Giwer, Post email publicly

If anyone were questioning it, compare the following to the public post
by some other idiot holohugger which is nearly identical to this one.

From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: The holohugger conspiracy
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 10:08:22 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 134
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri Jun 21 5:10:22 AM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Received: (from smap@localhost) by
id WAA20928; Tue, 18 Jun 1996 22:41:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from by ixmail2 via
smap (V1.3)
id smac05851; Tue Jun 18 22:14:25 1996
Received: (from uucp@localhost) by
id CAA74346 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 02:58:29 GMT
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
Received: from by via smap (V1.3mjr)
id smaOVkDe7; Wed Jun 19 02:58:23 1996
From: Gord McFee
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 96 22:53:36 +0100
To: Matt Giwer
Subject: What gives?
X-Mailer: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for OS/2 v1.03


I am going to try one serious message with you. There are probably not
people on Usenet, certainly not in alt.revisionism, who have reviled
other any more than you and I. Personal feelings aside, I seriously
want to
know what makes you tick. Ergo, this message. If you don’t want to
correspond with me, a simple “fuck off McFee” bounced back will do the
but if you do, please read on.

I have carefully looked at many of your posts over the months. And
doesn’t add up. I have difficulty believing you are really a
because, quite frankly, you come across as too intelligent. Most
“revisionists” are pretty dimwitted, and you decidedly are not. What
you do
seem to like to do is argue. Politics, religion, history, you name it.
also seem to like to take unpopular causes, get the whole newsgroup
you, and then try to fight your way out. And you do this well. Your
techniques are very effective. You know how to push buttons. If a
will be most likely to respond faced with outright distortion (the
incident), that’s what you do. If insult will elicit a response, you
If obscenity, you swear. If dragging in irrelevant topics (smoking),
you drag
them in. And the list goes on.

In other words, you are a manipulator. You have said as much publicly
to Alec
Grynspan. You said as much publicly to me one time, but I was too
to understand what you meant. In other words, you troll. You enjoy
manipulating the newsgroup, deciding the topics, steering the discussion
in directions you want, distracting people from the thread to get them
you want them. Put another way, it’s all about the exercise of power.
enter a newsgroup you probably had never heard of before, and, within a
short months, you have it dancing to your tune. No mean feat, and you
carried it off in superb fashion.

I remember the Marduk affair. You played me like a trout during that
one. Of
course, we both know that I had nothing to do with any of that, but you
able to get dozens of posts out of me, and start a major flamewar on
that one
issue alone. You sensed that accusing me falsely of that kind of
behaviour would “push my buttons” and you were right.

So, is that it? Is that what makes you tick?

Gord McFee ([email protected])
I’ll write no line before its time


You see McFly really is the idiot asshole he appears to be in public.
And the nearly identical issues demonstrate that he is part of the
private conspiracy to agree upon what to post.

Now we all know that McFly is a terminat idiot but that does not excuse
the other teminal idiots who he conspired with for this email.

You will also note that after this failed the ISP harrassment started
again. It is nothing new. It is the only thing the holohuggers have

They are very desperate at this point.

Two of them have admitted that I have taken over this conferenence
within four hours, one public, one private — he imagined.

Give it up. You folks are mongoloid idiots compared to my minus 163 IQ.

You lost.

I won, I continue to win and will continue to do so. You reaslly
intelligent idiots are no match for me even when you combine your
non-existant brain power.

Give it up.


(Sorry about that, Alec G., but you know how things go on the boards. I
truely regret any consequences that may come to you and Su and all the
rest who are real people. I am very sorry. This is sincere and in this
NG may be the last.

Repeat all of the above one more time.)

From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: interesting email
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 23:05:21 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
X-NETCOM-Date: Thu Jun 20 6:07:14 PM CDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

Received: (from smap@localhost) by
id PAA24064; Thu, 20 Jun 1996 15:34:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from by ixmail3 via smap
id sma000923; Thu Jun 20 14:51:44 1996
Received: from (
[]) by (8.7.3/CICNet) with SMTP id
RAA29434; Thu, 20 Jun 1996 17:52:46 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1996 17:52:55 -0400
From: [email protected] (Jamie McCarthy)
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: MATT GIWER REPORT for Jun 1-9: 12.7% / 18.3%
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
Organization: Absence Software

[email protected] wrote:

> I love a
> fair fight. That is why I handicap you folks by telling you what I am
> doing and am going to do.

So then why have you never come out and said “I am flooding this
newsgroup with crap”? Why do you beat around the bush?

Jamie McCarthy
[email protected] Co-Webmaster of
Unless you specify otherwise, I assume pro-“revisionism” email
to be in the public domain. I speak only for myself.

Because that is not what I am doing. I am dealing with your steaming
and electrocution crap.

From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism,
Subject: Does a stuck pig squealing remind you of this?
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 02:12:51 GMT
Organization: images incarnate
Lines: 108
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
X-NETCOM-Date: Fri Jun 21 7:14:58 PM PDT 1996
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: alt.revisionism:49554

He were have the Gang of Six complaining about exactly what they have
been doing for years, monopolizing the conference and preventing any
discussion of revisionism.

Not only as individuals but by email conspiracy as to how to deal with
people who won’t believe what the Gang insists they must believe.

Their entire intention to silence those who will not believe as they
believe. And they have been doing it for years, driving people out of
the NG.

And now when the same thing happens to them, they complain about it. Or
is it not closer to the term they are so willing to use, whine about it.

Anyone want to feel sorry for these poor little holohuggers. They do
not have “their” conference any longer.

They can no longer drive unbelievers out of it and brag about doing so.

It is of interest how many people I have found who will attest to this
gang behavior.

They have lost in a fair fight of about 10 to 1. And now they just
can’t deal with it.

It is curious what they think an alt conference is all about.

>Received: (from smap@localhost) by (8.7.5/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
> id FAA24541; Fri, 21 Jun 1996 05:02:59 -0700 (PDT)
>Received: from by ixmail1 via smap (V1.3)
> id sma024509; Fri Jun 21 05:02:58 1996
>Received: (from declan@localhost) by (8.6.13/8.6.6) id FAA12849;
Fri, 21 Jun 1996 05:04:11 -0700
>Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 05:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Declan McCullagh
>To: Jamie McCarthy
>cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected]
>Subject: Re: A discrepency among exterminationists…
>In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>Thanks for the note, Jamie.
>On Fri, 21 Jun 1996, Jamie McCarthy wrote:
>> (A copy of this message has also been posted to the following newsgroups:
>>, alt.bonehead.matt-giwer,alt.revisionism)
>> Cross-posted to; emailed “FYI” to various
>> people whom Giwer calls “hijackers” and several pro-free-speech
>> acquaintances of mine, as well as Mr. Giwer himself of course.
>> Matt Giwer states proudly and publicly that his goal is to take
>> alt.revisionism and “make it useless” to everyone with whom he disagrees.
>> He has so far tried to accomplish this chiefly through sheer posting
>> volume. Quite an upstanding net.citizen is Mr. Giwer!
>> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
>> wrote (quoted in its entirety):
>> : [email protected] (tom moran) wrote:
>> :
>> : >[email protected] (DvdThomas) wrote:
>> :
>> : >>Heck, since Dan Keren is using retreads, I may as well do the same:
>> :
>> : >Dvd, I don’t think there is any need to justify using material that
>> : >has been posted before. After all, the material is not posted out here
>> : >just to convince the usual. It should be posted for the reasons of
>> : >informing any new comers to alt.rev.
>> :
>> : I think it is an outstanding policy to return floods of reposts
>> : floods of reposts.
>> :
>> : After all the holohuggers think they own this conference. It
is about
>> : time they learned better. After all if a low IQ person such as I can do
>> : what two of them now have said I have done, if everyone starts doing
>> : this we may be able to firmly re-establish this as a conference on
>> : revisionism.
>> :
>> : That is, make it useless to the hijackers.
>> Nizkor will continue to maintain an archive on this net abuser’s tactics
>> and goals at:
>> —
>> Jamie McCarthy
>> [email protected] Co-Webmaster of
>> Unless you specify otherwise, I assume pro-“revisionism” email
>> to be in the public domain. I speak only for myself.
>// [email protected] // I do not represent the EFF // [email protected] //