Joshua 0194, Joshua Ricardo

Keith Morrison () wrote:

: In article [email protected], [email protected] (Ricardo D Joshua) writes:

: > As for “Israel” being illegal- quite frankly, I have not seen any other
: > cases where there has been a legitimation of a state founded by illegal
: > immigrants.

: And I suppose the European colonists of the Americas, South Africa and
: Australia all complied with the policies and laws set down by the governments
: of the original inhabitants regarding the integration into the native societies
: of all those foreigners who had applied for landed immigrant status?

Don’t be so stupid all your life! When these colonists landed in the 17th-19th
Centuries there was no such thing as *International Law*.

: >
: > Another fact worth noting- of the whole committee of the “Israeli” government
: > on it foundation in 1948, only _one_ was actually born in Palestine; all of
: > the rest were born in Europe. The leader of the Zionist Movement, Theodor
: > Herzl, was himself born in Europe.

: And Canada’s first Prime Minister was born in Great Britain. Your point?

Oh hell, this guy is a *moron*. My *point* is that the Zionists claimed to
come from a historical “Zion”, and that it was a “return” to a “homeland”. It
was far different to, say, the colonisation of Canada
: > Israel claims to have a historical legitimacy- however, in the whole history
: > of Palestine, they have ruled for a far smaller proportion of time that
: > many of the Gentile rulers had. (See Paul Findley’s new book, “Deliberate
: > Deceptions”, Lawrence Hill Press, 1993, for more information on this).

: And those of European decent form the vast majority of leaders in North
: America although the Native Americans were here about 12 000 years earlier.
: Your point?

Fair comment, although the Europeans never, ever stated that they had an
ancient and historical *right* to the land they colonised. This was the case
with the Jews, hence my previous comments. Yes, the Europeans did take the
land from the Native Americans, but the circumstances were far different. Once
more, when the Pilgrim fathers landed on the East Coast, the law at that time
in history was *if you want all, take all*. There was no concept of *intern-
ational Law*, as was the case in 1948.

: >
: > I can draw a parallel- there is a region in France called Brittany; many
: > Bretons (the people of Brittany) feel an affinity for the Celtic way; the
: > vast majority of what were Breton celts live in Wales, part of the UK. Can
: > you imagine the uproar if all of these Welsh Bretons started moving to France,
: > building up a community, and eventually breaking away from France to create
: > an independent “State” of Brittany?
: >

: Your point?

I see you have no comment- I was merely making a comparision with another
baseless territorial claim (voiced by few extremists, as was the Zionist
case in the late 19th Century- despite Zionist claims to be “ages old”, it
was a 19th century invention).
: > The Fight for Historical Truth and International Justice goes on…
: >
: > Ricky J.

: Damn right it does. Too bad you’re on the other side.

: ———————————————————————
: |Keith Morrison |
: |{You think anyone else would admit to these opinions?} |

Many would, but would be afraid to do so, for fear that they would be
called “antisemitic”, a term which has a deliberately ambiguous menaing
and which has mysteriously crept into the English language…

Ricky J.


From oneb!!destroyer!!!pipex!uknet!brunel!gt91rdj
Fri Jan 28 22:36:02 PST 1994
Article: 6752 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!!destroyer!!!pipex!uknet!brunel!gt91rdj
From: [email protected] (Ricardo D Joshua)
Subject: Re: Ricardo Slanders Russian Jewry
Organization: Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 13:35:03 GMT
Lines: 33

Harry Katz ([email protected]) wrote:
: In article ,
: Ricardo D Joshua ([email protected]) writes:

: …Russian Jews, who are the most virulently racist
: of all the Zionist racists…

: If Mr. Ricardo Joshua had any data in the form of surveys or
: opinion polls to back up this vicious slander, rest assured
: he would have produced it! The fact that Mr. Joshua does not
: even see a need to back up his vile assertions only serves
: to highlight his total moral and intellectual bankruptcy.

The Jews from the former Soviet Union are the most extreme elements, for they
have more to gain- it is they who are moving into the occupied territories. I
myself do not study voting figures for the state of “Israel” but, if they were
checked, I am almost certain that the highest proportion of votes for the
religious/Zionist extremists would come from this group. Satisfied?

: No doubt, the befuddled Mr. Joshua will respond once again
: with whining recriminations denying that he has a single
: anti-Semitic bone in his whole body!

I would like to prove you wrong once again… [where are the “whining recrim-

: Harry Katz

Ricky J.

The task in hand: Finding a World Solution for a World Problem…..


From oneb!!destroyer!!!pipex!uknet!brunel!gt91rdj
Fri Jan 28 22:37:18 PST 1994
Article: 6753 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!!destroyer!!!pipex!uknet!brunel!gt91rdj
From: [email protected] (Ricardo D Joshua)
Organization: Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 14:10:56 GMT
Lines: 96

[email protected] wrote:
: In article , [email protected] (Ricardo D Joshua)
: says:
: >Even as we are fed with this
: >rubbish, more Russian Jews, who are the most virulently racist of all the
: >Zionist racists, are finding their way to accommodation in the Occupied
: >Territories.

: Aside from the fact you’re pigeonholing all Russian Jews as “virulently
: racist” Ricky, wouldn’t you say that your usage of the terms “Jewnited
: States” and “Jewnited Nations” in posts of yours smacks of the same sort
: of racism?

The Russian Jews are the most racist out of all of the illegal inhabitants
of the state of “Israel”; this is due to the fact that they have the most
to gain from there not being a return of the occupied territories (because
they want to *live* there!!!)
The terms you described are meant merelt to describe the nature of both the
US *government* and the UN. They are manipulated, if not controlled, by
Zionist stooges.
Proof? I offer a few examples- firstly, the issue of the invasion of the
Lebanon in 1982- US Law should have enforced an arms cut on “Israel”, but
the Zionists in Congress would not stand for this law of the state, and
increased the arms sales. Secondly, the “buy America” act- the *law* states
that all clients have to buy (from Aid and asssitance money) 80% of their
goods from the US- the figure is far below this for “Israel”. The US even
sacrifices itself for “Israel”- there was the issue of the Aircraft sales
to Saudi Arabia that was blown apart by the Zionists, who claimed that
“Israel” would be under threat- the deal, eventuall worth $30billion, was
made with our government here in Britain, and with far less security
allowances for “Israel” as had been outlined as part of the US-Saudi deal.
Thus, it follows that the argument was not over “security”, but proving the
point that the Zionists can successfully manipulate the US government. The
fact that Paul Findley, who had been in Congress for *22* years, mysteriously
lost his seat after taking on the Zionist cabal vindicates this. For more
information (if you are a Zionist, you would not care- if you are an anti-
Zionist then you will be shocked), read Findley’s recent book, “Deliberate
Deceptions”, Lawrence Hill Books, 1993. Price $14.95. There is also his other
book (which really got up the Zionists’ noses), “They Dare to speak out:
People and Institutions confront Israel’s Lobby”, also published by Lawrence
Hill (date of publication and prices escapes me).
As for the UN, I think there is no need to look further than their lack of
will to punish “Israel” over their international terrorism. Examples from
over the years: the bombing of a nuclear installation in Iraq; the holding
on to occupied land against UN resolutions (as if they really matter!), the
invasion of Lebanon in 1982; th attack on a US warship (date escapes me);
brutality against the inhabitants of the Gaza Strip and West Bank (including
the beating of children)….the list goes on. Contrast this lack of will to
punish “Israel” with the swift action against Iraq, for example…

: >These peace talks will nor create a Palestinan nation, but a vassal state,
: >much like the former homelands in the RSA, which would not have its own
: >defence policy (its army being a mere police force), and which would be
: >economically reliant on “Israel”. Does this satisfy the requirements of
: >self-determination? I think NOT.

: Prove the above assertions, please. I doubt you can, but here’s an interesting
: point: if the current peace agreement is so odious to the Palestinian side of
: the bargaining table, why did the PLO agree to it?

The PLO leadership, after years of trying to bargain (only to come across the
US who would do nothing, for reasons explained above), finally grew impatient.
My theory is that Arafat, by trying to stick to his principles,thought that
he would never win, and that something was better than nothing.

Here is a little tale: Mister A has $1000000; Mister B has nothing. Mister B
steals all of Mister A’s money, and the Police refuse to do anything about it.
Mister A tries using all possible means to get his money back; Mister B then
realises he could try to solve the problem by offering Mister A $1000. Mister
A, not wanting to die and poor man, accepts the deal.

Now for some questions:

Mister A is (a) Yasser Arafat; (b) Yitzhak Rabin;
Mister B is (b) Yitzhak Rabin; (b) Yasser Arafat.

: >Jack, you were right on the button. These people are just worth wasting our
: >energy on. All they come out with is the same regurgitated baloney…

: Yeah, and you and Jack regurgitate the same old bullshit about the “Zionist/
: Jewish Conspiracy” to the point of absurdity, so why should I care about your
: rancid opinions in the first place?

Why should I care about yours, then?

The task: To find a World Solution for a World Problem…

: ** Chris Krolczyk, Agnostic-at-large **
: ** Email: [email protected] / [email protected] **
: ** I’ve always thought it was stupid to sue a universi- **
: ** ty for the opinions of a computer user. And _you_? **

Ricky J.

*International Justice and Historical Truth!*

From oneb!!destroyer!!!!uknet!brunel!gt91rdj
Fri Jan 28 23:55:58 PST 1994
Article: 6758 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!!destroyer!!!!uknet!brunel!gt91rdj
From: [email protected] (Ricardo D Joshua)
Subject: Re: Holocaust Deniers and the Himmler Speeches
Organization: Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 14:30:26 GMT
Lines: 38

[email protected] wrote:
: Gordon McFee replies to me:

: [About “Himmler’s” speeches]

: >I hope you’ll forgive me Hermann, but I think you will find that the
: >speech quoted by Danny is a translation from the German *recorded*
: >original.

: Where’s the original recording? Is it possible for me to obtain a copy?

: >I don’t know where the translation came from, but I have seen
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: >the original, and can vouch that the translation is accurate.

: Exactly! And neither do we. The Germans? Or the KGB?…the FBI? You’ve
: *seen* the “original?” I thought you said it was from a *recording*? Fur-
: ther, let us remember that unless one knew Himmler, one cannot verify if it
: was actually the Reichsfuehrer — and not an actor — speaking.

: >I might add that the notes for the speech, in Himmler’s own hand, still
: >exist.

: Where are they at? Do they concur with the “Himmler’s speech’s” text?


I have always thought that Poznan speech was genuine (although it has
nothing to do with the “gasskammer” myth; it seems to be directed at the
Einsatzgruppen); however, Hermann does come up with an interesting point
here. And, why was the speech recorded if, as Himmler said, it was to be
“an unwritten our history…”?

Ricky J.



From oneb!!destroyer!!!pipex!uknet!brunel!gt91rdj
Fri Jan 28 22:35:37 PST 1994
Article: 6754 of alt.revisionism
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Path: oneb!!destroyer!!!pipex!uknet!brunel!gt91rdj
From: [email protected] (Ricardo D Joshua)
Organization: Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 14:22:52 GMT
Lines: 77