet you wish me to play the teacher
and tell you all the answers. From your own logic, I will pose a similar
question, who was Sargon of Akkad's father?
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Tue Sep 5 01:26:41 PDT 1995
Article: 6109 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!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,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: The ONLY liberal big gun... (was: For anyone who's interested...)
Date: 5 Sep 1995 02:27:34 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 58
Message-ID:
References: <41fpcu$odi@koala.scott.net> <95237.141900CODY@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> <41mr44$cmi@ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1504 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1170 alt.revisionism:6109
> > >> >> > Ya see, Leshole, it's one thing to have a few
> typos in a
> > >> >> > quickie online typing of a rant or flame,
> > >>
> > >> I notice you left yourself a convenient out, there.
> > >
> > > I was cutting *you* some slack on that one, Les, but you were so quick to
> > > try and find something to pick apart that you didn't even notice.
> >
> > Oh, sure. And I just make SO MANY typos, Jeannie.
>
> I don't care how many typos you make in the newsgroups, Les. The fact
> still remains that the National Alliance's web pages have errors that give
> the impression that you have a sloppy organization. Period. BTW, if you'd
> bother checking the attributions, you might notice that you've spelled by
> name wrong AGAIN. ^^
Shouldn't that be "my"? You must be a bonehead like the Negroes too, Jeanne.
>
> > (snip)
> >
> > > Amazing what someone can do in a few years if they're not plotting to take
> > > over the world with their imaginary friends, eh? A big difference between
> > > us is that everything that I said that I've done is true and has been
> > > documented by the university. You are still a putz, Les.
> >
> > Jeannie, at least I don't treat the 'Net like some sort of Wailing Wall,
> > where I can come dump all my problems ("I married an asshole who beat and
> > abused me, and I stuck with him for two years before we 'went our
> > separate ways'".) There IS such a concept as "dealing with it".
>
> You're absolutely correct, Les. You treat the 'Net as a bathroom wall,
> where you dump your half-truths, outright lies, and laughable attempts at
> demonstrating your superior knowledge and ancestory. What you write is
> crap. What you are is an embarrassment to the human race. Deal with that.
>
It's a bit hard to take you seriously, since you like to criticise other
peoples spelling mistakes and you make them yourself. Remind me never to
hire you as my proofreader, bonehead. All this gibberish you wrote, I
simply cannot understand it, you can't spell therefore your own statements
are pure crap. You are such an embarrassment to the pedantic class of
liberals, bonehead. Could you please not try to demonstrate your superior
spelling ability again?
People who live in glasshouses shouldn't throw stones.
For those that came in late: Jeanne made this statement that if literacy,
spelling and grammar are signs of intelligence then those that can't are
boneheads. Since she has made a fuss on spelling with a WWW page,
therefore, by her own logic, she is a bonehead. Congragulations go to
Jeanne, a non racist, racist (her own arguments say that negroes are
boneheads as well.)
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Tue Sep 5 01:26:42 PDT 1995
Article: 6111 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!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,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: One stupid question asked of Les Griswold, answered
Date: 5 Sep 1995 03:01:05 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 160
Message-ID:
References: <42doj7$3bf@grivel.une.edu.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugln2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:1173 alt.politics.white-power:1505 alt.revisionism:6111
> : Hopefully the liberals that like to triumph this question have the courage
> : to admit their mistake.
> :
> : The American Indian question: From the Encyclopedia Brittanica 1990, vol.
> : 18, pp 851, The Races of Mankind, The American Indian geographic race.
> :
> : "Though some groups developed high civilization and then disappeared *,
> : there also has been considerable continuity in many areas with living
> : populations closely resembling those recovered from ancient burials. Many
> : American Indian groups were eliminated as a result of disease, colonial
> : expansion, and forced relocation: but others have come to exceed their
> : pre-Columbian numbers with varying degrees of admixture from Europe and
> : Africa"
> :
> : * I'd like to expand this point at some future date, if I get time.
> :
> : Cailean.
>
> I do not have access to the 1990 edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannicia,
> but I do have access to the 1992 edition. In this edition, Volume 18, p.851
> is part of an article devoted to Human Evolution. The second columan on
> p.851 contains a section headed "Tne American Indian race". This section is
> three paragraphs long. The third of these ends with the same words as
> those quoted in the posting from the address cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz.
>
> To clarify matters, here is the rest of the section:
>
> "In facial form and tooth morphology, and minor peculiarties such as
> brachymesophalangia-5, the indegenous peoples of the Americas often
> resemble Asiatics, indicating a common ancestry. Some, in fact,
> have ,maintained affinites with the Asian mainland through the present,
> as is true of the Aleuts of the Aleutian Islands and the Eskimo of
> northern Alaska. Yet most of the "Indians" that Christopher Columbus
> met had been residents of the Americas for thousands of years, dating
> back to the existence of land bridges and a more salubrious climate in
> Alaska and Siberia. It is therefore approrpiate to note the Asian origins
> and similarities, and the differences that have come about with time and
> isolation by distance and altered sea-levels.
>
> "The absence of blood group B in American Indians is notable, suggesting
> that theycame to America before blood group B had attained a high
> frequency in Asia. In the MNS series, American Indians are overwhelmingly
> M, again indicative of the long separation. Yet such genetically determined
> traits as shovel-shaped incisors and a relatively high frequency of
> third-molar agenesis again reaffirm Asian origins, as does eyelid morphology
> and (for most Indians) projecting malars (cheekbones). Hair form tends to be
> straight, hair shafts tend to be rather thick, and body haiur and facial hair
> tend to be sparse. Bearded representations are virtually absent in graphic art
> from the northwest coast, Central America and Peru. American Indians appear
> to share with Aisatics a lower tolerance for alcohol, indicated by lower
levels
> of the alcohol-degrading enzyme alcohol dehydrogenase.
>
> "Most American Indians do not look like "schoolbook" (Plains) Indians, and
> many do not look especially Asiatic, for variability is great over the range
> of two continents.Though some groups developed high civilization and then
> disappeared, there also has been considerable continuity in many areas with
> living populations closely resembling those recovered from ancient burials.
> Many American Indian groups were eliminated as a result of disease, colonial
> expansion, and forced relocation: but others have come to exceed their
> pre-Columbian numbers with varying degrees of admixture from Europe and
> Africa"
>
> Viewed in context, I do not see what any "liberals" would need to admit
> as mistaken.
Yes they do, they keep asking this stupid question of Les on what was the
population of the Indians in Canada before the White man, and now. I only
quoted what was relevant to the topic. For instance I never mentioned the
low alcohol tolerance, which I could use for my own arguments. You'll
find in most texts (maybe you don't read them), they only quote what is
relevant to their argument. On no academic grounds does my quote do
injustice. Therefore one can only assume your wilful ignorance and a want
to "look" intelligent. To be more succinct, you are ranting.
>
> While perusing this article, I looked at the classification into various
> "races. The article distinguishes nine "geographic races" (p.850) after
> explaining (p.849) that Homo sapiens "has a single origin, in terms of
> its single predecessor species, but with geographical differentiation
> arising well before the start of the Holcene epoch (about 10,000 years ago).
> At least some of the geographically delimited divisions of the species (i.e.
> the geographic or continental races) owe many of their distinctive
> features to differences present at an earlier tme that were preserved."
>
> On p. 850, there is a brief discussion of the origins of modern man.
>
> "Africa, espeically the area around Lake Tanganyika, now appears to be
> the homeland of Homo, in which case all humans must be of African
> ancestry."
>
Notice "now appears", ie., there are still differences of opinions. There
is still room for doubt, etc.
> Even more salient to this newsgroup is the classification into nine
> "geographical races" of Homo sapiens, the only "racial classification"
> made in the article quoted by the poster from cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz.
>
> "the European geographic race, which includes Europe, North Africa
> and the Middle East" (p.851)
>
> The same page bears a map, coloured according to the geographiuc region
> occupied by each of these geographic races. Even a cursory glance shoes
> that the "European race" includes, Moors, Arabs, Egyptians, Turks
> and all Jews, be they from the Middle East, Sephardic or Ashkenazy Jews!
>
> So far the reference cited by the poster from cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz
> seems to support what the "liberals" have been saying.
>
You could at least quote the Northwestern South Eastern Axis and the
various traits that go with it. For example those along this border show
the ability to lactase better than other "Europeans." Which is strange
since that border is prodominantly whiter than the rest (and it also
states that.) You'll also find somewhere in the Brittanica a reference to
many more races of "mankind." Whether you care to look for it is another
matter entirely. It would seem you are pushing it uphill (I assume the
idiom is not lost you.) So your argument is quite moot. Especially
considering that it is only identifying races, in that section you are
quoting from, by geographical terms. Though no doubt you didn't think of
that (perhaps you don't think.)
> Of course there is more.
>
> While I had the Britannica in my hand, I also looked up Australia
> (Volume 14 p. 430) and in the section titled "Tools and Artifacts"
> there is *no* mention of anything to do with Phoenicia.
>
And? I have been saying for a long time (well earlier this year anyway)
of the suppression of history. Whether I post the articles of the finds
of Phoenician artifacts in Australia is doubtful (the academic year is
finishing soon, hastened by the need to study for exams and so forth.) If
you care to wait some undetermined length of time (when I decide to
actually pay for internet connection rather than bludge of the University)
I will post them, most probably in either jpg or gif format (so the
pictures are preserved.)
> Volume 1 pp 758 -759 contains articles on Aztecs. No mention of a royalty
> esapecially not a white one.
>
See above, if you examine closely however, even their commentaries show a
separation of Aztecs and Indians. You should also note the legends
concerned with the Aztec origins. Also you should look at the
micropaedia, you'll note that the Aztecs are distributed throughout the
volumes. You should read all of them, if memory serves me correct, the
one about the Aztec royalty I quoted to the sore loser was in volume 20
onwards (I haven't looked at it for about 6 months.) No, it doesn't
specify race either.
> I looked in the telephone book for the area around Wilberforce. No R. Gilroy.
>
Perhaps he has moved. Either that or he is unlisted. Perhaps you could
ring directory (or its equivalent.)
Cailean.
PS The I consider the Encyclopedia a good place to start, but not the end
for research.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From guardianthor@delphi.com Tue Sep 5 05:59:42 PDT 1995
Article: 1187 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!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in2.uu.net!news.delphi.com!usenet
From: guardianthor@delphi.com
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: Jeff Han,How'd You Escape the Abortion Clinic?
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 95 03:05:40 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)
Lines: 12
Message-ID:
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1b.delphi.com
X-To: McKinstry
McKinstry writes:
>You're asking to much of Jeff Han. When he gets hard pressed, he reverts
>back to type, which is to say, "you're an Idiot", "you're a fucking
>idiot", "we have an idiot here", "you're an idiot" (just to empathise his
>brain going into an infinite loop.) Then of course when you really have
>Jeff Han backed into a corner, he runs away for months. When he deigns to
>show his head, he says he was on a trip to the USA. Basically you are
Thanks for the support and I "KNOW" Han does not grasp the concept of honor
!He's just another "can type better than me,educated idiot".If he he "DARES" to
take me "head on",I'll squish him like the "bug" he is.
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Sep 6 03:07:38 PDT 1995
Article: 1553 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglp1.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: The word nigger for those pedantic
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 1995 12:41:07 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 51
Message-ID:
References: <42g5s6$rko@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglp1.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1553 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1214
> > "More culturallly aware" my foot. Colon, the only thing that you are
> showing
> > us is that you know how to read a dictionary- one that is 100 years out
> of date,BTW. Of course, those are the only sort of documents that you
> could cite,
> > considering that your theories are sheer tar...
> >
> > JeFf hAN
> Lets see Jeff, know anything about Maori culture, Mori Ori culture, Samoan
> culture, Tongan culture, Latin culture, Turkish culture, (M.E.) Indian
> culture, Moslem culture, and so forth? Or were you humping sheep during
> those lessons? You should take special note Jeff, seeing as I'm racist
> and you (supposedly) aren't.
> >
> > P.S.: Exactly what edition of the `Encyclopedia Britannica' do you cite
> in your
> > posts, Colon? (it's an EARLY one, I'll bet...)
> >
> Seeing as I tend to put the date of the Encyclopedia Brittanica I quote,
> you have made yourself into a fool again. Obviously your reading skills
> are pitiful. So now you are not only a sore loser, but a fool to boot.
> Your ability to challenge is quite pathetic isn't it?
>
One more thing, loser, have you no respect for history? How do you think
history books are written? Is there some bizarre mechanism in how history
is made without actually looking at who wrote such and such? Has it ever
occurred to you that modern history books are written on things in the
past? That the accumulation of knowledge is based on what has gone
before? Of course in the light of your posts, you would have the sheer
audacity to say you think. Your posts show very little brain activity
actually took place. You never bother to think about the consequences of
your statements. You say "that does not prove anything" yet offer no
reason why it doesn't prove anything. Lets hear a reason why the 1895
edition of Lloyd's dictionary is "out of date", putting aside more modern
terminalogy. Lets hear what the grand intellectual called Jeff Han, who
can call other people morons and idiots, has to say. Will he produce
anything worth listening too? Or should the "will" be "can"? Can we have
some justification for your unsupported statements?
Cailean.
P.S So what if the Encyclopedia Brittanica I quote from was an early one,
does it make it irrelevant? This is the same type of statement the nobody
called Jim Collier made. His reasoning was that if I wrote from somewhere
more populous, then my statements would be more valid. Of course I asked
him if I wrote from Mexico City, my statements would be extremely valid,
noticeably he was absent of a reply.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Sep 6 03:07:39 PDT 1995
Article: 1556 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglp1.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: 2nd white unity day in sc
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 1995 12:55:06 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 9
Message-ID:
References: <423ekc$1ce@news.scsn.net> <424t0n$m1f@news.duke.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglp1.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
> Rob "my parties are better" Carscadden
Yeah, they only exist in your dreams.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Sep 6 08:32:44 PDT 1995
Article: 1214 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglp1.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: The word nigger for those pedantic
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 1995 12:41:07 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 51
Message-ID:
References: <42g5s6$rko@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglp1.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1553 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1214
> > "More culturallly aware" my foot. Colon, the only thing that you are
> showing
> > us is that you know how to read a dictionary- one that is 100 years out
> of date,BTW. Of course, those are the only sort of documents that you
> could cite,
> > considering that your theories are sheer tar...
> >
> > JeFf hAN
> Lets see Jeff, know anything about Maori culture, Mori Ori culture, Samoan
> culture, Tongan culture, Latin culture, Turkish culture, (M.E.) Indian
> culture, Moslem culture, and so forth? Or were you humping sheep during
> those lessons? You should take special note Jeff, seeing as I'm racist
> and you (supposedly) aren't.
> >
> > P.S.: Exactly what edition of the `Encyclopedia Britannica' do you cite
> in your
> > posts, Colon? (it's an EARLY one, I'll bet...)
> >
> Seeing as I tend to put the date of the Encyclopedia Brittanica I quote,
> you have made yourself into a fool again. Obviously your reading skills
> are pitiful. So now you are not only a sore loser, but a fool to boot.
> Your ability to challenge is quite pathetic isn't it?
>
One more thing, loser, have you no respect for history? How do you think
history books are written? Is there some bizarre mechanism in how history
is made without actually looking at who wrote such and such? Has it ever
occurred to you that modern history books are written on things in the
past? That the accumulation of knowledge is based on what has gone
before? Of course in the light of your posts, you would have the sheer
audacity to say you think. Your posts show very little brain activity
actually took place. You never bother to think about the consequences of
your statements. You say "that does not prove anything" yet offer no
reason why it doesn't prove anything. Lets hear a reason why the 1895
edition of Lloyd's dictionary is "out of date", putting aside more modern
terminalogy. Lets hear what the grand intellectual called Jeff Han, who
can call other people morons and idiots, has to say. Will he produce
anything worth listening too? Or should the "will" be "can"? Can we have
some justification for your unsupported statements?
Cailean.
P.S So what if the Encyclopedia Brittanica I quote from was an early one,
does it make it irrelevant? This is the same type of statement the nobody
called Jim Collier made. His reasoning was that if I wrote from somewhere
more populous, then my statements would be more valid. Of course I asked
him if I wrote from Mexico City, my statements would be extremely valid,
noticeably he was absent of a reply.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Sep 6 17:22:47 PDT 1995
Article: 2352 of alt.skinheads
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!gl_13.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.skinheads
Subject: Re: ADL: Skinhead International; Australia
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 1995 07:54:12 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 82
Message-ID:
References: <42juvm$ggc@nizkor.almanac.bc.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gl_13.cs.auckland.ac.nz
> Australia
>
> "Romper Stomper," an Australian motion picture that depicts savage
> violence by Skinhead toughs, has brought worldwide attention to
> Australia's Skinheads. Although the story on which the film is based
> is imaginary, there are indeed racist Skins Down Under and some of
> them actually liked the film. One such Skinhead has been quoted
> thus: "Up to a point it's against Skinheads ... but it's good
> publicity for our cause. With unemployment like it is, they're
> asking for trouble letting all these Asians into the country."
>
I don't know which skinheads you've been talking too, the ones which I'm
acquainted, think the film is a poor description.
> According to the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, Skinhead
> numbers have fluctuated over the past decade from a relative few to
> 300 to 400. There are Skinheads in most state capitols, some
> affiliated with such neo-Nazi groups as the Australian Nationalist
> Movement, Australian National Action, and the Australian National
> Socialist Movement. Both the Australian Nationalist Movement and
> Australian National Action succeeded in recruiting Skinheads in 1993
> and 1994. As many as one-third to one-half of the participants in
> National Action rallies have been Skins.
>
> White Australian Resistance
>
> Two new racist Skinhead groups have made their appearance of late.
> One, a Sydney group calling itself Southern Cross Hammer Skinheads,
> has adopted the motto: "We must secure the existence of our people
> and a future for white children." (This expression, common among
> far-right activists in the United States, is known as "the 14
> words," and was originally coined by David Lane, an American
> neo-Nazi terrorist serving a long prsion term. It is noteworthy that
> the expression is now being used by an Australian Skinhead group
> which has also borrowed from its American cousins the term "Hammer
> Skinheads.") The other Skinhead gang, White Australian Resistance
> WAR), located in Melbourne, apparently adapted its name from the
> California-based White Aryan Resistance (WAR). The head of the
> latter group, Tom Metzger, has boasted on his telephone hotline
> about the formation of the Australian organization.[1]
>
> Aussie Skinheads have a record of violence similar to that of their
> counterparts the world over. From 1987 to 1989, National Action
> members in Sydney - some of them Skinheads - actively harrassed
> anti-apartheid activists and members of homosexual organizations. On
> January 27, 1989, two National Action Skins fired bullets into the
> residence of the Sydney-based representative of the African National
> Congress.
>
You should witness the ol' Black Power gangs, and so forth, just to let
the viewers note who does the most violence. Most skinhead gangs were
formed in protest to this black gangs. Especially considering how the
Police handle these gangs.
> "Asian Invasion"
>
> Several weeks later, Adelaide, still reeling from the Skinhead riot,
> was the scene of Australia's biggest neo-Nazi demonstration in
> several decades. The rally, sponsored by Australian National Action,
> included many Skinheads, along with bikers and other neo-Nazis. The
> 80 to 100 demonstrators gathered to denounce proposed anti-racist
> legislation. A nearby crowd of opponents hooted down National Action
> leader Michael Brander, as he railed against "the Asian invasion"
> and the "threat of Australia losing its identity to the Asian
> capitalists." Another National Action street demonstration, in an
> Adelaide suburb in December 1994, featured anti-Asian and other
> bigoted chants.
>
Perhaps the were protesting the even more draconian race bills than New
Zealand has got. Lets not forget the supposed ideal of free speech.
Perhaps you would also like to mention the atocities the Asians committed
in WWII, as a justification measure. A lot of senior citizens haven't
forgotten that one. Also why did you put a Swedish skingang in supposed
description of Australian skinhead gangs?
As usual, a biased report.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Sep 6 20:56:32 PDT 1995
Article: 6280 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!newsgate.watson.ibm.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!gl_13.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: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 1995 07:34:05 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 48
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gl_13.cs.auckland.ac.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1624 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1256 alt.discrimination:35028 alt.revisionism:6280
> > Jeffrey Brown, here is a quote from the 1990 Encyclopedia Brittanica vol.
> > 14 pp 954 under Population genetics.
> >
> > "Human population geneticists have traced migration and invasion routed of
> > man; genetic studies of present-day Europeans, for example, reveal routes
> > of human migrations that occurred hundreds or thousands of years ago. The
> > origin of the people inhabiting South Pacific islands and the degree of
> > intermingling among mixed races also are studied by human population
> > geneticists."
> >
> > I chose this quote because its straight to the point. If you have trouble
> > understanding it, I can get you are longer and more verbose one.
>
> This quote is far from the point, McKinstry. You were not asked to provide
> facts supporting the hypothesis that genetic studies can "reveal routes of
> human migrations that occurred hundreds or thousands of years ago".
>
I cannot help you with your reading ability Jeffrey. Please try to
comprehend the signifance on how geneticists can trace migrations of
Europeans hundreds or thousands of years ago without knowing the genetic
makeup os a European.
> You have yet to answer the question put to you: what facts can you present
> that support your contention that DNA testing can determine "whiteness"?
> Let me be more specific: Has a DNA standard for "whiteness" been
> established? If so, by whom? Has it been established, by experiment, that
> this standard, coupled with DNA testing, can distinguish "whites" from
> "non-whites"?
>
I repeat, human population geneticists are an official branch of genetics,
therefore their work must be as easily accessable as any other branch of
genetics. Unless you wish to prove the Encyclopedia Brittanica wrong, you
have accept that quote. If you were sincerely interested I would partake
of more research into this field, however you are being pedantic as usual,
and that does not take any effort. Therefore, you will have to be content
with the quote from the Encyclopedia Brittanica. As you will note they
also study mixed races, how can they tell they are a mixed race if they
can't tell racial genetics? Also, how can a geneticist tell if a european
has been somewhere some thousand years ago, if he cannot tell genetically
what a european is? Please answer these questions.
Hopefully, such reasoning is not above you.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Sep 6 20:56:34 PDT 1995
Article: 6292 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!vanbc.wimsey.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!uglp6.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: One stupid question asked of Les Griswold, answered
Date: 6 Sep 1995 22:00:40 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 23
Message-ID:
References: <4239jc$24u@news1.databank.com> <42ghpn$rql@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglp6.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:1261 alt.politics.white-power:1631 alt.revisionism:6292
> >PS The I consider the Encyclopedia a good place to start, but not the end
> >for research.
>
> I assume "The I consider" was supposed to be "I consider," but it's of no
> consequence. I must say however: I find it peculiar that you start with
> the Encyclopedia Britannica and find your "end for research" in the 1895
> Lloyd's Dictionary. (ref: "The word nigger for those pedantic," msg-ID
> )
>
So I'm not allowed to look at old books now? Where do think this type of
information comes from? Oh, I forget, you're like Jeff Han who thinks it
drops from the sky or something like that. What texts does the
Encyclopedia Brittanica quote from or more to the point, what date of
printing were these texts? Would they have occurred in the past or is
that too logical?
When you learn to rub two sticks together, please come back.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Thu Sep 7 04:28:22 PDT 1995
Article: 6349 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in2.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.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Iberia = Hebrew or some stupid question like that
Date: 7 Sep 1995 02:26:31 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 42
Message-ID:
References: <42gtco$mab@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:1307 alt.politics.white-power:1678 alt.revisionism:6349
> : Who was the liberal genius saying that the part of the white race didn't
> : come from the Caucasus mountions?
>
> Wasn't it Les Griswold (who still refuses to clarify whether
> he is related to Les Patterson) who maintained that "whites" are descendents
> only of the original inhabitants of Northern Europe?
>
> I seem to recall several postings by Kaus or Ayre to a similar effect,
> once even going do far as to say that the only true whites are those whose
> ancestors all come from the Hanover-Paris-London triangle.
>
I suppose it depends on which time period you are talking about. There
were white settlements in Asia as well as North Africa in ancient times,
even in China. If you wish to find out more on the Caucasus Mountains and
the Caucasion race you should read the works of Sharon Turner.
> I don't have archives of these postings, so I could be mistaken.
> I apologise in advance for anyone who feels improperly maligned
> by my possible misattribution of views.
>
> But the matter can be settled quite easily by someopne who has
> access to undoctored archives.
>
> Of course it is not clear that these people, whom you flatter with the
> etiquette "genius" at the same time as wreaking havoc with the
> English language. would be pleased to be labelled "liberal".
>
I take it that you like wreaking havoc with the English language as well?
If one of my early teachers is correct, a sentence should start with a
capital. Guess you like to write a load of gibberish as well. You should
note that Jeanne thinks you are a bonehead, as with the Negroes in Africa
before the white man came. Consider also the Jeanne is supposedly non
racist.
Cailean.
P.S How's that definition of primitive going? Still hanging to your creed
that Stone Age means advanced, compared with a highly technological Age?
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Thu Sep 7 04:28:23 PDT 1995
Article: 6350 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in2.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,alt.discrimination,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: 7 Sep 1995 02:36:22 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 27
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
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:1679 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1308 alt.discrimination:35044 alt.revisionism:6350
> > I have never postulated that I knew such sequences, yet you wish me to play
> > the teacher and tell you all the answers.
>
> If you never "knew" of "such sequences" then how can you even "postulate"
> that DNA tests for "whiteness" are even possible? Or is this simple
> "blue-skying" on your part? What _actual_ and _accepted_ research can you
> cite that would lead you to any such conclusions that "race" can be
> gentetically detected?
>
> Generally speaking, when one puts forward such ideas one should also
> provides evidence to support them. If, that is, one wishes for them to be
> taken seriously and not dismissed as quackery.
>
I was asked Mike, to provide the nucleotide sequence for a white person.
I just keep those things memorised don't I? As for DNA tests, I put
forward the ability of human population geneticists being able to test for
racial characteristics, it does not mean I can test for racial
characteristics via genetics. Or that I know such sequences. As for your
first paragraph, you should have been following the thread more closely.
Cailean.
P.S That sequence is on my must-do-at-some-stage projects.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Thu Sep 7 04:28:24 PDT 1995
Article: 6351 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in2.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,alt.discrimination,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: 7 Sep 1995 02:42:44 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 33
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
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:1680 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1309 alt.discrimination:35045 alt.revisionism:6351
> : Jeffrey Brown, here is a quote from the 1990 Encyclopedia Brittanica vol.
> : 14 pp 954 under Population genetics.
>
> : "Human population geneticists have traced migration and invasion routed of
> : man; genetic studies of present-day Europeans, for example, reveal routes
> : of human migrations that occurred hundreds or thousands of years
> : ago...
>
> I agree that genetics CAN trace populations (to some extent) through
> migrations, incasions, etc.
>
> But when asked "how do you know if a person is 'white'?", you
> answered "genetic testing". I'm assuming from this answer that
> you have at least some knowledge about WHAT (genetics-wise) is
> tested to find out if someone is 'white'. Given that we can trace
> groups genetics-wise, what are the defining genetic characteristics
> of 'white' people? (Or if you do not know, a simple "I don't know"
> will suffice).
I don't know what is exactly tested in the determination of race.
Eventually I do plan to know. However, just because I don't know what is
tested, does not mean that other people (ie., human population
geneticists) don't know either. Which is the absurd logic put forward by
Jeffrey Brown & Co. As I pointed out to Jeffrey, if I put forward that
electrons exist, I would have to retract the same statement, seeing as I
haven't done the relevant tests for electrons. Which you have to admit is
quite illogical.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Thu Sep 7 04:28:25 PDT 1995
Article: 6352 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in2.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,alt.discrimination,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: 7 Sep 1995 02:43:28 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 12
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
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:1681 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1310 alt.discrimination:35046 alt.revisionism:6352
> : Do you wish me to find the exact title for this area of genetic research
> : or are you afraid of doing a lot of reading?
>
> I for one would LOVE the exact title.
>
I'll see what I can do.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Thu Sep 7 20:37:09 PDT 1995
Article: 6451 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!uglo6.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: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: 7 Sep 1995 22:09:05 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 19
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> <42fjbv$t4a@nic.umass.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglo6.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1741 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1361 alt.discrimination:35071 alt.revisionism:6451
> Well, actually that would be nice. I wonder how you will be able
> to come up with the reference for something that doesn't exist in science.
> A DNA test to determine 'whiteness'? I see you've never taken a course
> in biology, eh?
> Please, if you *do* actually post a reply, stick to real science,
> not something from some neo-nazi who got his degree in the mail.
>
Actually Joe, I typed S=HUMAN POPULATION GENETICS on the University of
Auckland's AUCAT (S= subject heading.) Guess how many titles there were?
Around 50. So please, please lose the arrogance, or you might have to eat
humble pie. The science does exist, including one title on the Genetics of
Jews.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Sep 9 03:22:54 PDT 1995
Article: 6634 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglr2.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: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: 9 Sep 1995 03:31:46 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 21
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> <42hotv$b36@ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglr2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1832 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1449 alt.discrimination:35108 alt.revisionism:6634
> Mike "3 against 1? Another WP 'fair fight'!" Beebe
Actually there are 4 against 1 (Joseph, Lane, Mark, Jeffrey, and you), and
yes I can count.
You see Ron, I was nice to Mike, I could have stated that Mike was correct
at 3 against 1 (Mike, being a deficit), but I didn't. There you go Mike,
hope that boosts your ego.
I wouldn't call it a fair fight either Mike, if there was about 8 against
1, I would start calling it a fair fight, apart of possibly Joseph and
Mark (whom I don't recall before), there really isn't a fight. Both Lane
and Jeffrey don't rate (Jeffrey doesn't actually say anything, if you
actually read his posts.) Whether Joesph and Mark can cover this deficit,
remains to be seen.
Cailean, whose only just beginning to enjoy this little debate.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Sep 9 03:22:55 PDT 1995
Article: 6639 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!uglr2.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: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: 9 Sep 1995 03:57:56 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 100
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> <42n41d$bnp@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: uglr2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1837 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1457 alt.discrimination:35110 alt.revisionism:6639
> Excellent post, Richard. I note that there is no response from celtic
> Colin as yet.
Could be that I was away. Nevermind, perhaps you could one day piece
together a decent attack.
>
> Reread Richard's outline below, Colin, and understand this:
>
> There is absolutely NO genetic marker, not one single allele, that
> exists ONLY in one population, and not others.
>
> DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS?
>
There has to be, otherwise, babies will be born of any race, with any
genetics, which (I hope) you know to be wrong. Therefore, some part of
the genetics determines the child's characteristics. The child's ancestry
should reflect the genetics of his ancestors shouldn't it?
> Because this is one of the many reasons that the whole concept of
> "race" has been scuttled by the VERY GENETICISTS you look to for
> guidance on this issue, and demand that Jeffrey study, in hopes
> that you can weasle out of yet another hole you've dug for yourself,
> in your unbridled ignorance.
>
> If you will actually study the widely published work by such
> evolutionary geneticists as Luca Cavalli-Sforza, you will find that:
>
> Certain populations in sub-Saharan Africa bear a greater genetic
> similarity to Europeans than they do to certain other sub-Saharan
> populations.
>
You will also note, that some sub-Saharan Africans intermingled with Aryan
peoples in the past, therefore, one would expect that progeny to reflect
their ancestors. Hardly a case at all, please try harder.
> The population of aboriginal Australians are much further removed,
> genetically, from any group of sub-Saharan Africans than is any
> population of Euopeans.
>
Are you trying to bring the closeness of Europeans to Australians
Aborigines by your statement or are you trying to say the Australian
Aborigines are disimiliar to sub-Saharan Africans? The former is
bullshit, the latter is correct. I have always maintained that the two
were separate races. The Australian Aborigine is far more primitive than
the sub-Saharan for a start. You also talk about that Europeans have
similar genetics from your own arguments. You disprove yourself without my
intervention.
> And much more, very interesting information. Try reading some science
> for a change.
>
> (Singer)
Considering I hold a B.Sc, your attack is pretty pathetic, in fact I read
a lot of scientific material. Most of it doesn't apply to any topic so
far posed on these Newsgroups, on the account it isn't relevant to these
Newsgroups.
>
> >So let me make sure I understand this.
> >
> >A scientist wants to track migration routes from thousands of years
> >ago. He (or she) needs to know which people are descendants of the
> >original people in order to track these ruotes. He decides to find
> >out if there are genetic "markers" that appear more often in the
> >population he is studying than in the population in general. He
> >finds genetic markers that appear in 90% of the target population, but
>
> >only in 10% of the rest of the world population. This is not perfect,
> >but is good enough for what he needs. With some sampling, he can tell
> >if a certain population is likely to be his target population (in this
> >example, "descendant from Europeans"). That is what he needs.
> >He can now track populations over time.
> >
> >The next day the American government is overthrown by White
> >Separatists. The scientist is contacted by the new government.
> >They want the scientist to train people to administer his test
> >on individuals to determine if an individual is of European
> >descent. The scientist hesitates. He tells them "it won't work
> >very well with individuals. 10% of the people with PURE European
> >ancestry will test as NON-European. 10% of the people who are not
> >of pure European ancestry will test as PURE European." They shoot
> >him and find someone else.
> >
> >So McKinstry, tell me again how this will work?
> >
> > - Grego
A curious problem. I will investigate further, it shouldn't be too hard
to find the general characteristics of the European population (you stated
it yourself) from the past, and use that as the measuring stick.
Considering that Human Population Geneticists can determine who is of
mixed race or not, it would indicate that such a process can be
determined. For example, it is known that Polynesians are a mixture of
Asian, Melansian and European (going back before Capt. Cook), how did they
determine that?
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Sep 9 18:03:43 PDT 1995
Article: 6693 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Iberia = Hebrew or some stupid question like that
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 11:41:32 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 49
Message-ID:
References: <42ifu9$sg1@grivel.une.edu.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:1481 alt.politics.white-power:1872 alt.revisionism:6693
> : One of the least talented liberals came up with some stupid question for
> : me about whether Iberia = Hebrew. Personally, I don't know why such a
> : question was posed of me, seeing I have never mentioned it, but then
> : liberals aren't known for there intelligence, only their laziness and
> : wilful ignorance.
> :
>
> The claim the "Iberia = Peninsula of the Hebrews" originated in a series
> of postings emanating from an address in the mid-west of the USA, bearing
> the name "Benjamin Johnson".
>
> Brother Johnson, or the person or persons unknown who posted here using
> the name, insisted that that was the meaning of the word. On one
> occasion I posted the etymology of the two words from the Shorter Oxford
> English Dictionary, which did not impress Brother Johnson or the person
> or persons unknown who posted here using the name.
>
> I agree that Brother Johnson or the person or persons unknown who posted
> here using the name, was one of the least talented "contributors", which
> was most clearly shown in a series of postings concerning one "Arthur
> Koelter". Brother Johnson, or the person or persons unknown who posted
> here using the name, was caught out falsifying previous postings.
>
> Since Brother Johnson, or the person or persons unknown who posted here
> using the name, is no longer with us, it is up to those who still are
> to defend his "honour". I assure you that he would have been mortally
> offended at your accusing him of being a "liberal". His (or their)
> intellectual capabilities and integrity were certainly less than minimal,
> as you so correctly pointed out in the first five words of your posting.
> But he/they shared another of your features: an aversion to all things
> "liberal", be the word used in the English or Northern American usage.
> Brother Johnson, or the person or persons unknown who posted here using
> the name, succesfully established a reputation for being racialist,
> white-supremist, reactionary, anti-Semitic, and everything else you seem
> to be looking for in a husband.
It was the liberal Adim Krims that posed the question. Therefore it was
Adam Krim to whom I was referring. I also posted from a couple of
Etymological dictionary the feasibility of such a connection, not that I
am currently in a position to either deny or affirm such a claim. One
would have to investigate the Phonetic implication before making a
conclusion, and quoting from the Oxford Dictionary neither proves or
disproves it.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Sep 9 18:03:44 PDT 1995
Article: 6694 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Iberia = Hebrew or some stupid question like that
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 11:46:36 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 21
Message-ID:
References: <42n9pv$46i@news.ios.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:1482 alt.politics.white-power:1873 alt.revisionism:6694
> : One of the least talented liberals came up with some stupid question for
> : me about whether Iberia = Hebrew.
>
> Actually it was Ben Johnson who originally made that claim on this NG. I
> don't think he'd like it if you called him a liberal.
>
> IMHO the term Iberia is much more likely to be related to Hibernia than
> to Hebrew, but what do I know?
>
Actually I wasn't calling Ben a liberal, but Adam Krim. Yes you are
correct about Hibernia and Iberia, there is also implication of the
Phonetics to be considered. Eber, iber on the face value are extremely
close. As I've stated before, whether it stands up to more rigourous
testing is yet to be determined. I'm quite prepared to leave the work to
somebody else as well (far to busy at the moment.)
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Sep 9 20:48:37 PDT 1995
Article: 1483 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 12:03:02 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 169
Message-ID:
References: <41epca$6ee@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <41roa6$rum@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <423qut$ujs@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <42nsth$9h0@grivel.une.edu.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1874 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1483
> :> I have in front of me Volume II of the Encyclopaedia Britannica ----
> :> I presumethat is what is meant by the reference to "Encyclopaedia
> :> Brittanica" --- (1962 edition). The article on Aztecs is on pages
> :> 833-834. There is no mention of a " `white' Aztec royal line".
> :> In fact, the reader is left with the impression that there was
> :> no royal line to speak of. In connection with the late 14th century,
> :> the Encyclopaedia Britannica article says:
> :> "... they had become strong enough , under the patronage of
> :> Culhuacan, to reckon Acamapiichtli as their first "king" [sic]".
> :>
>
> To which McKinstry grunted:
>
> :So the Conquisitors never killed Montezuma? Pizarro never wrote about
> :their colour?
>
> d.A. restrains his/her mirth at the inanity and patiently explains:
>
> The technical term for what you have just illustrated is
> "non sequitur". It is irrelevant, a smoke screen, a red herring,
> in short, in "character" with the rest of your text.
> Whether the Conquistadors --- tell your scribe to note the
> spelling --- killed Montezuma II. As a matter of interest,
> according to the Encyclopaedia Britannica (1962 edition)
> Volume 15 p.763, it is uncertain who killed him:
> "In an effort to divert the attack, Cortes induced Montezuma
> to address his people from the Spaniard's stronghold. The
> angry mob responded by showering him with stones and arrows.
> Montezuma succumbed, either from wounds inflicted by te mob
> or at the hands of the Spaniards."
>
> As for Pizarro --- tell your scribe to note the spelling ---
> whether he wrote of there colour or not is again irrelevant to
> the question of whether the Aztecs had a royalty. Since you
> claim to use the Encyclopaedia Britannica as your source, I
> presume others are also entitled to refer to it. So, once again,
> I quote verbatim from it: (1962 edition) Vol 2 p.833.
>
> "Baudelier, therefore, was largely right when he denied (Peabody
> Mus. Rep., vol.ii 1876--1879) was an emperor or even king in our
> sense.."
>
> Back to McKinstry:
>
> :Also note that Culhuacan was the Mayan first king, whom is called in the
> :Aztec; Queztecoatl (the white god.) This comes from the 1990 Edition,
> :Jeff Han should be able to tell you the page numbers and so forth. Also
> :from the 1990 Edition come the information on Aztlan or white land, lan
> :meaning land, Azt meaning white. Curious isn't it? Also the Aztecs were
> :separated from the Indians, ie., they were not included in the Aztecs
> :numbers. Which is strange since the Indians lived among them. If memory
> :serves me correct, the quote goes "The Conquisitors killed the Aztecs,
> :thereby gaining the loyalty of 200,000 Indians", if Jeff Han can humble
> :himself, he should be able to give you the exact quote.
>
> Here d.A. feels the irresistible urge to attempt again to inject a note
> of rationality:
>
> The Encyclopaedia Britannica makes it very clear that in its view,
> the Aztecs were not "white". (1962 edition) Vol. 2 p. 834:
>
> "Even the Axtec realm is likely to have had a predecessor among the
> Toltec of Tula or Teotihuacan; and like theirs, it would have
> crumbled in a century or two and another have arisen in its stead
> after a period of disintegration had the Caucasian not appeared on the
> scene."
Please tell your scribe to note the spelling. As I was explaining to
Jeff, the Aztecs had mongelized.
>
> McKinstry quotes d.A. and comments:
> :
> :> And later on the same page, speaking of the Aztec empire:
> :> "...it was not an empire or state in our sense but a loosely knit
> :> aggregation of units related to the dominant community in varying ways."
> :>
> :That does not mean that they did not have a king over all. For example in
> :Celtic legends you could have kings, but also high kings that ruled over
> :all (high kings were coronated on the Stone of Destiny), including kings.
>
> d.A. stops laughing for a moment and comments:
>
> The Encyclopaedia Britannica is quite clear on this matter, as the
> additional quotation from it I included above shows --- and it does
> *not* agree with you. In any event, the structure of Celtic legends
> is of at best dubious relevance to a discussion of Aztec society.
>
I used it as an illustration. What about the quote about Baudelier? Hmm?
Okay, they didn't have a king or emperor in the same sense we do today (or
that is what I gather from the quote), maybe you should look at the
Scandinavian countries before the 11th century as a reference to your
illogic.
> McKinstry continues by quoting d.A. and commenting:
>
> :> Of course, it is possible that you looked in a different edition
> :> of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, or that it was *not* a typing
> :> or other error, and there is also an "Encyclopaedia Brittanica".
> :> This matter can be readily clarified by your providing a page
> :> and volume number of the editin you use(d).
> :>
> :The Encyclopedia Brittanica does not mention what race the royalty was,
> :that comes from Pizarro. All I did was go through the wording in the
> :Encyclopedia Brittanica to back up my claims, something Jeff Han could not
> :refute. Hopefully the sore loser still has copies of those posts, where
> :he got thrashed, so you can get them unadulterated.
> :>
>
> d.A. is beginning to suspect a plagiarisation from a rejected
> Monty Python script, but observes:
>
>
> It is odd that to provide a reference for material you are claiming
> to have personally verified you need to ask Jeff Han to tell you
> where it is that it is. Is Jeff Han the minder and scribe the
> New Zealand welfare system provides you with to read and write
> for you? Anyone with even a pretence to an iota of intellectual
> and/or personal integrity would provide the reference. You
> clearly have neither, for you have since this posting quoted
> several times from the Encyclopaedia Britannica, giving precise
> references. So there is no need to rely on Jeff han. Or are
> you in a conspiracy with him? If the New Zealand welfare authorities
> discover that you do use the Encyclopaedia Britannica, might they
> cease to pay for your use of his services as scribe and maybe
> even cut off your hand-out?
>
I've done the work before, if Jeff Han wishes to continue the argument, he
had better consider the items I had written before, otherwise he is going
to repeat the same tactics. Therefore it is safe to assume that Jeff Han
has those posts, therefore I don't need to find them again.
> McKinstry makes quotes d.A.'s question and responds:
>
> > P.S. Have the Phoenician butterflies learnt to ski yet?
> :
> :And you talk about me having fanciful ideas?
> :
>
> d.A. clarifies:
>
> The reference you provided for the claim of Phoenician traces
> in Australia was a certain R. Gilroy of the Museum of Natural
> History in New South Wales. According to the telephone people
> here, there is no such museum listed *anywhere* in New South Wales.
>
Incorrect, I provided the address and the Museum of Natural History in the
same post. Whether you missed it is not my fault. I later clarified that
I was quoting from a 1983 (which is after 1965) journal. I tried to say
(obviously unsuccessfully) to say perhaps circumstances have changed. You
could find a 1983 telephone directory yourself, seeing you seem to live in
New South Wales.
> Later you provided a more precise address, which I checked. It
> is the "Butterfly Farm and Ski Garden".
>
> Even Blind Freddy can see immediately that you must have had
> a bunch of Phoenician butterflies in mind, and surely they went
> to the ski garden to learn to ski. If Blind Freddy happesn to
> have been wrong, please enlighten him. But do so without
> asking Jeff Han to hold your willie for you while you wee.
>
You have done better insults than this one before, one did you degrade
yourself with this slop?
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Sep 9 21:39:30 PDT 1995
Article: 1874 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 12:03:02 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 169
Message-ID:
References: <41epca$6ee@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <41roa6$rum@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <423qut$ujs@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca> <42nsth$9h0@grivel.une.edu.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1874 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1483
> :> I have in front of me Volume II of the Encyclopaedia Britannica ----
> :> I presumethat is what is meant by the reference to "Encyclopaedia
> :> Brittanica" --- (1962 edition). The article on Aztecs is on pages
> :> 833-834. There is no mention of a " `white' Aztec royal line".
> :> In fact, the reader is left with the impression that there was
> :> no royal line to speak of. In connection with the late 14th century,
> :> the Encyclopaedia Britannica article says:
> :> "... they had become strong enough , under the patronage of
> :> Culhuacan, to reckon Acamapiichtli as their first "king" [sic]".
> :>
>
> To which McKinstry grunted:
>
> :So the Conquisitors never killed Montezuma? Pizarro never wrote about
> :their colour?
>
> d.A. restrains his/her mirth at the inanity and patiently explains:
>
> The technical term for what you have just illustrated is
> "non sequitur". It is irrelevant, a smoke screen, a red herring,
> in short, in "character" with the rest of your text.
> Whether the Conquistadors --- tell your scribe to note the
> spelling --- killed Montezuma II. As a matter of interest,
> according to the Encyclopaedia Britannica (1962 edition)
> Volume 15 p.763, it is uncertain who killed him:
> "In an effort to divert the attack, Cortes induced Montezuma
> to address his people from the Spaniard's stronghold. The
> angry mob responded by showering him with stones and arrows.
> Montezuma succumbed, either from wounds inflicted by te mob
> or at the hands of the Spaniards."
>
> As for Pizarro --- tell your scribe to note the spelling ---
> whether he wrote of there colour or not is again irrelevant to
> the question of whether the Aztecs had a royalty. Since you
> claim to use the Encyclopaedia Britannica as your source, I
> presume others are also entitled to refer to it. So, once again,
> I quote verbatim from it: (1962 edition) Vol 2 p.833.
>
> "Baudelier, therefore, was largely right when he denied (Peabody
> Mus. Rep., vol.ii 1876--1879) was an emperor or even king in our
> sense.."
>
> Back to McKinstry:
>
> :Also note that Culhuacan was the Mayan first king, whom is called in the
> :Aztec; Queztecoatl (the white god.) This comes from the 1990 Edition,
> :Jeff Han should be able to tell you the page numbers and so forth. Also
> :from the 1990 Edition come the information on Aztlan or white land, lan
> :meaning land, Azt meaning white. Curious isn't it? Also the Aztecs were
> :separated from the Indians, ie., they were not included in the Aztecs
> :numbers. Which is strange since the Indians lived among them. If memory
> :serves me correct, the quote goes "The Conquisitors killed the Aztecs,
> :thereby gaining the loyalty of 200,000 Indians", if Jeff Han can humble
> :himself, he should be able to give you the exact quote.
>
> Here d.A. feels the irresistible urge to attempt again to inject a note
> of rationality:
>
> The Encyclopaedia Britannica makes it very clear that in its view,
> the Aztecs were not "white". (1962 edition) Vol. 2 p. 834:
>
> "Even the Axtec realm is likely to have had a predecessor among the
> Toltec of Tula or Teotihuacan; and like theirs, it would have
> crumbled in a century or two and another have arisen in its stead
> after a period of disintegration had the Caucasian not appeared on the
> scene."
Please tell your scribe to note the spelling. As I was explaining to
Jeff, the Aztecs had mongelized.
>
> McKinstry quotes d.A. and comments:
> :
> :> And later on the same page, speaking of the Aztec empire:
> :> "...it was not an empire or state in our sense but a loosely knit
> :> aggregation of units related to the dominant community in varying ways."
> :>
> :That does not mean that they did not have a king over all. For example in
> :Celtic legends you could have kings, but also high kings that ruled over
> :all (high kings were coronated on the Stone of Destiny), including kings.
>
> d.A. stops laughing for a moment and comments:
>
> The Encyclopaedia Britannica is quite clear on this matter, as the
> additional quotation from it I included above shows --- and it does
> *not* agree with you. In any event, the structure of Celtic legends
> is of at best dubious relevance to a discussion of Aztec society.
>
I used it as an illustration. What about the quote about Baudelier? Hmm?
Okay, they didn't have a king or emperor in the same sense we do today (or
that is what I gather from the quote), maybe you should look at the
Scandinavian countries before the 11th century as a reference to your
illogic.
> McKinstry continues by quoting d.A. and commenting:
>
> :> Of course, it is possible that you looked in a different edition
> :> of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, or that it was *not* a typing
> :> or other error, and there is also an "Encyclopaedia Brittanica".
> :> This matter can be readily clarified by your providing a page
> :> and volume number of the editin you use(d).
> :>
> :The Encyclopedia Brittanica does not mention what race the royalty was,
> :that comes from Pizarro. All I did was go through the wording in the
> :Encyclopedia Brittanica to back up my claims, something Jeff Han could not
> :refute. Hopefully the sore loser still has copies of those posts, where
> :he got thrashed, so you can get them unadulterated.
> :>
>
> d.A. is beginning to suspect a plagiarisation from a rejected
> Monty Python script, but observes:
>
>
> It is odd that to provide a reference for material you are claiming
> to have personally verified you need to ask Jeff Han to tell you
> where it is that it is. Is Jeff Han the minder and scribe the
> New Zealand welfare system provides you with to read and write
> for you? Anyone with even a pretence to an iota of intellectual
> and/or personal integrity would provide the reference. You
> clearly have neither, for you have since this posting quoted
> several times from the Encyclopaedia Britannica, giving precise
> references. So there is no need to rely on Jeff han. Or are
> you in a conspiracy with him? If the New Zealand welfare authorities
> discover that you do use the Encyclopaedia Britannica, might they
> cease to pay for your use of his services as scribe and maybe
> even cut off your hand-out?
>
I've done the work before, if Jeff Han wishes to continue the argument, he
had better consider the items I had written before, otherwise he is going
to repeat the same tactics. Therefore it is safe to assume that Jeff Han
has those posts, therefore I don't need to find them again.
> McKinstry makes quotes d.A.'s question and responds:
>
> > P.S. Have the Phoenician butterflies learnt to ski yet?
> :
> :And you talk about me having fanciful ideas?
> :
>
> d.A. clarifies:
>
> The reference you provided for the claim of Phoenician traces
> in Australia was a certain R. Gilroy of the Museum of Natural
> History in New South Wales. According to the telephone people
> here, there is no such museum listed *anywhere* in New South Wales.
>
Incorrect, I provided the address and the Museum of Natural History in the
same post. Whether you missed it is not my fault. I later clarified that
I was quoting from a 1983 (which is after 1965) journal. I tried to say
(obviously unsuccessfully) to say perhaps circumstances have changed. You
could find a 1983 telephone directory yourself, seeing you seem to live in
New South Wales.
> Later you provided a more precise address, which I checked. It
> is the "Butterfly Farm and Ski Garden".
>
> Even Blind Freddy can see immediately that you must have had
> a bunch of Phoenician butterflies in mind, and surely they went
> to the ski garden to learn to ski. If Blind Freddy happesn to
> have been wrong, please enlighten him. But do so without
> asking Jeff Han to hold your willie for you while you wee.
>
You have done better insults than this one before, one did you degrade
yourself with this slop?
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Sep 9 23:19:13 PDT 1995
Article: 6739 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugll2.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: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: 10 Sep 1995 03:47:35 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 37
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> <42o252$9h0@grivel.une.edu.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1893 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1498 alt.discrimination:35133 alt.revisionism:6739
> : who was Sargon of Akkad's father?
> :
>
> Too easy! It was Montezuma Abraxas-Cortez, famous Phoenician
> butterfly of exquisite blancheness undheard of before or since.
> He was related by marriage to Pizarro on the Scottish side of
> the latter's family and colonised the lower reaches of the
> ski slopes of Wilberforce, New South Wales, after completing his
> doctoral dissertation on "The Micro-Local Analysis of Inks Used
> for Printing the Encyclopaedia Brittanica and Its Application
> to DNA-Analysis for the Determination of the Penis Size of Maori
> Men."
>
> This rare tome was printed in limited numbers, with one
> copy destroyed by the dog which destroted the experiment in
> artificial insemination at Brother Johnson's address. another
> being one of the uninsured, precise docuemnts destroyed in a
> fire which burnt down a house in Canada, *not* owned by its
> occu[pant, but its occupant's son. Fortunately the only other
> copy is in the safe hands of the McKinstry dynasty, and is its
> prized heirloom.
>
> Jeffrey G. Brown will just have to learn to live with the
> fact that not everyone is entitled to know what is in
> this pricelss document. He'll just have to accept McKinstry's
> word about the conclusions.
>
As stated to Jeffrey, you should leave the humour to Chuck, at least he
can occasionally come up with something remotely humourous.
Rating: D-
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Sep 9 23:36:00 PDT 1995
Article: 6740 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!van-bc!news.mindlink.net!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugll2.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: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: 10 Sep 1995 03:55:01 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 24
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll2.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1894 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1499 alt.discrimination:35134 alt.revisionism:6740
> This quote obviously means that the scientists can check for
> similarities in different DNA. I fail to see how this allows anyone to
> determine what exactly consitutes 'White' DNA. Are you suggesting that
> we should just use YOUR DNA and measure how close everyone is to you?
> That's hardly scientific, but at least it is amusing.
>
> I'm sorry, but if this is the best evidence you can come up
> with to support your claim, I think we have to call the match.
>
> Rational people one, Racists zero...
>
>
> Joseph Poulin
I suppose your next task is to find the rational people to give them a medal?
I'm afraid Lane, backed up my argument unwittingly and so did Mark, never
mind. Come back and play some other day.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 10 13:13:30 PDT 1995
Article: 1905 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!gl_5.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: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 1995 07:36:18 +0100
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 17
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> <42hotv$b36@ixnews2.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.white-power:1905 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1507 alt.discrimination:35135 alt.revisionism:6762
> : Cailean, whose only just beginning to enjoy this little debate.
>
> If this is true, which is doubtful, why aren't you answering those
> nagging little questions about how to segregate white DNA from
> non-white DNA?
>
> Mike "Wellllll?" Beebe
Mike, I memorise DNA sequences for fun don't I? What type of question is
this supposed to be? I never made the claim that I, myself knew, but that
others do.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 10 14:30:14 PDT 1995
Article: 6774 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!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!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.revisionism
Subject: Re: One stupid question asked of Les Griswold, answered
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 1995 08:36:17 +0100
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 259
Message-ID:
References: <42doj7$3bf@grivel.une.edu.au> <42pl79$mh0@grivel.une.edu.au>
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:1508 alt.politics.white-power:1907 alt.revisionism:6774
> McKinstry (cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz) quoted two sentences from
> the Encyclopedia Brittanica 1990, vol. 18, pp 851, The Races of
> Mankind, The American Indian geographic race in an attempt to
> bolster extravagant claims.
>
> In response, d.A. posted the rest of the section, which makes
> it clear that to call the claims extravagant is to flatter
> those who make the claims.
The rest of your quote had no bearing on the argument. Especially
considering I was quoting Indian population size, not the other facts of
Indian race.
>
> Then D.A. added:
>
> : > Viewed in context, I do not see what any "liberals" would need to admit
> : > as mistaken.
> :
>
> In response, MacKinstry posted:
>
> :
> : Yes they do, they keep asking this stupid question of Les on what was the
> : population of the Indians in Canada before the White man, and now.
>
> The question was asked of Griswold, who refuses to clarify a possible
> relationship to Les Patterson, after he (Griswold, that is, not
> Patterson) had made unsubstantiated claims about the demography of
> the indigenous peoples of North America. Te only thing even vaguely
> stupid about the question was to entertain the thought that Griswold,
> who will not clarify whether he is related to Les Patterson, might,
> on this one exceptional occasion, actually be in a position to
> substantiate the phantasms emanating from the subterranean Antarctic
> headquarters.
Your insults are getting more and more pathetic, have you already reached
your platform? If this is the case you should give up.
>
> :I only quoted what was relevant to the topic.
>
> Far from it. You selected sentences which, when taken out of
> context, suggest the very antithesis of the import of the article.
> It reminds me of Joe Bloggs saying: "I did not steal the apple"
> and then McKinstry's quoting Joe Bloggs as saying "I did steal the apple".
> Note that every word was uttered by Joe Bloggs, and in the order quoted
> by our hypothetical McKinstry, who would then justify the judicious
> editing by saying "I only quoted what was relevant to the topic."
>
> : For instance I never mentioned the
> : low alcohol tolerance, which I could use for my own arguments. You'll
> : find in most texts (maybe you don't read them), they only quote what is
> : relevant to their argument.
>
> That depends entirely on the intellectual integrity --- or lack thereof
> --- of the author, and also the degree of relevance/irrelevance of
> the material omitted.
>
So alcohol tolerance has a bearing on Indian population size? You must be
some academic. Could I please have some sort of reasoning for this?
> : On no academic grounds does my quote do injustice.
>
> It was a disingenuous attempt to pervert the meaning of the article.
> You made the mistake of giving precise references, which made your
> fabrication easy to expose. I note that you have since refused to
> be precise, alluding only vaguely to texts if they may be readily
> available. It is much safer to hide behing vague falsehoods
> and diffuse prevarication. The only drawback is that your reticence
> to provide references when you claim to have them is a tacit admission
> of fraudulence.
>
What a load of crap, please state why for example, the need to quote
alcohol tolerance of Indians in reference to population size. Perhaps I'm
missing something here to understand this incredible piece of logic from
you.
> : Therefore one can only assume your wilful ignorance and a want
> : to "look" intelligent.
>
> Not really. When I want to look intelligent, I wear glasses. When
> I want to seem inteligent, I ask the person I wish to impress to read
> your postings. After enough of them, even the neighbour's dead cat
> seems to be a genius.
>
You shouldn't be so hard on yourself. Trying to impress the neighbour's
dead cat to seem intelligent, must be an amazing example of someone who is
desperate.
I assume you were trying to be insulting? What a poor attempt, I didn't
even need to twist your argument.
> : To be more succinct, you are ranting.
>
> Well, to be precise, I was "WRITING" , and quoting the text you
> misrepresented.the text you misquoted.
>
No, the other part of the text played no bearing on Indian population
size. From your logic, if I wanted to quote a piece from a book, I should
quote the entire book.
> McKinstry quotes some lines from d.A.
>
> : > While perusing this article, I looked at the classification into various
> : > "races. The article distinguishes nine "geographic races" (p.850) after
> : > explaining (p.849) that Homo sapiens "has a single origin, in terms of
> : > its single predecessor species, but with geographical differentiation
> : > arising well before the start of the Holcene epoch (about 10,000
years ago).
> : > At least some of the geographically delimited divisions of the
species (i.e.
> : > the geographic or continental races) owe many of their distinctive
> : > features to differences present at an earlier tme that were preserved."
> : >
> : > On p. 850, there is a brief discussion of the origins of modern man.
> : >
> : > "Africa, espeically the area around Lake Tanganyika, now appears to be
> : > the homeland of Homo, in which case all humans must be of African
> : > ancestry."
> : >
>
> Now "They don't call me Clarence Darrow for nothing" McKinstry strikes:
>
> : Notice "now appears", ie., there are still differences of opinions.
>
> d.A. interjects:
>
> Not at all. The phrase says nothing about the number or plausibility
> of alternative explanations. It simply means that the evidence
> available does not exclude all other possibilities. It does
> *not* mean that other plausible explanation are seriously entertained,
> just that there is no definitive proof. When you graduate to primary
> school, the English teacher will probably explain this to you. Just be
patient.
>
To bad I asked by Supervisor. Now appears means: to the best of our
ability at this time to ascertain this ...
> : There is still room for doubt, etc.
>
> Correct!! You know, you are beginning to learn! Wonders will never cease!
> I think we may be witnessing here a major breakthrough in science.
> We may have stumbled upon the famous "missing link" in the chain of
> evolution!!!
>
Amazing how you back me up now, are you like Singer, who unwittingly backs
up "the enemies" arguments? "There is still room for doubt" is still in
response to "now appears", guess you weren't to good at the ol' primary
school english. Is this why you went and saw an English Primary School
Teacher recently? The old English is slipping a bit is it?
> The Missing Link again quotes d.A.
d.A tries to be funny, and misses the mark because of his own blunderings.
>
> : > Even more salient to this newsgroup is the classification into nine
> : > "geographical races" of Homo sapiens, the only "racial classification"
> : > made in the article quoted by the poster from cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz.
> : >
> : > "the European geographic race, which includes Europe, North Africa
> : > and the Middle East" (p.851)
> : >
> : > The same page bears a map, coloured according to the geographiuc region
> : > occupied by each of these geographic races. Even a cursory glance shoes
> : > that the "European race" includes, Moors, Arabs, Egyptians, Turks
> : > and all Jews, be they from the Middle East, Sephardic or Ashkenazy Jews!
> : >
> : > So far the reference cited by the poster from cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz
> : > seems to support what the "liberals" have been saying.
> : >
> : You could at least quote the Northwestern South Eastern Axis and the
> : various traits that go with it. For example those along this border show
> : the ability to lactase better than other "Europeans." Which is strange
> : since that border is prodominantly whiter than the rest (and it also
> : states that.) You'll also find somewhere in the Brittanica a reference to
> : many more races of "mankind."
>
> d.A. again:
>
> Where in which edition of the Britannica? Be careful!! This question is
> a rap. Tell me where exactly to look, and I'll do so!! Just a vague
> reference to tens of thousands of pages is just not convincing. You're
> bluffing.
>
>From memory vol. 19 around page 720.
If there is a book on insults you should get it out. Your original
insults weren't bad. Have you been getting the logic for your insults
>from spelling on your beer cans (XXXX instead of Beer)?
> So I rang information --- it could be a new or silent listing.
> Neither.
>
> So I rang the Australian Museum in College St Sydney
> (Tel: + 02 320 6000).
>
> After some to-and-fro, I had an informative discussion with
> Val Attenbrow from the archaeology section there on
> Tuesday, 5th September, 1995.
>
> I explained that I had heard about Phoenician artefacts having
> been found in Australia, and wanted to know where I could find
> out more.
>
> Ms Attenbrow said that to the best of her professional knowledge,
> there have been no Phoenician artefacts found in Australia.
>
> I then said that I had heard that there were Phoenicians here
> before the Kooris and the Murris.
>
> Well, I was informed that there is evidence of Koori/Murri
> civilisation predating the earliest traces of the Phoenicians
> by over thirty thousand years.
>
> Ms Attenbrow said that there have been nuemrous other
> "strange claims" over the years. She cited the example
> of the "Spanish Ruins" in Bitangabee near Eden on the
> South Coast of NSW. It was claimed to pre-date many
> other relics. A serious examination showed it to be the
> remains of an abandoned whaling station built after the
> British colonisation of NSW.
>
> I then gave the game away by admitting: "Well, I have
> been told that Dr R. Gilroy with a PhD in archaeology
> had found Phoenician artefacts in Australia".
>
> The response was illuminating. "Oh, Gilroy. His father
> was already well-known for strange notions and theories."
> He had a mueseum of sorts at Mt Victoria in the Blue Mountains
> west of Sydney.
>
> I saked Ms Attembrow where R. Gilroy obtained his PhD
> in achaeology.
>
> Ms Attenbrow said she was not aware that he had one. She knows
> most people who have obtained PhD's in archaeology in Australia
> in the last decade or two, but she is ot aware that R. Gilroy
> has one from an Australian university. "It's possible that
> he obtained it overseas, or that i just don't know about it,
> but I don't think he has one from an Australian university."
>
> I asked Ms Attenbrow if I could quote her in this forum.
> She agreed to my doing so.
>
> The questions arise: Where and when did R. Gilroy obtain a
> PhD in archaeology? What was the title of his dissertation?
>
So a R. Gilroy does exist. As for where he got a degree in Archeology, I
wouldn't have clue, I presumed in a University of Australia, and that
hasn't been disproved either. Also I never claimed (nor R. Gilroy) the
Phoenicians were here before the Abos, but its amazing to hear some of the
liberal's interpretations.
So you can now begin your quest to find R. Gilroy, Val Attenbrow gave a
direction for Rex's father place. Maybe that is a good place to start.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 10 15:56:48 PDT 1995
Article: 6777 of alt.revisionism
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!ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: One stupid question asked of Les Griswold, answered
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 10:00:18 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 48
Message-ID:
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:1512 alt.politics.white-power:1914 alt.revisionism:6777
> : > : Hopefully the liberals that like to triumph this question have the
courage
> : > : to admit their mistake.
> : >
> Always crowing over your "victory," too dumb to realize it's a loss.
>
> : > : The American Indian question: From the Encyclopedia Brittanica
1990, vol.
> : > : 18, pp 851, The Races of Mankind, The American Indian geographic race.
> : >
> : > :. Many
> : > : American Indian groups were eliminated as a result of disease, colonial
> : > : expansion, and forced relocation: but others have come to exceed their
> : > : pre-Columbian numbers with varying degrees of admixture from Europe and
> : > : Africa"
> : >
> : > Just as it is today, California was the most populous area in north
> : > America five hundred years ago.
> : > ... More than one million Natives are estimated to
> : > have lived there.
> : >
> : > Where are they? Primarily wiped out (murdered through slavery and
> : > ...
>
> : The question asked of Les, was concerning Canada, not northern
> : California. Hopefully you can distinguish the distinction.
>
> : Cailean.
>
> Where does your feeb' attempt to come to grismolds's aid mention
> Canada? Your response is, as usual, just an attempt to slime out
> of having to acknowledge the truth. There was never any mention
> of relegating the debate to Canada alone, not that there hasn't
> been the same pattern of genocide for northern plains and
> northeastern tribes, anyway.
I suggest you read those "eight question for Les Griswold" posts sometime,
usually the first question is on the Indians in Canada. If you didn't
realize this, my mistake for not clarifying. However you will notice the
title of this post, I made the assumption that most liberals would know
what this post was about, and stop asking stupid questions again and again
and again and...
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 10 22:17:51 PDT 1995
Article: 6790 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!kryten.awinc.com!netnet2.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 11:16:30 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 40
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> <42o252$9h0@grivel.une.edu.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1935 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1528 alt.discrimination:35141 alt.revisionism:6790
> > : who was Sargon of Akkad's father?
> > :
> >
> > Too easy! It was Montezuma Abraxas-Cortez, famous Phoenician
> > butterfly of exquisite blancheness undheard of before or since.
> > He was related by marriage to Pizarro on the Scottish side of
> > the latter's family and colonised the lower reaches of the
> > ski slopes of Wilberforce, New South Wales, after completing his
> > doctoral dissertation on "The Micro-Local Analysis of Inks Used
> > for Printing the Encyclopaedia Brittanica and Its Application
> > to DNA-Analysis for the Determination of the Penis Size of Maori
> > Men."
> >
> > This rare tome was printed in limited numbers, with one
> > copy destroyed by the dog which destroted the experiment in
> > artificial insemination at Brother Johnson's address. another
> > being one of the uninsured, precise docuemnts destroyed in a
> > fire which burnt down a house in Canada, *not* owned by its
> > occu[pant, but its occupant's son. Fortunately the only other
> > copy is in the safe hands of the McKinstry dynasty, and is its
> > prized heirloom.
>
> Ohhhhh... _that_ Sargon of Akkad! I was thinking of the Sargon of Akkad
> that inhabited Kirk's body in "Return to Tomorrow". Silly me....
>
> > Jeffrey G. Brown will just have to learn to live with the
> > fact that not everyone is entitled to know what is in
> > this pricelss document. He'll just have to accept McKinstry's
> > word about the conclusions.
>
> Not _this_ Jeffrey G. Brown. You must be thinking of that other Jeffrey G.
> Brown who does _not_ have a perfectly functional bullshit filter.
>
You should leave the humour to Chuck, even his worst is better than this.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 10 22:17:53 PDT 1995
Article: 6791 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!kryten.awinc.com!netnet2.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 11:33:50 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 75
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> <42fjbv$t4a@nic.umass.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1936 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1529 alt.discrimination:35142 alt.revisionism:6791
> > > Well, actually that would be nice. I wonder how you will be able
> > > to come up with the reference for something that doesn't exist in science.
> > > A DNA test to determine 'whiteness'? I see you've never taken a course
> > > in biology, eh?
> > > Please, if you *do* actually post a reply, stick to real science,
> > > not something from some neo-nazi who got his degree in the mail.
> > >
> > Actually Joe, I typed S=HUMAN POPULATION GENETICS on the University of
> > Auckland's AUCAT (S= subject heading.) Guess how many titles there were?
> >
> > Around 50. So please, please lose the arrogance, or you might have to eat
> > humble pie.
>
> And out of 50 references, McKinstry could not find one that explained how
> "white DNA" differs from "non-white DNA". Nor could he find a reference
> that explained how "white DNA" is tested for in the laboratory. Nor could
> he find any reference that indicates which researchers are working to
> determine the unique characteristics of "white DNA".
Actually, I haven't started reading a single on yet, I'll try in a couple
of weeks. Mainly because, I'm rather busy at the moment. Don't worry
Jeffrey, I won't forget. Mainly because, I want to memorise it, so I can
laugh down your throat as much as possible.
>
> He therefore settled for an article from the Encyclopedia Britannica
> discussing the use of genetic testing to follow the migrations of ancient
> populations -- an article which gave absolutely no indication of the
> existence of some unique "white DNA".
>
> > The science does exist, including one title on the Genetics of Jews
>
> Note that the message that McKinstry responds to does _not_ claim that the
> science of population genetics does not exist. McKinstry is subtly
> twisting his response to indicate that it does, but such is not the case.
>
> What the message actually said was:
>
> > > ...I wonder how you will be able
> > > to come up with the reference for something that doesn't exist in science.
>
> ... referring, of course, to the unique "white DNA" that McKinstry assures
> us loadly _must_ exist -- yet he cannot produce a single direct reference
> to any research results supporting his thesis.
>
Okay Jeffrey. Another reference from the Encyclopedia Brittanica (1990)
vol. 19 pp 724, Genetics of Race and Species, I've taken sentences out of
paragraphs, if you want the full reading, read the above reference:
"The Geneticist Curt Stern defined a race as a group more or less isolated
geograhically or culturally who share a common gene pool and who,
statistically, are somewhat different at some loci from other
populations."
I wonder what a common gene pool might be?
"Race differences are more often quantitive than qualitative; racially
distinct populations of a species differ usually in the frequency of
certain genes rather than the presence or absence of certain genes."
"Human races differ certainly in many genetic traits, not in blood groups
alone."
"The major human races are separated by their most readily recognized
characteristics, such as skin colour, body size, and facial morphology."
Basically stating there are genetic differences between the races,
therefore a test can obviously be determined. I forgot to record the
reference to a mixed raced individual, it basically stated that it was
somewhere in between both parents, therefore a difference is again noted.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Sep 10 22:17:53 PDT 1995
Article: 6792 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!kryten.awinc.com!netnet2.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.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: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 11:36:58 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 51
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> <42fjbv$t4a@nic.umass.edu> <42pml7$ssp@ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1937 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1530 alt.discrimination:35143 alt.revisionism:6792
> >> Actually Joe, I typed S=HUMAN POPULATION GENETICS on the
> >> University of Auckland's AUCAT (S= subject heading.) Guess how
> >> many titles there were?
> >>
> >> Around 50. So please, please lose the arrogance, or you might
> >> have to eat humble pie. The science does exist, including one
> >> title on the Genetics of Jews.
>
> Colin, if you were to read any of these studies you would find what
> people have been trying to convey to you for days now: All they can
> do is measure trends. That is all. They could never, for certain,
> state that an individual is of a given nationality based upon the
> set of genes under analysis. They can only rely upon statistical
> trends.
>
> The reason for this is that there are no alleles they have yet found
> that are relegated to merely one population. Every single human
> population will have members that possess the target allele, although
> in varying numbers.
>
> Do you know why this is? It is because humans the world over are more
> genetically similar to one another than just about any single species
> on the planet.
>
> One study revealed that two humans from the most distant ends of
> the earth will be infinitely more similar, genetically, than two
> low-land gorillas from the same forest in Africa. Our genetic variation
> among populations is that minimal -- so strikingly minimal that it
> is estimated we are all descended from a breeding population of just
> 10,000 individuals as recently as the end of the last ice-age, 12 to
> 15 thousand years ago.
>
> Do you understand this? Do you even vaguely comprehend what this means,
> and what it does to your ... theories on race?
>
> And one more thing: If you were to read those studies on the genetics
> of Jews, you would find that the nazis' favorite lie about Jews being
> descended from Khazars is just that: a lie. There is far more genetic
> similarity between Ashkenazim and Sephardim than there is between
> either and any of the surrounding populations in Europe or the near
> east.
>
Actually singer, most of the references on Khazars to Ashkenazi are from
Jews, (Arthur Koeslter, Jack Berstein, Harry Freedman and so forth.) I've
noted your argument. I'll get back to it, in a couple of weeks.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Sep 11 03:41:38 PDT 1995
Article: 6795 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!gl_5.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: McKinstry's "DNA test" (was: Les scuttles under the carpet...)
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 1995 07:42:07 +0100
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 33
Message-ID:
References: <41i73u$5si@ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> <42v5va$5ld@ixnews2.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.white-power:1943 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1534 alt.discrimination:35148 alt.revisionism:6795
> >I'm afraid Lane, backed up my argument unwittingly and so did
> >Mark, never mind.
>
> First of all, learn where to apply commas, and where they don't
> belong.
Never payed much attention to the arts, only science I'm afraid.
Hopefully you never make the same mistake...
>
> Secondly, the only person around here who is "unwitting" is you:
> You have failed to comprehend the facts that at least three people
> are laying before you, and have therefore not answered a single
> point.
I can't help it, if you wish to back my argument and disprove your own, I
never made the comment that some (note) sub-saharan tribes have similar
genetics to Europeans. Which from your own statement goes towards proving
my own argument, whether you realize it, remains to be seen.
>
> >Come back and play some other day.
>
> Ditto.
>
SInger, if you wish to attack my statements then you should learn not to
unwittingly support my own. I personally have nothing against this style,
but if you wish to be derogatry about it, I will quite happily point out
your own failings.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Sep 11 03:41:39 PDT 1995
Article: 6796 of alt.revisionism
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!in2.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!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.revisionism
Subject: Re: MCKINSTRY, WRITING FROM "ACADEMIA" IN REMOTE N.Z. ...
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 1995 07:51:31 +0100
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 53
Message-ID:
References: <42tgbm$s9m@newsbf02.news.aol.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:1535 alt.politics.white-power:1944 alt.revisionism:6796
Some nobody Jew wrote:
> cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry) writing from "academia" in remote New
> Zealand said in defense of He Who Has Disappeared (but hint- he was
> ben-Somebody):
>
Actually it was Adam Krim, trying ineffectively to be insulting.
> [On the putative origin of the name Iberia...]
>
> > I also posted from a couple of
> > Etymological dictionary the feasibility of such a connection, not that I
> > am currently in a position to either deny or affirm such a claim. One
> > would have to investigate the Phonetic implication before making a
> > conclusion, and quoting from the Oxford Dictionary neither proves or
> > disproves it.
>
> McKinstry, everybody has speculated that Iberia, and even more
> specifically, the Rio Ebro in the northeast of Spain, is related to
> "ebreo" or "Hebrew".
>
> Ben-Somebody adds dung to the fire not with this unoriginal contribution,
> but with his monumental ignorance of Spanish history. He claims that
> Spain became the richest, greatest country in Europe by the act of
> officially expelling its entire Jewish population in 1492. Or at least
> those who didn't stay behind and call themselves Christian for the sake of
> safety. Sez it would turn out this way in his Bible.
>
Spain did become the most powerful for a while. You can refute this if
you wish, not that any historian with his salt would back you.
> In fact, McKinstry, although Spain had its fingers on the mineral wealth
> of the Americas within a decade after the expulsion, it so squandered this
> wealth during the 1500s, so that by the end of the century Spain was
> flat-out the poorest country in Western Europe, and remains the second
> poorest (behind Portuagal, the poorest) to this day.
>
Too bad they miscegenated with the Indian populations of Latin America.
Never thought of that one did you?
> So much for the Biblical prophecies of the antisemites.
>
?
> Now what's your article of faith, other than that you believe that New
> Zealand's tiny Jewish population controls all the delis?
>
Why would I want to tell some nobody Jew anything?
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Sep 11 03:41:41 PDT 1995
Article: 6823 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.cyberstore.ca!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!NewsWatcher!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: MCKINSTRY, WRITING FROM "ACADEMIA" IN REMOTE N.Z. ...
Date: 11 Sep 1995 02:31:31 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 86
Message-ID:
References: <42vn39$j33@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 130.216.105.80
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:1555 alt.politics.white-power:1971 alt.revisionism:6823
> > Spain did become the most powerful for a while. You can refute this if
> > you wish, not that any historian with his salt would back you.
>
> You are ignorant, old boy! The Spanish navy (la Armada espanola) was
> decimated in 1588 (in home waters, no less) completely ending its primacy
> in the Atlantic... and the Mediterranean. The Spanish were also were
> driven out of the entirety of British North America and existed south of
> there, and in the west of the present-day United States, only because the
> English weren't interested. After the 1588, inflation at home made a
> shambles of the Spanish economy.
>
Did I say they stayed powerful?
> >> In fact, McKinstry, although Spain had its fingers on the mineral
> wealth
> >> of the Americas within a decade after the expulsion, it so squandered
> this
> >> wealth during the 1500s, so that by the end of the century Spain was
> >> flat-out the poorest country in Western Europe, and remains the second
> >> poorest (behind Portuagal, the poorest) to this day.
> >>
> > Too bad they miscegenated with the Indian populations of Latin America.
> > Never thought of that one did you?
>
> What are you talking about? Do you have a concentration-lapse syndrome
> like the other Nazi posters in this newsgroup? I addressed Spain, not
> the Americas. The colonial natives didn't go to Iberia --- they were
> prohibibted from going there --- and Spaniards who had children in the
> Americas stayed in the colonies as permanent settlers. You didn't know
> this?
>
Yes, the Spaniard to the Americas, miscegenated and becoming useless,
something Spain couldn't withstand. Not to mention the Usury problem...
> Or do you just have a dislike of the indigenous peoples of this continent?
> The Mexica (Aztec) civilization of central Mexico which Cortez found was
> not too much less advanced than his own, but did lack war-making
> apparatus. Not that they didn't have plenty of interneciine warfare. The
> Aztec and linguistically-allied nations stretched from just south of
> present-day Arizona to Central America.
>
> As usual, you're in over your head. You live in a country where the
> median is not too advanced over the median of present-day central Mexico
> (meaning the area from Queretaro to Cuernavaca and including the Valley of
> Mexico and containing half of Mexico's population) either. Even the poor
> parts of Mexico (the north along the U.S. border and the southeast) are
> well outside the Third World, whereas all New Zealanders are so far from
> the remainder of the world that they aren't even classified.
>
If you wish to criticize New Zealand, I'm not stopping you, I'd probably
even help you.
> (Jim Collier a nobody Jew wrote):
> >> So much for the Biblical prophecies of the antisemites.
> >>
> >>
> >> Now what's your article of faith, other than that you believe that New
> >> Zealand's tiny Jewish population controls all the delis?
> >>
>
> > Why would I want to tell some nobody Jew anything?
>
> Sorry, McKinstry. I guess you were trounced. In general, I don't give a
> rat's ass what the Bible says with respect to prophecy. (Make a note of
> that, will you?) Other than as a chronicle of the peoples of the Middle
> East, it is a pretty sorry work for running the 20th century. And if you
> must know the truth, the Christian addtions contain nothing of interest
> for any non-Christian, not just Jews. If you're going to wave it at me
> like some medicine man, you're wasting your time.
>
Who gives a shit what you think? You're just some nobody Jew. If you
rated I might consider what you just wrote, but since you don't, I won't.
> By the way (second or third request), what are your academic
> qualifications to be a rational Jew-hater, and which particular
> institution might you attend there in the big city of Aukland?
>
Why would I want to waste my time with a nobody like you, telling you my
qualifications? You've obviously already forgotten my post from a few
months back, telling you again, will be a waste of effort.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Sep 11 03:59:13 PDT 1995
Article: 1509 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!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
Subject: A joke to cheer up the boring Liberal posts of late.
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 1995 09:00:02 +0100
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 25
Message-ID:
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:1509 alt.politics.white-power:1911
Abos = Australian Aborigines.
Qu. What did God tell the abos before he left?
Ans. Don't do anything until I come back.
Probably the best joke of week however is Jeff Han's assertion that only
post-1965 texts are relevant. One question I forgot to ask him was, if an
author wrote a book in 1964 and another in 1966, is the one in 1964
incorrect, whilst the other correct, or would they both be incorrect?
Which is based on the theory that if the 1964 text is incorrect, then so
is the Author, therefore his 1966 text is also incorrect. So shouldn't we
also have an age restriction as well, those born after 1965 are correct,
whilst those before are incorrect? Therefore you won't have the above
contradiction.
If this is wrong, could you please state where the flaw lies, rather than
resorting to your superior intellectual safety (calling people original
names like: idiot and moron.)
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Sep 11 03:59:14 PDT 1995
Article: 1511 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!ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: Colon's `Histories'
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 09:51:28 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 51
Message-ID:
References: <42otov$t5m@rover.ucs.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
> Let's see: you posted `Lords of the Soil', which was your attempt to `prove'
> that the Aztec royal line was `white'. One paragraph served as that `proof',
> citing accounts taken from dated history texts (as was the entire post,
for thatmatter) and examples of Aztec artwork which depicts those peoples
with light
> skin tones- none of this is SCIENTIFIC (anthropological or archaeological)
> evidence. You claimed that the Phoenicians `brought civilization' to the
> Aztec people and thereby influenced their art and religion (the white god and,
> again, the light skin tone depictions in art), again without any SCIENTIFIC
> evidence. All of your `evidence' comes from dated history texts.
>
So Aztec relics aren't archaeological evidence? Are you like d.A who
thinks stone age is advanced, and technology, primitive? I never claimed
the Phoenicians brought civilization to the Amerikas, that is your
interpretation, I said a white people did, with a reasonable chance that
it was Phoenician (because Phoenicians were brilliant mariners.)
So dated texts are now wrong? Let me ask you a question Jeff, if I wanted
to study Plato, I should only read modern texts rather than texts closer
to the source, or preferably Plato's own? No wonder I can thrash you in
any argument Jeff, your logic is screwed. I'm afraid that if I wanted to
do a thorough research into the topic, I would need to go as close as
possible to the original source.
> The point: try reading a CURRENT (say, from 1965 and beyond) text, Colon; I
> don't believe that the libraries in New Zealand could be THAT far behind those
> in most parts of North America (excepting parts of Mexico, the area of Canada
> that Less lives in, etc.). You DO know what `whig history' means, don't you?
> You had better make sure before you attempt to disseminate more of your
> theories again...
>
>From your own statements, any text before 1965 is incorrect. Therefore,
how do you know if any text after 1965 is correct? Surely pro-1965 texts
base their works on pre-1965 texts? How does any researcher come to his
conclusions Jeff, because after 1965 they get a special insight, that our
ancestors didn't know about (even though they even there) or because they
are pushing modern propaganda (that browns/blacks can build
civilizations)?
Could you please state your reasons that pre-1965 texts are wrong.
As one other thought (painful for you, I know), King Richard I and King
John, now if you have done any study into the topic, we go through these
cycles on who was the bad king and who wasn't. So which thought is
correct and which isn't? Given this light, re-read your own arguments.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Sep 11 03:59:15 PDT 1995
Article: 1513 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!ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN Grego, where is this...
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 10:12:24 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 128
Message-ID:
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1915 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1513
> : supposed counterargument to my assertion on meteorology? I've tried
> : coming up with them myself. Here are some possibilities:
>
> Why thank you! (See also "American Indians caused the desert SW..."
> for the real discussion...)
>
> : 1. Egypt is a desert, how did it become a desert? Even before
> : civilization came to the region, it was a desert.
>
> : Good question.
>
> Not my question, though. Actually I had no question in this area.
> Just what I thought were better theories for the cause of the
> desertification of the American Southwest (please see the "American
> Indians caused..." thread).
>
I was bored, since I couldn't find your article, I started going through
some possibilities.
> But your post seems interesting, so let's go through it...
>
> : As many archeologist point out, blacks were living there before
> : civilization came to the region (and were subsequently removed from the
> : area, as civilization came incredibly quickly.) Therefore, if Egypt was a
> : fertile region then it is possible that the blacks destroyed what
> : vegetation there was.
>
> Yes, it is possible.
>
> : This could have happened because of a poor soil
> : layer (much like the Amazon rain forest), once the vegetation was gone,
> : there would be little that would allow vegetation to regain its strength.
> : Once the trees were gone, it would seem unlikely that (because of osmosis)
> : that "rain" would have reestablished itself.
>
> : Of course Egypt could have always been a desert, which doesn't reject my
> : argument either. The legends make mention that Mizraim (a grandson of
> : Noah) diverted the Nile from Libya into Egypt (a formidible task.) Which
> : is why upper and lower Egypt was called Mizraim for centuries. Once
> : irrigation had settled, then vegetation could be applied to those areas
> : covered by the Nile.
>
> : 2. All right, how does it not reject your argument?
>
> Why would I even ask this? (I don't even know what the question is
> trying to ask!)
>
Sorry, jumped the gun, I was talking about whether Egypt was always a desert.
> : If vegetation could not have grown there from the most ancient of times,
> : then it could not have gotten hold a latter time, unless some intervention
> : made it so.
>
> Correct. Going from "can't support" to "can support" implies change.
>
> : The desert in the USA, however is a different type of desert,
> : comparatively it is quite fertile, and has vegetation.
>
> I don't know about it's fertility, but I do know that it does indeed have
> some vegetation.
>
A comparison between most of Egypt (excepting the area around the Nile)
and the US desert.
> : Therefore it is an
> : indicator that the area could support vegetation.
>
> It does support vegitation, so again, correct.
>
> : Only some intervention
> : stopped it from being more productive.
>
> Yup. Rainfall.
>
> : 3. So why doesn't it become more prosperous?
>
> Rainfall. If the land in the desert Southwest is not irrigated,
> it supports "chapperel (sp?)" and "desert" type vegitation. With
> irrigation it supports a vast assortment of vegitation. We in California
> even get the dubious honor of subsidizing farmers to grow RICE in
> California by paying for part of their water.
>
True, good irrigation will provide a better (or least the potential)
growing environment. However if I'm mistaken, the desert does have "dry"
rivers, which would allow "wet" rivers to flow, should water become
available, ie., there is some irrigation anyway.
> : Without a large supply of well established trees, the process known as
> : osmosis becomes weak. Therefore, the amount of persipitation in the
> : atmosphere would be lowered, therefore the "clouds" are less likely to be
> : formed, or at least made to "drop its load".
>
> I thought that cloud formation MAINLY happens over the ocean. Am I
> mistaken?
>
Yes. Most of the ozone formation occurs over the ocean (due to plankton)
as well as most of the planets oxygen support. One of ways to tell if you
are near land (apart of sea birds) is cloud formation.
> : Mountains help this process
> : as well. Mountains however cannot make clouds.
>
> Again, in my reply I talk about the "rain shadow" effect. Mountains
> don't push moisture into the air, but they can play a part in
> causing clouds to dump thier load of rain.
>
I never accused you of being dumb, I was making sure you didn't think I
did (that mountains form clouds.)
> : 4. Why cannot it not come from the oceans?
>
> : As many a sailor will point out, in the middle of an ocean, there are no
> : clouds, only when one gets closer to land does cloud formation become
> : evident.
>
> But that is where the atmosphere picks up most of it's moisture (or so I
> thought).
>
Then you would be wrong. Admittedly coming from New Zealand and the
propaganda machine going non stop, you pick up this sort of thing
(Aotearoa -- the land of the long white cloud, instead of the name New
Zealand.)
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Sep 11 03:59:16 PDT 1995
Article: 1514 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!ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: ATTN Grego, where is this...
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 10:29:09 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 149
Message-ID:
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1916 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1514
> : 5. Surely rivers help vegetation?
>
> : Yes they do, rivers come down from mountains, which in turn need clouds to
> : make such transistion (even for snow.)
>
> Yup, agreed.
>
> : 6. What if a large meteorite destroyed the vegetation rather than the
> : noble, at one with nature, peace loving, and hippy indigeoness people?
>
> I get a big kick out of you sometimes. 8)
> I would have never even thought of this...
I was going through possibilities, I get asked all sorts of stupid
questions sometimes.
>
> : Yes, that is a possibility. Unfortunately, large meteorites also tend to
> : leave their presence for millenium. Also, such a quick change does not
> : seem to pose too greater a difficulty for vegetation to recover from, as
> : "neighbouring" vegetation allow the area to recover,
>
> yup, I just came back from Hawaii...talk about devistation, those lava
> fields look like the "end of the world"...but plants are already starting
> to take over.
>
> : also a meteorite may
> : provide an abundance of minerals that plants may absorb. As is witnessed
> : with volcanic eruptions, delibrate fires and so forth.
>
> I don't think a meteorite would itself provide enough "minerals" to help
> plant life in any measurable way...but that's just my opinion.
>
Actually meteors can contain huge mineral wealth. As a digression, it was
suggested the best way of mining titanium (titanium being very expensive
to extract.)
> : 7. What if a large atmospherical change occured?
>
> Stuff would happen?
>
> : That would be felt all over the globe, and a global change would occur,
> : the various ice ages are an example of this phenomen.
>
> Oky doky.
>
> : 8. Aha, got you, how did vegetation take hold after the last ice age?
>
> Sheesh, when was the last time I ever said "Aha"? 8)
>
Taken from the argument sketch of Monty Python.
> : First off the last ice age peaked in 1492 A.D, and the globe has been
> : subsequently been getting warmer since,
>
> Hmmmm, that seems EXTREMELY more recent than the last Ice Age I've ever
> heard of. Mabye we have different definitions of "Ice Age"?
>
Just something I like to point out to people, stuffs up their theories
half the time (global warming due to the increase of CO2 emission.)
> : however to answer your question in
> : the manner you wished:
>
> Hehe. It's kind of funny considering that you are asking these
> questions of yourself. Actually it's rather interesting because I can
> see smidgens of how you formulate arguments.
>
Maybe, maybe not. I'm a real bastard when it comes to arguments :)
> : If no vegetation could have grown in that time,
> : then no life would have taken place either.
>
> Mabye vegitation would need longer to grow? (Actually, you can safely
> ignore this point because I'm not at all sure what you are saying by the
> above).
>
> : Also the thawing out process
> : would have allowed the vegetation to take root once more (lots of water.)
> : One should also note that seeds can hibernate in the soil for centuries.
>
> Yup. This is what I think happens. (Wait, am I supposed to be arguing
> for you or against you?)
>
Actually I forgot one other point I was going to say, that was plants
hibernate in the cold (well most of them do.)
> : An example of this is in New Zealand, the native seeds are still there,
> : and if allowed to grow, will. The conservation minded Maoris, in there
> : conservation hunting of Moas accidently burned out a lot of shrub land in
> : the central parts of the south islands in their attempts to count Moa
> : numbers. They also forgot how to count past zero, so they had to kill
> : them all, to give an accurate tally.
>
> 8)
>
> : Being serious once more, the Maoris
> : wiped out this area out, it has not recovered, only by the ingenuity of
> : white farmers can they keep livestock there. Yet the seeds are still
> : there, if a sufficient climate arose, they would grow.
>
> Probably true (about the seeds at least).
>
Oh its reasonably well known that the Maoris lit fires to slaughter Moas
(got them out of the vegetation.)
> : 9. You only hate the more "primitive" peoples, and are therefore, more
> : biased, you cannot give an accurate account.
>
> Hmmmm, I've never argued this either. But let's see how you handle your
> question to yourself...
>
No, but it was one of these stupid statements I get every other day, the
lasted one is from Jeff Han and history. At least he was honest in
telling me the minimum date he would accept of any text.
> : While I make no mask on my dislike of these peoples, your innate and
> : unfounded prejudice does not serve justice. You can gather most of this
> : information from a biology course and a meteorological course. The
> : reference to the last age of 1492, comes from many history books, for
> : example the text, Medieval Europe, A short history by Hollister makes
> : mention of it.
>
> Hmmm, I'd like to see it. (I'll file this reference away).
I consider a short, but accurate presentation of the medieval world of
Europe. Jeff Han should like it, it was written after 1965.
>
> : 10. Silence.
>
> Ooops, I mean "I am speachless". There, was that good?
No, the typical liberal response, they go run away. At least I can say
when I'm beaten, not like those cowards.
>
> : Question for you Grego; was I close?
>
> Not by a mile (ooops, I mean kilometer). But it was entertaining. 8)
>
As stated in part I, I was bored. I was trying to come down to the level
of a bright liberal, whether I succeeded is a matter of debate. Which is
why there were some dumb and stupid questions posed. If I wanted to be
more accurate, I should have dodged the issue more, and ask really
irrelevant questions -- like, what year was this text written?
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Sep 11 03:59:17 PDT 1995
Article: 1527 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!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!auckland.ac.nz!ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: Indians caused the American desert SW (was Re: ATTN Grego)
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 1995 11:11:31 +1200
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 419
Message-ID:
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: ugll4.cs.auckland.ac.nz
X-Newsreader: Value-Added NewsWatcher 2.0b20.0+
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:1934 alt.politics.nationalism.white:1527
> : > : > >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.
> : >
> : > 'Cept I guess living on it, and living off what it provided them.
> : > But hell, "savages" doesn't equal "people", does it?
> : >
> : They were using the entire area or was it just lying fallow?
>
> If the Native Americans were indeed hunter/gatherers, then "the entire land"
> was where they got their food from.
>
Most of the land was unused, as well as other lands being inefficiently used.
> Someone saying that he "deserves to have my car because I hardly ever
> use it" doesn't quite wash with me.
>
And? Your car has no bearing on the nation's livelihood, however land can
be put to use.
> : > : > 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.
> : >
> : > Nope. Some of our ancestors were, though. And murderers, and rapists.
> : > Do I feel guilty about it? Of course not, it wasn't me that did the
> : > stealing, killing, and raping.
> : >
> : Bit of hypocrisy here isn't it. Are you now saying that it's no longer
> : their land? So why are you defending Indian "rights" and so forth?
>
> Hypocrisy? Why? I'm being consistant (and a realist) when I say what I
> did. Most of the people here own land because :
>
> 1. We bought some from the Native Americans.
> 2. We bought some from the French who had earlier bought or stolen it
> from the Native Americans.
> 3. We bought some from the Mexicans who had earlier bought or
stolen it
> from the Native Americans.
> 4. We stole some from the Mexicans who had earlier bought or stolen it
> from the Native Americans.
> 5. We stole some from the Native Americans (easiest done by
killing them
> first, but putting them on reservations will do nicely).
>
> And when I say "stole", I mean "take by force what wasn't ours to begin with".
>
> Now if I was one of the ones that did the "stealing", then I am a thief.
> If I am the son of one of the ones that did the "stealing", then I am
> a son of a thief. NOT a thief. Where's the hypocrisy?
>
I am assuming that like most liberals you support "people's rights," in
this case Indian's rights. Especially in respect to land issues.
Therefore the hypocrisy lies, not in whether you are the son of a thief,
but in the fact you want the government to give up land (or whomever),
whilst you don't. The thought process "we should give them land, so long
as its not mine."
> As for saying it's no longer their land, yes, I am saying that. I'm saying
> that the land now belongs to US. If my great great great grandfather stole
> some land, and later sold parts of it to 12 different families (who KNEW it
> was stolen), I would say that those families should give it back (stolen
> property). If those same families were able to keep the land for several
> generations, and sold the land to other families, who sold the land to other
> families it gets a bit muddier. It's harder to show who the property was
> stolen from, and there are now many families who bought "their" land
> on good faith (ie practical issues as opposed to moral issues).
>
> You also ask "So why are you defending Indian "rights" and so forth?"
> I don't remember ever saying anything about "rights" (except in
> questioning your alleged "right of conquest"). I think that you are
> reading too much into things.
>
Obviously you aren't most liberals, which asks me, what the hell are you
writing here for?
> To make it simple : I'm just calling a steal a steal.
>
> :
> : > Saying it was "stealing, pure and simple" is the truth. Suppose you had
> : > some acreage in the Sierra Nevadas that you use for hunting, fishing,
> : > and as a homestead. And say I thought that your land would be better
> : > used for a paper mill. And suppose I got a group of my friends and
> : > relatives to kick you off that land because I'd be making use of it
> : > while you're just letting it go to waste. If we were determined enough,
> : > we'd take the land (with, I would gather, some casualties). But the
> : > world would be a better place, because now more people would be
> : > getting the benefits of the land. And beside, you and your family
> : > probably weren't even poeple...look at them, they were so stupid
> : > that they didn't even know how to use the land...
> : >
> : If you are trying to get a sympathy vote out of me this way, you're
> : barking up the wrong tree. I'm nationalistic, petty personal pursuits
> : don't interest me. Thus I would have no problem giving up such land for
> : the benefit of the nation (providing it does.) Mainly because I would
> : never get into the above scenerio. Non issue.
>
> Who says I would ever want to get a sympathy vote out of you?
>
Then don't bother posing the above style of questions.
> Mabye this paragraph illustrates where we really differ. You state that
> you are "nationalistic, petty personal pursuits don't interest me".
> I, on the other hand, am an indivualist (born and raised the 'merican
> way). We'll probably end up agreeing to disagree. 8)
>
I was brought up on similar principles, I just decided to mature a bit more.
> :
> : > : Right of conquest.
> : >
> : > So what is a "right"? Something you're entitled to?
> : >
> : > If I mug you, and don't get caught, is that "right of conquest"?
> : > I had a "right" to your wallet?
> : >
> : Who says I'd let you get away with it? Petty revenge is another topic
> : altogether...
>
> Here, let me simplify for you:
>
> If I want something that you have AND I can get away with taking it from
> you, does that mean I have a RIGHT to that thing?
>
Actually I was using a Savage's argument. Obviously you don't think they
are your equal. The story goes (in New Zealand): The Mori Oris (who were
the native people of the Chatham Islands, were basically butchered and
eaten by the conquering Maoris. With the Waitangi Tribunal (were Maoris
go to get free land) the Mori Oris tried to get the same deal for the
Chatham Islands (actually the then Maori land), they were outright refused
on the above basis. As they say, what is good for the goose is good for
the gander.
> :
> : > : > 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?
> : >
> : > Their families, who just happend to live off that land.
> : >
> : The topic was not about land, but a valuable item, please try again.
>
> Here, let me SIMPLIFY for you:
>
> Stacia : "Interesting how the Europeans kept right on stealing all the
land..."
> You : "So what things did the Indians possess that could be classed as
valuable..."
> Me : "Their families, who just happend to live off that land."
> You : "The topic was not about land, but a valuable item"
>
> Stacia was talking about land. You asked what they had that was of value.
> I said their families (which lived off what the land provided them). You then
> said that the topic wasn't about land, but something valuable.
>
> Point 1: Stacia WAS in part talking about land.
> Point 2: I was only talking about land indirectly.
> Point 3: I was talking directly about the Natives' families, which although
> of little value to you was SURELY valuable to the Natives.
>
> I can "please try again" if you would like.
>
I was talking about Capt. John Smith decapitating an Indian thief. Not
land issues, which is were you got confused. The thief was stealing a
valuable item from the fort, its a bit hard for the thief to steal land
>from the fort (unless the had some special and unique soil.)
> : > Ooops, forgot, they weren't real people (what species were they again?)
> : >
> : > : 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.
> : >
> : > I'll agree with that...it just took so damn long for them to get things
> : > pointed out to them, eh?
> : >
> : > And those damn savages, killing off the bison every 20 or so years,
> : > needing to bio-engineer new ones so that they could live off them
> : > for several thousand years...
> : >
> : Bizarre.
>
> Point being that the American Indians DIDN'T have a way to bioengineer
> new species, so the ones found in large numbers (such as the bison) at the
> dawn of European intervention must have "survived the onslaught of those
> nature ravaging savages" quite nicely.
>
The bison obviously were superior to the indians.
> : >
> : > : > 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.)
> : >
> : > So, here's some questions for you:
> : >
> : > How many bison are ther now?
> : >
> : Wouldn't have a clue.
>
> : > How many will there be in 100 years (assuming European guardianship)?
> : >
> : Without the Usury monster, much larger.
>
> May I steal a quote from you?
>
> "Bizarre."
It is well known that deforestation of a countries forests, destruction of
their resources go to paying their debts to international banks. The
Asian bank is probably the best known example of it (I had field day with
liberals at the time the Asian Bank came to Auckland.)
>
> :
> : > How many were there just befor the Europeans started visiting America
> : > (in other words, under the Indian menace)?
> : >
> : Wouldn't have a clue.
> :
> : > Ballpark, order of magnitude answers would do. And mabye you could also
> : > answer these questions about the flocks of passenger pigeons that used to
> : > darken the skys when europeans first settled the new world, but are now
> : > extinct. "It just took so damn long for them to get things pointed out to
> : > them"?
>
> Here, let me SIMPLIFY FOR YOU:
>
> Do you think that the bison in North America will EVER reach the numbers that
> they once had prior to European intervention?
>
They could, circumstances have to change. See my last statement.
> : >
> : > : > >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.
> : >
> : > I don't know if they did or didn't farm. Do you?
> : >
> : It's sarcasm. Stacia made the remark.
>
> You : "Why couldn't they be more productive and use horticultural or
> agricultural techniques?"
>
> Hmmm, sounds like you also made the remark (unless "farming" doesn't
> equal "use horticultural or agricultural techniques").
>
Please tell me about the Indians farming techniques, hunting and gatherers
don't farm. I hope you realize this, maybe then you can understand my
"dig" at 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?
> : >
> : > So it's easier to justify taking the land if it's "for the good of the
> : > plants and animals".
> : >
> : Howabout the nation?
>
> Part 1:
>
> Stacia was adressing why someone would "doctor the truth a little" about
> the Indians' ecology practices. You said "So?". I tried to simplify
> it for you. Then you started a little topic drift...
Capt. John Smith, the evil governor that he was, didn't like Indians.
Simple, the entire topic was drifted away by Stacia. Remember the
original thread "Captain John Smith & Pocachontas"? I commented that the
story is propaganda for the promotion of interacial marriage, whilst
attempting to prove that Capt. John Smith didn't like Indians, therefore
this supposed romance is complete and utter bullshit.
>
> Part 2:
>
> Yes, it's also easier to kick people off their land if you can convince
> your kinsman and superiors that it's for the good of the nation.
> Agreed.
>
> : > : >
> : > : > >> 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?
> : >
> : > Hmmm, for the same reason that most, if not all deserts are considered
> : > deserts:
> : >
> : > VERY LITTLE RAINFALL.
> : >
> : Perhaps you should take a course in meteorology. Or perhaps to some of
> : the arguments of "greenies" on the Amazon forest getting butchered. Which
> : raises another point, why does it rain more in the Amazon forest than in
> : the western desert? The answer is in meteorology.
>
> Hmmm, I took a some courses in college that included a small spattering
> of atmospheric sciences.
>
> I believe that large scale deforestation can have clamactic changes.
>
> But I also believe the the deserts in the American southwest (and the Sahara)
> are caused by the "Hadley Cels" : three convection cels above the Equator,
> and three below the equator.
>
One flaw, the Sahara used to be known for its Birch Trees, too bad the
natives deforested it.
> Where the cels move moist warm air up (at 0 and 60 degrees north and south
> latitudes), you get heavier precipitation. This is because the air gets
cooler
> as it rises, and cooler air can't hold as much moisture.
>
> Where the cels move the same cool (and now drier) air back down (at 30 degrees
> north and south latitude, and the poles), you tend to get much lighter
> precipitation. This is because the air gets warmer as it lowers, and warmer
> air can hold more moisture (coupled with the fact that the air had been
> already squeezed of moisture on it's way up).
>
> The American desert south-west is at about 32 N latitude. Egypt, Libya, and
> Saudia Arabia are at about 30 N latitude. South Australia is at about
> 30 degrees S latitude.
>
Flaws, South Australia still provides an abundance of vegetation. Saudia
Arabias desert was caused by the poor farming techniques performed by the
Arabs. Saudia Arabia used to be quite fertile, as was Libya. Let me
explain, why did the Cattle farmers protest over having sheep in the
west? Both sheep and goats eat the vegetation right down to the roots,
cattle do not. Therefore greater skill is needed in keeping both sheep
and goats. The Arabs obviously didn't realize this. Which is why most of
the ME is a desert rather than the fertile grounds it once was. Of course
the Arabs also did quite a lot of deforestation as well.
> We can also add the "rain shadow" effect : when air is forced up
> by mountain ranges, the air cools and dumps a good degree of it's moisture
> (as rain, etc.) on that side of the mountain range. When the air goes
> back down the other side, it gets warmer and is drier (drier because again,
> it's already been wrung out on the other side of the range, and because warm
> air can hold more moisture).
>
> One example is Death Valley, on the eastern side of the Sierra Nevadas (the
> clouds blow in from the west). Another is the Hawaiian island chain, on
> the south west side of each of the islands (volcanic mountains, the clouds
> blow in from the north east).
>
> Now this is a VAST oversimplification (corialis (sp?) effects come in to play
> if I remember right), but you get the idea.
>
Are yes, but perhaps trees also provide the necessary criteria?
> : > As for "Compare western culture with indian culture. Which could
support the
> : > largest population per square foot?", does that make western culture
better?
> : > We can get even closer to the brink of overpopulation and crowding through
> : > western culture?
> : >
> : Quite feasible. I've heard the propaganda of overcrowding, but I've never
> : heard any proof to go with it. Of course if we look at say the Asian
> : civilizations, then they would be correct.
>
> I consider American cities overcrowded; at least some of the ones I've
visited:
>
> Boston
> Los Angeles
> San Francisco
> San Diego
> Newark
> Miami
>
So why has there been this demand or urbanisation rather than
ruralisation? Also whites (a generalisation) tend to live in a high
standard of living, compared to non whites. The non whites provide the
overcrowding, if removed, the city could handle even greater population
with reasonable wealth (yes I realize there is going to be poor people)
and standard of living. Either that or ruralisation might become
profitable again.
Cailean.
--
"Kill! Kill! In the German race there is nothing but evil; not one among the living, not one among the yet unborn but is evil! Follow the precepts of Comrade Stalin. Stamp out the Fascist Beast once and for all in its lair! Use force and break the racial pride of the Germanic women. Take them as your lawful booty. Kill! as you storm onwards Kill, you gallant soldiers of the Red Army!"
-- the celebrated Jewish journalist Ilya Ehrenburg
From cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Sep 11 03:59:18 PDT 1995
Article: 1559 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!auckland.ac.nz!NewsWatcher!user
From: cmck02@cs.auckland.ac.nz (McKinstry)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: Indians caused the American desert SW (was Re: ATTN Grego)
Date: 11 Sep 1995 02:59:43 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland
Lines: 209
Message-ID:
References: