"Good night, and may God continue to bless America."
tom moran
Bushes finale to his speech giving Saddam Hussein 24 hours -
"Good night, and may God continue to bless America."
"Continue"?
Anyone have any imput on that?
Tavish
Yes- I do!
You are as unAmerican as Peter Outerbridge aka Paul Knesiel and it is no wonder
why they harass me a lot more than they do you. Now you have a clue as to why!
You are more like them and that is why they don't really come down on you like
they do me which should tell you something if you had any sense. IOW you are one
of their useful idiots! No insult intended! Your rhetoric is the same as the
leftists and their toadies. Peter Outerbridge aka Paul Kneisel and the other
America Haters are so delighted whn you post such stuff as the above and below:
<START>
From: t...@pacificnet.net (tom moran)
Newsgroups: alt.revisionism
Subject: The coming war of slow attrition against the rogue superpower
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 14:48:00 GMT
Organization: Ye 'Ol Disorganized NNTPCache groupie
Message-ID: <3ebb2b01....@newsproxy4.pacificnet.net>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cache-Post-Path: excel3.!unk...@newsproxy4.pacificnet.net
X-Cache: nntpcache 3.0.1 (see http://www.nntpcache.org/)
X-Complaints-To: ab...@supernews.com
Already the balance of trade is a matter of $1 worth of goods out to
every $100 in. That means that for every dollar's worth of tangible
products coming in we send out $99 worth of paper money.
The boats come in full and go out empty.
When the officials of John Deere go to another nation to sell them a
tractor the reception will be, 'Fuck you, why should we contribute to
your military belligerency. You scare us. We will destroy you by
finishing off your economy. Now get the fuck out of here. We can buy
all the tractors we need from China, Japan, Germany and France.'
In the years coming up the United States will be occupying Iraq. They
will first go in and destroy it, take over the oil fields and then
impose U.S. companies to rebuild the nation using the money from the
oil sales.
Down the road maybe the only 'trade' the United States will have will
be sales of Iraqi oil paid to U.S. companies.
"God Bless America"
<STOP>
Here is Peter Outerbridge aka Paul Kneisel and his Hate America rants:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=q6u65v4lop8l8k31b8po91hvjtta8sr1n9%404ax.com&rnum=1
"NYC Based web site ANTI-FASCISM.ORG Advocates Communist Revolution..."
Date: 19 Feb 2003 12:29:06 GMT
Message-ID: <q6u65v4lop8l8k31b...@4ax.com>
You two should get along quite well seeing how you two speak the same language!
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Black Knight
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 14:56:58 GMT, <3ebc330b....@newsproxy4.pacificnet.net>
> t...@pacificnet.net (tom moran) wrote:
> >
> >Bushes finale to his speech giving Saddam Hussein 24 hours -
> >
> >"Good night, and may God continue to bless America."
> >
> >"Continue"?
> >
> >Anyone have any imput on that?
>
> Yes- I do!
>
> You are as unAmerican as Peter Outerbridge aka Paul Knesiel and it is no wonder
> why they harass me a lot more than they do you. Now you have a clue as to why!
Wrong as usual, Fatboy. Tom says some dumb things, but he doesn't
litter the ng with repetitive bullshit like you do. His posts are
generally short and to the point and he only posts them once. He
doesn't namecall like you do, either.
He is full of hate, but he isn't insane like you are.
Bruno
david_michael
Judging from the Pope's comments earlier today, it appears that the
Kingdom of Heaven is one of the few states that the American
administration has failed to either bribe or bully into supporting its
policies. Perhaps Mr Bush was concerned about possible military or
economic sanctions from above . . .
David
Tavish
kni...@indystart.com (Black Knight) wrote:
>Wrong as usual, Fatboy.
---
"It takes no thought whatsoever, on the other hand, to flame someone for
this, rather than present a rational argument, backed by verifiable evidence.
Once again, [you] display [your] preference for the cheap shot over the
reasoned statement." -- Jeffrey G. Brown
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=jeff_brown-1111961218190001%40news.zippo.com&rnum=6
Message-ID: <jeff_brown-11...@news.zippo.com>
My "Maxim Concerning Debate"- Originally written in a letter to Liberal
Radio Talk Show Host Jim Hightower:
"I am tired of seeing people get attacked for speaking
the truth and the hecklers not being able to prove their point
other than scorn or ridicule.
Liberals can't refute the truth so all liberals instead
attempt to make the truth bearer into a buffoon hoping to draw the
public's attention away from the message!
I will tell you a secret and I hope that you learn from it!
This is my original- "If I hear something being debated pertaining
to a subject that I am not cognizant of, therefore impartial, I
examine the manner of the debate and conduct. I know who is telling
the truth and who is lying by the tactics employed- the liar always
attacks the opposing person and the truth teller always attacks the
opposing premise!"
-Subject: Tavish Maxim Concerning Debate.
-Date: 1997/12/09
-Message-ID: <348ccbc4....@news.smart1.net>
The Socialists/Marxists/Leftists/Liberals or whatever name they choose
to exist under are the primary users of smear and innuendo thus they
typically resort to personal attacks instead of dealing in FACT.
Sara Salzman
david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
Mr. Michael.... I've been trying to reach you for some time. Welcome
back.
I will be in the lobby of the Amsterdam Hotel in London on Wednesday,
March 26th. Care to show a little of your famous "courage" and meet me
there?
Sara
--
If Ernst Zundel is a refugee, Daffy Duck is Albert Einstein. Some
propositions are so ludicrous that they are a betrayal of common
sense and human dignity if allowed a moment's oxygen.
- REX MURPHY, The Globe and Mail
steve wolk
"Sara Salzman" <cata...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:catamont-7E346D...@tribune.sj.sys.us.xo.net...
> In article <b7fe1abc.03031...@posting.google.com>,
> david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>
> > t...@pacificnet.net (tom moran) wrote in message
> > news:<3ebc330b....@newsproxy4.pacificnet.net>...
> > > Bushes finale to his speech giving Saddam Hussein 24 hours -
> > >
> > > "Good night, and may God continue to bless America."
> > >
> > > "Continue"?
> > >
> > > Anyone have any imput on that?
> >
> > Judging from the Pope's comments earlier today, it appears that the
> > Kingdom of Heaven is one of the few states that the American
> > administration has failed to either bribe or bully into supporting its
> > policies. Perhaps Mr Bush was concerned about possible military or
> > economic sanctions from above . . .
> >
> > David
>
> Mr. Michael.... I've been trying to reach you for some time. Welcome
> back.
>
> I will be in the lobby of the Amsterdam Hotel in London on Wednesday,
> March 26th. Care to show a little of your famous "courage" and meet me
> there?
Ten pounds to a shilling he doesn't show.
Richard Phillips
================================================
Phillips
"Good night, and may God continue to bless America."
I'm not at all sure He is still doing that right now. He's
never been fond of bullies.
====================================================================
david_michael
> david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>
> > t...@pacificnet.net (tom moran) wrote in message
> > news:<3ebc330b....@newsproxy4.pacificnet.net>...
> > > Bushes finale to his speech giving Saddam Hussein 24 hours -
> > >
> > > "Good night, and may God continue to bless America."
> > >
> > > "Continue"?
> > >
> > > Anyone have any imput on that?
> >
> > Judging from the Pope's comments earlier today, it appears that the
> > Kingdom of Heaven is one of the few states that the American
> > administration has failed to either bribe or bully into supporting its
> > policies. Perhaps Mr Bush was concerned about possible military or
> > economic sanctions from above . . .
> >
> > David
>
> Mr. Michael.... I've been trying to reach you for some time. Welcome
> back.
>
> I will be in the lobby of the Amsterdam Hotel in London on Wednesday,
> March 26th. Care to show a little of your famous "courage" and meet me
> there?
>
> Sara
As one perceptive lurker pointed out, had you really wished to contact
me, given that you have my e-mail address, you would have done so
directly. Delightful though it would be, I very much regret that I am
at the other end of the country nowadays and have a very hectic
schedule. Although, if you're staying at the Amsterdam, I suppose I
could give you a buzz on the telephone (taking suitable precautions)
just to say hello.
David
Sara Salzman
Your "perceptive lurker" isn't very perceptive at all. I don't want to
be accused of harassing you, or threatening you, or in any way doing
anything inappropriate. Therefore, I contacted you in public, and I will
be glad to meet you in public. I will be at the Amsterdam throughout the
weekend, and you know as well as I that "the other end of the country"
isn't that far away.
steve wolk
"david_michael" <david_...@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
news:b7fe1abc.03031...@posting.google.com...
I win my bet. It was a sure thing.
steve wolk
It isn't very far away, but a yellow stripe that long would be outstanding.
I guess I won a shilling.
steve wolk
"steve wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote in message
news:rzGdnYO7x88...@comcast.com...
DEM proves, for the umpty-umpth time, that he is a coward.
>
>
david_michael
Most considerate of you, Ms S. It is interesting to note that this has not
always been your position. Indeed, it was not your position on 24 May 2001.
> Therefore, I contacted you in public, and I will
> be glad to meet you in public. I will be at the Amsterdam throughout the
> weekend, and you know as well as I that "the other end of the country"
> isn't that far away.
In terms of money and time, distances in Britain are not, I suspect, the
same as distances in Colorado. We're talking four hours each way (assuming
no transport snare ups) and, if you include the cost of my time, a couple of
hundred pounds. And it could all be a wild goose chase or even a setup.
Moreover, as a happily married daddy, I am sure you'll appreciate that it
would be most inappropriate for me to arrange meetings with strange women
from foreign lands. It does indeed weigh heavily on my heart to decline an
invitation for a date with the pin-up girl of alt.revisionism and Colorado's
answer to Leopold von Sacher-Masoch but, you see, I have no choice in these
matters . . .
David
Sara Salzman
You're correct. It takes quite a while to get from one end of Colorado
to the other, including crossing the Rocky Mountains. (Of course, this
is a moot point, since Colorado is not a country, and Britain is.)
Since I can get from London to Edinburgh in a little more than four
hours, I find your dodge a bit disengenuous.
> We're talking four hours each way (assuming
> no transport snare ups) and, if you include the cost of my time, a couple of
> hundred pounds. And it could all be a wild goose chase or even a setup.
> Moreover, as a happily married daddy, I am sure you'll appreciate that it
> would be most inappropriate for me to arrange meetings with strange women
> from foreign lands. It does indeed weigh heavily on my heart to decline an
> invitation for a date with the pin-up girl of alt.revisionism and Colorado's
> answer to Leopold von Sacher-Masoch but, you see, I have no choice in these
> matters . . .
>
> David
Your arrogance is matched only by your disgusting egotism. I have
absolutely no interest in your wild theories about wild goose chases or
setups. I made an offer in good faith. I am traveling with my husband
and two children, and offered to meet you in a public place.
In return, you made sarcastic remarks and disgusting insunuations.
Thanks for showing your true colors.
Ken McVay
Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
[michael flushed right down the knoll]
>In return, you made sarcastic remarks and disgusting insunuations.
>Thanks for showing your true colors.
Here are his true colours:
Mr. David Michael, a disgusting, shameful Englishman,
and self-described abject failure at organizing the Hull
and North Lincolnshire unit of the British National Party,"
stated his position on the terrorist murder of about 3000 people
on September 11, 2001 in the attacks in New York, Washington
and Pennsylvania.
<quote>
Now, however, the chickens are coming home to roost. This afternoon a
truly wonderful thing has happened: the oppressed of the earth have
turned around and have shown that they do not have to be nature's
eternal victims. They have shown that the poor, the downtrodden, and the
powerless can strike back at the very heart of the dark forces that are
oppressing them. This time it was not Palestinian children who cowered
in fear as death came from the skies -- this time it was the very fat
bankers and financiers who sustain the terroristic regime of Sharon.
This time it was those very military men who mastermind the attacks on
the women and children of Iraq. They thought they were so safe as they
planned death and destruction from their comfortable offices in the
Pentagon, and as they did their dirty deals in the World Trade Center.
Now they have been given a bloody nose that they will never forget.
Today was a glorious day. May there be many others like it.
Death to American capitalism!
Death to international finance!
David Michael
Message-ID: <3b9e...@news-uk.onetel.net.uk>
Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:18:49 +0100
</quote>
(2) When challenged with: "You applaud the terror and killing of
thousands of innocent people perpetrated by the terrorists who attacked
the Pentagon and attacked and destroyed the World Trade Center, calling
their actions "a wonderful thing," the day the attacks occurred a
"glorious day," and finishing by fervently wishing for "many more" such
days.", his response was:
"I do indeed."
Message-ID: <3bae...@news-uk.onetel.net.uk>
Mon, 24 Sep 2001 02:26:45 +0100
(3) To a debating opponent who doesn't share his admiration for terrorism:
<quote>
All I can say in response to your filthy remark is that I very much hope
that, if there is an anthrax attack on America, your loved ones fall
victim to it so that you get a dose of your own putrid medicine.
</quote>
Message-ID: <3bc9...@news-uk.onetel.net.uk>
Sun, 14 Oct 2001 20:34:44 +0100
<quote>
"It was not a horrific event, Tony. It was you arrogant, murderous,
scummy, neoliberal bastards getting precisely what you deserve. You
filthy pigs export your murder and your corruption and your dirt
across the world and then you play all holier-than-thou when someone
gives you a dose of your own medicine. Doesn't wash with me."
</quote>
david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael)
27 Nov 2002 20:52:20 -0800
Message-ID: <b7fe1abc.02112...@posting.google.com>
<quote>
As I have recently been appointed the organizer of the Hull and North
Lincolnshire unit of the British National Party, I'm afraid I simply
won't have time to continue our little debates in this forum. It's a
question of directing one's efforts to the place where they will have
most effect. Good wishes to all who wish to continue the good fight
here.
</quote>
david_...@onetel.net.uk (David Michael)
24 May 2001
Message-ID: <3B0C4356...@onetel.net.uk>
<quote>
Islam is not our enemy. America is our enemy. We should be fighting
shoulder-to-shoulder with our Islamic friends under the slogan
'death to America!'
</quote>
http://www.redaction.org/wwwboard/msgs5/5940.HTM
June 13, 2002
--
If Ernst Zundel is a refugee, Daffy Duck is Albert Einstein. Some
propositions are so ludicrous that they are a betrayal of common
sense and human dignity if allowed a moment's oxygen.
-REX MURPHY, The Globe and Mail
steve wolk
"david_michael" <david_...@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
news:b7fe1abc.03031...@posting.google.com...
Yellow belly. Afraid of a woman. Typical of the hypocritical, racist, nazi
sympathizer and apologist.
steve wolk
David has always shown his true color. It's a bright yellow.
Tavish
kmc...@vex.net (Ken McVay) wrote:
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=3e235877_3%40news2.uncensored-news.com&rnum=1
Subject: Did Ken McVay pay tax on those $50,000+ donations he denies receiving?
Message-ID: <3e235...@news2.uncensored-news.com>
Date: 14 Jan 2003 00:23:26 GMT
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=kpbl2v8od8empt5mdkt30k3t8ehs5q3jeh%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Nizkor's Ken McVay Caught Lying Big Time About his San Antonio
Connection!
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 08:17:47 -0600
Message-ID: <kpbl2v8od8empt5md...@4ax.com>
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=&selm=prbo5vkp1825141dem99scia1676el7nqd%404ax.com
Subject: Anti-American Communist Agitator and Tax Exempt Religious Org (B'nai
Brith) Which Gave Him Financial and Moral Support
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 21:07:42 -0600
Message-ID: <prbo5vkp1825141de...@4ax.com>
david_michael
> In article <b7fe1abc.03031...@posting.google.com>,
> david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
<snip>
> > > > > Mr. Michael.... I've been trying to reach you for some time. Welcome
> > > > > back.
> > > > >
> > > > > I will be in the lobby of the Amsterdam Hotel in London on Wednesday,
> > > > > March 26th. Care to show a little of your famous "courage" and meet me
> > > > > there?
> > > > >
> > > > > Sara
> > > >
> > > > As one perceptive lurker pointed out, had you really wished to contact
> > > > me, given that you have my e-mail address, you would have done so
> > > > directly. Delightful though it would be, I very much regret that I am
> > > > at the other end of the country nowadays and have a very hectic
> > > > schedule. Although, if you're staying at the Amsterdam, I suppose I
> > > > could give you a buzz on the telephone (taking suitable precautions)
> > > > just to say hello.
> > > >
> > > > David
> > >
> > > Your "perceptive lurker" isn't very perceptive at all. I don't want to
> > > be accused of harassing you, or threatening you, or in any way doing
> > > anything inappropriate.
> >
> > Most considerate of you, Ms S. It is interesting to note that this has not
> > always been your position. Indeed, it was not your position on 24 May 2001.
No comment?
> > > Therefore, I contacted you in public, and I will
> > > be glad to meet you in public. I will be at the Amsterdam throughout the
> > > weekend, and you know as well as I that "the other end of the country"
> > > isn't that far away.
> >
> > In terms of money and time, distances in Britain are not, I suspect, the
> > same as distances in Colorado.
>
> You're correct. It takes quite a while to get from one end of Colorado
> to the other, including crossing the Rocky Mountains. (Of course, this
> is a moot point, since Colorado is not a country, and Britain is.)
Well, some of us would argue that Britain is little more than another
American state these days . . .
> Since I can get from London to Edinburgh in a little more than four
> hours, I find your dodge a bit disengenuous.
You can do that if you take either a plane or a high-speed train.
Unfortunately, high-speed trains do not stop *everywhere* in England.
Those in my part of the world proceed with all the swiftness of
constipated snails.
> > We're talking four hours each way (assuming
> > no transport snare ups) and, if you include the cost of my time, a couple of
> > hundred pounds. And it could all be a wild goose chase or even a setup.
> > Moreover, as a happily married daddy, I am sure you'll appreciate that it
> > would be most inappropriate for me to arrange meetings with strange women
> > from foreign lands. It does indeed weigh heavily on my heart to decline an
> > invitation for a date with the pin-up girl of alt.revisionism and Colorado's
> > answer to Leopold von Sacher-Masoch but, you see, I have no choice in these
> > matters . . .
> >
> > David
>
> Your arrogance is matched only by your disgusting egotism.
Oh dear.
> I have
> absolutely no interest in your wild theories about wild goose chases or
> setups.
I advanced no theories. What blithering idiot would travel all that
way, at considerable expense, when there is absolutely no guarantee
that you'd even pitch up?
> I made an offer in good faith.
And I declined in good faith, not least because the journey would be
long and expensive and I have a very busy schedule.
> I am traveling with my husband
> and two children, and offered to meet you in a public place.
For what purpose?
> In return, you made sarcastic remarks and disgusting insunuations.
You seriously don't like being teased, do ya?
> Thanks for showing your true colors.
Not one of your best posts, Ms S.
> Sara
David
steve wolk
"david_michael" <david_...@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
news:b7fe1abc.03031...@posting.google.com...
Coward.
david_michael
In fact I am not the organizer of any BNP unit, nor am I even a member
of the BNP, nor am I a self-confessed abject failure at organizing any
BNP unit. So much for Ken McVay and Nizkor as a source of reliable
information. And as for Mr McVay's criticism of my views on America --
views that are now becoming commonplace in the Middle East -- I think
a fairly good response is this:
<begin quote>
If you are still shaken by the horrifying scenes of September 11,
please
observe a moment of silence for the [2,000] civilian lives lost in the
New
York, Washington, DC and Pennsylvania attacks.
While we're at it, let's have 13 minutes of silence for the 130,000
Iraqi
civilians killed in 1991 by order of President Bush Sr. Take another
moment
here to remember how Americans celebrated and cheered in the streets.
Now another 20 minutes of silence for the 200,000 Iranians killed by
Iraqi
soldiers using weapons and money provided to young Saddam Hussein by
the
American government, before the great eagle turned all its power
against
Iraq.
Another 15 minutes of silence for the Russians and 150,000 Afghans
killed by
troops supported and trained by the CIA. Plus 10 minutes of silence
for
300,000 Japanese killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the Atomic bombs
dropped by the USA
We've just kept quiet for one hour: one minute for the Americans
killed in
NY, DC, and Pennsylvania, 59 minutes for their victims throughout the
world.
If you are still in awe, let's have another hour of silence for all
those
killed in Vietnam, which is not something Americans like to admit. The
US
went to another continent thousands of miles away and burnt tens of
thousands of Vietnamese peasants with napalm.
Or for the massacre in Panama in 1989, where American troops attacked
poor
villagers, leaving 20,000 Panamanians homeless and thousands more
dead. Or
for the millions of children who have died because of the USA
embargoes on
Iraq and Cuba
Or the hundreds of thousands brutally murdered throughout the world by
US-sponsored civil wars and coups d'etat (Chile, Argentina, Uruguay,
Bolivia, Guatemala, El Salvador to name a few).
Maybe, and although the memory of Americans claims otherwise, someone
may
remember the USA attack on Baghdad where 18,000 civilians were killed.
Did
someone see it on CNN? Was justice ever served? Or was there even any
retaliation?
We hope that Americans finally begin to understand their vulnerability
and
the attacks and other tragedies that they have caused around the
world. The
dead in other places hurt as much as the dead of the Towers, maybe
even
more!
What about the 560,000 Iraqi children (as per current UN data) who
have died
as a direct cause of the US supported sanctions against Iraq? Are
these the
children of a lesser God?
What about a new generation of nearly one million Iraqi children who
are
currently having their lives being ruined by improper nutrition, lack
of
medicine and inferior education because of US supported sanctions.
Now, let's talk about terrorism, shall we?
<end quote>
And why is Ken McVay so cross with me? Because I revealed to the world
that
he once posted THIS to alt.sex:
<begin quote>
From: kmcvay@oneb (Ken McVay)
Newsgroups: alt.sex
Subject: Erotic Lit. (was Re: sex ves. violence)
Message-ID: <2686f4a0-2.6alt.sex-1@oneb>
Date: 26 Jun 90 06:52:07 GMT
References: <137...@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <9655.2...@amherst.bitnet>
Lines: 8
Posted: Tue Jun 26 07:52:07 1990
>> restrictions are generally in force anyway. Aside from pornography
>> being deadly dull, it doesn't bother me.
I once enjoyed an exception to the 'deadly dull' rule - a delightful
movie entitled 'Alice in Wonderland' which bore an, er, superficial
resemblance to
another movie of the same name....I've been trying to find a copy for
years, or at least to rent one....last time I viewed it was around
1983....
Bring on the Dancing Nurses! :-)
<end quote>
David
PS -- and DEATH TO AMERICA!!!!
Orac
Sara Salzman <cata...@concentric.net> wrote:
I knew DM would not take you up on your offer, but it is amusing to
watch him squirm.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"
steve wolk
"Orac" <or...@wlsfanmail.com> wrote in message
news:orac-81F6A6.0...@host9.newsfeeds.com...
Yup. He ALWAYS squirms.
Tavish
david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>David
>
>
>PS -- and DEATH TO AMERICA!!!!
You are being a sphincter again and you are giving your enemies ammunition to
pummel (rightfully so too) you with. The subject title was correctly selected as
well : "Dr. Homeland shows his true self."
Need I say more?
Tavish
wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote:
>> Not one of your best posts, Ms S.
At least she is not an America Hater like you are and I will take her side
against you on that aspect for sure!! I don't know who hacks me off more-- you
or Peter Outerbridge! Both of you are America haters and America Bashers.
>> > Sara
>> David
>Coward.
I agree.
david_michael
> On Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:55:14 -0500, <dp6cnbdzqfS...@comcast.com> "steve
> wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote:
>
> >> Not one of your best posts, Ms S.
>
> At least she is not an America Hater like you are and I will take her side
> against you on that aspect for sure!!
I don't think I'm going to be losing a lot of sleep over that, Mr
Bradbury. I accept that discussing politics with you is a bit like
discussing history with Ken, but, for the archives, let me answer your
general accusation.
The United States of America made it possible for the communism that
you purport to despise to flourish for three-quarters of a century and
to take some 200 million lives. Why? Because it was *profitable* for
them so to do. See AK Chesterton's *New Unhappy Lords* and Charles
Levinson's *Vodka Cola* for evidence.
The involvement of the United States of America in the Second World
War procured an outcome that effectively divided the world between
communists and internationalist liberals -- firmly marginalizing
people such as yourself and leading to the destruction of age-old
cultures and ways of life and giving rise to the aggressive
multiculturalism and multiracialism of our age.
The 'international law' that has been policed by America and its
allies since the close of the Second World War has been utterly biased
in its enforcement. Thus the Nazi war criminals were punished -- in
many cases by death -- for such crimes as printing propaganda
(Streicher), whereas the Allied war criminals, such as those who
dropped atomic bombs and massive amounts of conventional explosives on
entire cities full of civilians went completely unpunished and,
indeed, were applauded as heroes. When Iraq invades neighbouring
countries and supposedly stockpiles weapons of mass destruction it is
subjected to punitive sanctions by the American-led international
community, leading directly to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of
its citizens, it is bombed at regular intervals by America and
Britain, and it is then subjected to aggressive warfare from America
and Britain with the object of 'regime change'. When Israel invades
neighbouring countries and stockpiles weapons of mass destruction, by
contrast, it is given billions of dollars in American aid. That is the
'justice' that the world witnesses under the pax Americana.
America and its allies have created a world economic order in which
more people die of starvation-related causes every three years than
died in the whole of World War II, even accepting 'official' figures
(around 50 million) of those killed in that war.
Now you might feel that it is fine and honourable to defend a country
that behaves in such a manner. I, on the other hand, feel passionately
that those who truly have the interests of the American people and the
peoples of the world at heart are perfectly justified in demanding the
overthrow of America's New World Order.
And this is what I mean when I say, proudly and defiantly, DEATH TO
AMERICA!
<snip>
David
Tavish
david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>And this is what I mean when I say, proudly and defiantly, DEATH TO
>AMERICA!
>
><snip>
>
>David
You are certainly entitled to you opinions and I don't see you as being any
danger to my America so when Ken McVay smears you and I post what I have been
posting about him and his hypocrisy do not take it that I am personally
defending you but rather I see him and his co-conspirators as being real dangers
whereas your isolated kook rants are merely passe!
david_michael
> On 20 Mar 2003 19:18:38 -0800, <b7fe1abc.03032...@posting.google.com>
> david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>
> >And this is what I mean when I say, proudly and defiantly, DEATH TO
> >AMERICA!
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >David
>
> You are certainly entitled to you opinions and I don't see you as being any
> danger to my America so when Ken McVay smears you and I post what I have been
> posting about him and his hypocrisy do not take it that I am personally
> defending you but rather I see him and his co-conspirators as being real dangers
> whereas your isolated kook rants are merely passe!
And yet you have no refutation of the points that I have raised.
The main conflict today is not between the US and Iraq. It's between
the liberal international Establishment and all who oppose it. In THAT
conflict, you're firmly on the side of Ariel Sharon and, indeed, Kenny
McVay.
David
<snip>
Tavish
david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>Tavish <t--avi-...@RemoveHyphens2MAILix.n-etc-om.com> wrote in message news:<q37l7vcolmd48v7qf...@4ax.com>...
>> On 20 Mar 2003 19:18:38 -0800, <b7fe1abc.03032...@posting.google.com>
>> david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
>>
>> >And this is what I mean when I say, proudly and defiantly, DEATH TO
>> >AMERICA!
>> >
>> ><snip>
>> >
>> >David
>>
>> You are certainly entitled to you opinions and I don't see you as being any
>> danger to my America so when Ken McVay smears you and I post what I have been
>> posting about him and his hypocrisy do not take it that I am personally
>> defending you but rather I see him and his co-conspirators as being real dangers
>> whereas your isolated kook rants are merely passe!
:
>And yet you have no refutation of the points that I have raised.
Your point is your opinions. You are entitled to your opinions even though it's
my opinion your current opinions are kookdum.
>The main conflict today is not between the US and Iraq. It's between
>the liberal international Establishment and all who oppose it. In THAT
>conflict, you're firmly on the side of Ariel Sharon and, indeed, Kenny
>McVay.
I understand where you come from and I am on record as posting numerous times
that America should sever all ties with Israel and especially based on the false
teaching that Jews and Israel are God's "Chosen Vessels." I have no use for
McVay or Sharon and you know it BUT I don't condone terrorist attacks against my
homeland on account of the naivity of politicians who have been brought up from
infancy that Jews etc. are Chosen.
Here is what I posted just the other day:
On 19 Mar 2003 05:13:45 GMT, <20030319001345...@mb-fi.aol.com>
ewe...@aol.com (Ewe812) wrote:
>Bush has IRAQnaphobia
>
>Patrick Buchanan: Cabal of US Officials Colluding with Israel to Ignite Wars:
>http://www.amconmag.com/03_24_03/cover.html
I would have preferred Patrick Buchanan over George Bush BUT I voted for Bush
because (realistically) a vote for Buchanan would have been a vote for Al Gore
just as a vote for Ross Perot was really a vote for Bill Clinton! See what I
mean. Do you really think America would have been better off if Al Gore became
president instead of George Bush? I am speaking political realities rather than
what either of us desire.
Proof Buchanan is/was my ultimate choice and notice all the dates:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=854845399%246862%40atype.com&rnum=1
From: Doc Tavish <tav...@phoenix.net>
Subject: Doc Tavish Enters The Fray Feet First!
Date: 1997/02/02
Message-ID: <854845399$68...@atype.com>
Daniel Kuehne wrote:
>
> Ahhh, thank God... FINALLY some words of wisdom...
>
> tsun wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 30 Jan 97 23:03:05 GMT, aha...@aol.com (AHABIZ) wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >dannyboy your nazi cult leader mark thomas was busted for conspiracy and
> > >bankrobbery related to the "aryan republican army" bankrobbers...so how
> > >does it feel to be a total dupe? not only do you not realize that the
> > >cult you belong to (identity) is a cult, you don't realize you're being
> > >used as a helpless pawn to cover up the drug running, murders, bank
> > >robberies, and bombings perpetrated by your cult's putative
> > >leadership....suck it up dannynazi, suck it up...
> > >
> > >Arlin H. Adams
:
> > You know, when I read the above non-sense, I see nothing so much as
> > the ranting of an extreme liberal left-winger, if not a radical
> > communist.
Doc Tavish must now step into the fray. I have taken off my jacket and
rolled up my sleeves and wiped my brow to say: "Typical communist
strategy and a Kremlin Gremlin trick. Label anybody that does not fit in
with the leftist agenda as a naziboy. I'm fed up to me gills with it! I
am an American and I voted for Dole! If certain Bolsheviks wouldn't have
bushwhacked Pat Buchanan then he would have been my man.
<END>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=sMEx4.1040%24624.111014%40news.flash.net&rnum=2
From: "Doc Tavish" <doc_t...@NOSPAMmy-deja.com>
Subject: Re: Blood Pressure Today 162/101 BUT I Got Out and Voted!
Date: 2000/03/09
Message-ID: <sMEx4.1040$624.1...@news.flash.net>
On 8-Mar-2000, Ed Kadach <edd...@connect.ab.ca> wrote:
> an0...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 07 Mar 2000 21:58:47 -0700, Ed Kadach <edd...@connect.ab.ca>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Doc Tavish wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Blood Pressure Today 162/101 BUT I Got Out and Voted for George W. Bush.
> > >> He may not be totally in line with my philosophies BUT he is miles closer than
> > >> John McCain!
> > >>
> > >> Doc Tavish
:
> > >You actually voted for Bush? A pro-zionist!
> > >
> > >
> > >Baffled,
> > >Ed Kadach
:
> > So, this means you're voting for Gore Ed?
> >
> > An elitist liberal.....just as I suspected
:
> Ahh, I live in Kanada but even if I were able to vote,
> Gored be the last person I'd vote for. McCain and Bradley
> wouldn't get my vote either. I'd more than likely vote
> for the Reformed Partys nominee.
I am 100% for Pat Buchanan. I've always liked Pat Buchanan and in fact
I posted about how Jews did him in previously:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=353a7cb9.41779758%40news.tavish-central.net&rnum=1
Subject: >The Undermining of a Political Candidate by the Jewish Controlled
Media<
Date: 1998/04/19
Message-ID: <353a7cb9...@news.tavish-central.net>
The above is a MUST read post for all Pat Buchanan fans!
I hate to say though that if Pat did run as an independent I'd still would have
to vote for Bush in November. Why some people may ask! Look what happened
when people voted for Ross Perot-- it was the same as voting for Clint*n. If
I were to vote for Buchanan it would be a vote taken away from Bush and in
principle given to Al Gore. One must consider the real world with its political
eccentricities. Historically "Independents" have never been a major factor in
American Presidential elections. If Pat had a real viable chance he'd been in
the Republican Party rather than splintering off. Because of his telling the
truth about Jews (which I see as admirable) too many conservatives are afraid of
him-- which is in my mind bowing to liberals and socialists.
Doc Tavish
~~End of GOOGLE Archive~~
>PNAC/JINSA Zionist Cabal (in Bush Regime) on ABC's "Nightline" Program from
>March 5th, 2003:
>http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=4267
>http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=4309
You must not be too hard on my fellow Texan and yes you make many fine points.
Instead of bashing Bush you and others should instead try to get Bush and all
the others like him see that Israel as God's Chosen vessel is a false notion.
Bush and many like him have had the Jews are the chosen people and everyone must
serve Israel etc. drummed into their heads since they were children by the false
teachers of Christendom. You can't blame them for following a bad path which
they have been indoctrinated with since they were young. Bush and others need to
learn what the Bible really says about Jews and Israel as shown here:
<START>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=4ec17voucam2q39154je59emp6hei6mrmf%404ax.com&rnum=1
Subject: Old Covenant Vs New -- New Covenant Replaces Old Covenant aka Jews NO
Longer God's Chosen People So Says the Scripture! R_0313
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 10:38:59 -0600
Message-ID: <4ec17voucam2q3915...@4ax.com>
(Excerpt)
CLASSIC DOC TAVISH REPOST
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001 03:47:19 GMT,
<b78D6.18307$k04.3...@news1.rdc1.mi.home.com> "Ray and Mary"
<Droui...@home.com> wrote:
>> > The Jews are God's chosen people.
:
>> They are NOT God's Chosen People. They lost that distinction long ago.
>> Care to deny what the Bible says Ray?
:
>Are you saying that God goes back on his promises? Are you saying that God
>would break his promise with Abraham?
God does not go back on his promises OR his warnings. Jews did not heed the
warning given in 1Kings and as a result they lost their claim to the kingdom.
Are you now going to say God's Son lied when he said the following or the
Apostle Paul for that matter concerning what God warned in 1Kings?
1 Kings 9:3-9 (English-RSV):
3 And the LORD said to him [King Solomon], "I have heard your prayer and
your supplication, which you have made before me; I have
consecrated this house which you have built, and put my name there for
ever; my eyes and my heart will be there for all time.
4 And as for you, if you will walk before me, as David your father walked,
with integrity of heart and uprightness, doing according to all that I
have commanded you, and keeping my statutes and my
ordinances,
5 then I will establish your royal throne over Israel for ever, as I
promised David your father, saying, 'There shall not fail you a man upon
the throne of Israel.'
The warning.
6 But if you turn aside from following me, you or your children, and do
not keep my commandments and my statutes which I have set before you, but
go and serve other gods and worship them,
7 then I will cut off Israel from the land which I have given them; and
the house which I have consecrated for my name I will cast out of my
sight; and Israel will become a proverb and a byword among all peoples.
8 And this house will become a heap of ruins; everyone passing by it will
be astonished, and will hiss; and they will say, 'Why has the LORD done
thus to this land and to this house?'
9 Then they will say, 'Because they forsook the LORD their God who brought
their fathers out of the land of Egypt, and laid hold on other gods, and
worshiped them and served them; therefore the LORD has brought all this
evil upon them.'"
Here is Jesus foretelling of the current temple destruction and the
casting off of the Jews who presumed to still have G-d's approval:
Matthew 21:33-46 (English-RSV)
33 [Jesus said] "Hear another parable. There was a householder who planted
a vineyard, and set a hedge around it, and dug a wine press in it, and
built a tower, and let it out to tenants, and went into another country.
34 When the season of fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the
tenants, to get his fruit;
35 and the tenants took his servants and beat one, killed another, and
stoned another.
36 Again he sent other servants, more than the first; and they did the
same to them.
37 Afterward he sent his son to them, saying, 'They will respect my son.'
38 But when the tenants saw the son, they said to themselves, 'This is the
heir; come, let us kill him and have his inheritance.'
39 And they took him and cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. 40
When therefore the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those
tenants?"
41 They said to him, "He will put those wretches to a miserable death, and
let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in
their seasons."
42 Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the scriptures: 'The very
stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner; this
was the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes'?
43 Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you
and given to a nation producing the fruits of it."
44 _
45 When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they
perceived that he was speaking about them.
46 But when they tried to arrest him, they feared the multitudes, because
they held him to be a prophet.
Yes, Jesus foretold the Kingdom being ripped away from "The Chosen[TM]"
and they knew that he was talking about them too! The nation that will be
producing the fruits are the Gentiles and any Jew that believes in the
Son.
As for the destruction of the ones that killed the Son what did the
prophecy in 1 Kings 9: 3-9 say? It said: "... then I will cut off Israel
from the land which I have given them; and the house which I have
consecrated for my name I will cast out of my sight; and Israel will
become a proverb and a byword among all peoples. And this house will become a
heap of ruins; everyone passing by it will be astonished, and will hiss; and
they will say, 'Why has the LORD done thus to this land and to this house?'
What did Jesus say regarding the temple becoming ruins?
Matthew 24:1,2 (English-RSV)
1 Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to
point out to him the buildings of the temple.
2 But he answered them, "You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to
you, there will not be left here one stone upon another, that will not be
thrown down."
As we all know the temple has been in ruins since 70 AD. This should be
obvious that the Pharisees and their descendants did not have God's favor
and to this very hour do not have G-d's favor!
Don't forget:
Romans 11
7 What then? What Israel sought so earnestly it did not obtain, but the elect
did. The others were hardened,
8 as it is written: "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes so that they could
not see and ears so that they could not hear, to this very day."
9 And David says: "May their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block
and a retribution for them.
10 May their eyes be darkened so they cannot see, and their backs be bent
forever."
11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all!
Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to
make Israel envious.
12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means
riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring!
Jews are no longer the chosen and the temple being in ruins is testament to it!
BTW
Colossians 3
11 Here there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian,
Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.
12 Therefore, as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves
with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.
1 Peter 2
1 Therefore, rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and
slander of every kind.
2 Like newborn babies, crave pure spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow up
in your salvation,
3 now that you have tasted that the Lord is good.
4 As you come to him, the living Stone--rejected by men but chosen by God and
precious to him--
5 you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a
holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus
Christ.
6 For in Scripture it says: "See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious
cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame."
7 Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not
believe, "The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone, "
8 and, "A stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall."
They stumble because they disobey the message--which is also what they were
destined for.
9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people
belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of
darkness into his wonderful light.
Who are God's Chosen People today Ray? Anyone! Whether Jew or non-Jew but they
must believe in the Son and what he taught.
>The new covenant doesn't cancel the old one.
Your opinion which you have no Biblical support as the following scriptures
show.
>It adds to it.
Where in the Bible does it say that Ray? No where. This is what the Bible says
about the Old Vs the New.
Hebrews 8
6 But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant
of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better
promises.
7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would
have been sought for another.
8 But God found fault with the people and said : "The time is coming, declares
the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the
house of Judah.
9 It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took
them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful
to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord.
10 This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time,
declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their
hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.
11 No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, `Know
the Lord,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the
greatest.
12 For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more."
13 By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete;
Hebrews 9
1 Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly
sanctuary.
2 A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the lampstand, the table
and the consecrated bread; this was called the Holy Place.
3 Behind the second curtain was a room called the Most Holy Place,
11 When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already
here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not
man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation.
12 He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he
entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained
eternal redemption.
15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those
who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance--now that he
has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the
first covenant.
Covenant of Moses (Law) done away with the Covenant of Christ (Faith).
Galatians 3
13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for
it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree."
14 He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the
Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of
the Spirit.
15 Brothers, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set
aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in
this case.
16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not
say "and to seeds," meaning many people, but "and to your seed," meaning one
person, who is Christ.
23 Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until
faith should be revealed.
24 So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified
by faith.
25 Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.
Galatians 4
21 Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law
says?
22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the
other by the free woman.
23 His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the
free woman was born as the result of a promise.
24 These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two
covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be
slaves: This is Hagar.
25 Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present
city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children.
26 But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother.
Galatians 5
1 It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not
let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
2 Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised,
Christ will be of no value to you at all.
3 Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is
obligated to obey the whole law.
4 You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you
have fallen away from grace.
5 But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which
we hope.
><Snipped a fine example of the way that anti-Sematists twist the bible in
>order to justify their hate>
What hate? What anti-Semitism? It is not my fault that you're unreceptive and I
will restore what you deleted in full at the bottom for the archives and so
future readers can compare your view versus mine...
~~End of GOOGLE Archival Excerpt~~
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=&selm=8spror01p27%40news2.newsguy.com&rnum=1
Subject: G-d's Will - Jews No Longer OWN The Land Israel
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 16:27:25 GMT
Message-ID: <8spro...@news2.newsguy.com>
(Excerpt)
On 31-May-1999, dlt...@ix.netcom.com (dltjxx) "Debora" wrote:
> From: dlt...@ix.netcom.com (dltjxx)
> Subject: Re: Jews Go Home!
> Date: 31 May 1999 07:29:47 GMT
> Organization: Netcom
> >Susan Cohen <ze...@smart.nett> wrote:
> >>We are home. You're the invader.
:
> >Stop the illusions. Go back to Krakow. It's our land. Forever.
> >The invadors are you jewish fanatics who invaded OUR land in 1948.
> >I wish those ships sank before they reached Yafa.
> >Hani
:
> Please specify how the half million Jews resident in Israel in 1948 are
> invaders of the land given to them.
Who gave "Jews" the land in 1948? If you say G-d then you are wrong! G-d
has thoroughly dispossessed you of the land that you claim as YOURS. The
Temple being in ruins for nearly two thousand years is tantamount to the
fact as spoken:
THE TEMPLE INUAGURATION AND GOD'S STATEMENT
1 Kings 9:3-9 (English-RSV):
3 And the LORD said to him [King Solomon], "I have heard your prayer and
your supplication, which you have made before me; I have
consecrated this house which you have built, and put my name there for
ever; my eyes and my heart will be there for all time.
4 And as for you, if you will walk before me, as David your father walked,
with integrity of heart and uprightness, doing according to all that I
have commanded you, and keeping my statutes and my
ordinances,
5 then I will establish your royal throne over Israel for ever, as I
promised David your father, saying, 'There shall not fail you a man upon
the throne of Israel.'
6 But if you turn aside from following me, you or your children, and do
not keep my commandments and my statutes which I have set before you, but
go and serve other gods and worship them,
7 then I will cut off Israel from the land which I have given them; and
the house which I have consecrated for my name I will cast out of my
sight; and Israel will become a proverb and a byword among all peoples.
8 And this house will become a heap of ruins; everyone passing by it will
be astonished, and will hiss; and they will say, 'Why has the LORD done
thus to this land and to this house?'
9 Then they will say, 'Because they forsook the LORD their God who brought
their fathers out of the land of Egypt, and laid hold on other gods, and
worshiped them and served them; therefore the LORD has brought all this
evil upon them.'"
Here is Jesus foretelling of the current temple destruction and the
casting of the Jews who presumed to still have G-d's approval:
Matthew 21:33-46 (English-RSV)
33 [Jesus said] "Hear another parable. There was a householder who planted
a vineyard, and set a hedge around it, and dug a wine press in it, and
built a tower, and let it out to tenants, and went into
another country.
34 When the season of fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the
tenants, to get his fruit;
35 and the tenants took his servants and beat one, killed another, and
stoned another.
36 Again he sent other servants, more than the first; and they did the
same to them.
37 Afterward he sent his son to them, saying, 'They will respect my son.'
38 But when the tenants saw the son, they said to themselves, 'This is the
heir; come, let us kill him and have his inheritance.'
39 And they took him and cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. 40
When therefore the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those
tenants?"
41 They said to him, "He will put those wretches to a miserable death, and
let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in
their seasons."
42 Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the scriptures: 'The very
stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner; this
was the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes'?
43 Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and
given to a nation producing the fruits of it."
44 _
45 When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they
perceived that he was speaking about them.
46 But when they tried to arrest him, they feared the multitudes, because
they held him to be a prophet.
[...]
God destroyed the Temple and drove Jews out from Israel almost 2000 years
ago! Was it God or was it man's doing that Israel be made a State in 1948?
Consider this:
http://www.israel-mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00hb0
"THE DECLARATION OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL May 14, 1948
On May 14, 1948, on the day in which the British Mandate over a Palestine
expired, the Jewish People's Council gathered at the Tel Aviv Museum, and
approved the following proclamation, declaring the establishment of the
State of Israel. The new state was recognized that night at 11:00 AM
Israel time by the United States and three days later by the USSR..."
Hardly looks like God brought about the disenfranchisement of Palestinians
from their land does it? Modern "Israel" was mandated by man NOT by God!
~~End of GOOGLE Archival Excerpt~~
<STOP>
Rather than bashing a man of good intent for following what he was indoctrinated
with since youth you should be a beaming light to help all non-Jews to see the
error of still thinking Jews and "their" Israel are God's CHOSEN ONES today. Be
part of the solution rather than being part of the problem. :-)
Tavish
>David
>
><snip>
Steven Mock
news:b7fe1abc.03032...@posting.google.com:
> America and its allies have created a world economic order in which
> more people die of starvation-related causes every three years than
> died in the whole of World War II, even accepting 'official' figures
> (around 50 million) of those killed in that war.
You know, Dr. Michael, in the course of their rise to power the Nazis used,
with much success, a very similar propaganda tool to the one you are
employing now. On the street level, the SA would provoke violence between
themselves and the communists, creating an atmosphere of violence and
disorder, while on the political level the Nazi leadership would blame the
liberal Weimar regime for its failure to preserve order, offering
themselves as the only alternative capable of doing so.
You are now trying to pull the same trick on an international level,
blaming the liberal international system for the violence and starvation
that characterizes the current world order. When, in fact, the immediate
perpetrators of this violence and starvation are almost invariably
autocratic dictators, religious fanatics, and movements seeking to impose
utopian visions on an unwilling populace (of which I count communism among
the latter) - the very entities you count on your side of the stuggle
between proponants and opponants of the international system.
In short, the problem in the world seems to be too little liberalism, not
too much.
Or maybe you can name a liberal regime that has been responsible for or
presided over a massacre or mass starvation of its own people, comperable
to those perpetrated frequently by your chosen allies.
I'll wait.
Steven Mock
--
"I may not agree with your bumper sticker;
but I'll defend your right to stick it." - Ed Anger
david_michael
> david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote in
> news:b7fe1abc.03032...@posting.google.com:
>
> > America and its allies have created a world economic order in which
> > more people die of starvation-related causes every three years than
> > died in the whole of World War II, even accepting 'official' figures
> > (around 50 million) of those killed in that war.
>
> You know, Dr. Michael, in the course of their rise to power the Nazis used,
> with much success, a very similar propaganda tool to the one you are
> employing now.
You know, I find it quite hilarious how you people seem to assume that
everyone who disagrees with you around here is, to a greater or lesser
extent, Nazi! It's as if you guys are pre-programmed to detect and
attack NAZIS and ONLY NAZIS, and if something opposes you then you
automatically go into IT MUST BE A NAZI mode, analyse its every word
for parallels with the Nazis, look carefully for similarities with the
Nazis, and if you can't find either then assume it's just a NAZI
PRETENDING NOT TO BE A NAZI.
> On the street level, the SA would provoke violence between
> themselves and the communists, creating an atmosphere of violence and
> disorder, while on the political level the Nazi leadership would blame the
> liberal Weimar regime for its failure to preserve order, offering
> themselves as the only alternative capable of doing so.
Well I am not interested in provoking violence with communists or
anyone else, and I have no intention of either blaming the liberal
Weimar regime for its failure to preserve order or offering myself as
an alternative.
> You are now trying to pull the same trick on an international level,
You have a very, very vivid imagination. Tell me, do you really
believe the crap you post?
> blaming the liberal international system for the violence and starvation
> that characterizes the current world order.
Looking at what's happening in Iraq tonight I think that I'm not too
far from the truth in so doing. Hell, man -- even Chirac is almost
calling the Americans war criminals now! Is he a NAZI too?
> When, in fact, the immediate
> perpetrators of this violence and starvation are almost invariably
> autocratic dictators, religious fanatics, and movements seeking to impose
> utopian visions on an unwilling populace (of which I count communism among
> the latter) - the very entities you count on your side of the stuggle
> between proponants and opponants of the international system.
Let me state quite clearly that there is no regime on earth that I
count as clearly on my side of the struggle. Some, North Korea being a
clear example, make very encouraging anti-American noises but take a
closer look at what they do, rather than what they say, and you'll see
them trundling merrily along the same path that took most of the
communist world into the American empire. As far as I am concerned,
every nation on this planet (with a couple of exceptions, such as
'Zimbabwe', which are pulling the plug on themselves anyway) is either
thoroughly subverted by America and its allies, or is on its way to
such an end. I say let them all rot. Nationalists -- and I address
this remark particularly to people like Bradbury -- have to stop
trying to preserve existing nations, which have all been lost
irretrievably, and must now start working for new autonomous zones.
> In short, the problem in the world seems to be too little liberalism, not
> too much.
Let those who want liberalism have it. Let those who don't be free
from it. My objection to conventional liberal regimes is simply that
they are utterly subverted. Most of them are two-party, or
two-coalition, dictatorships that use the media as gatekeepers to
prevent any opposition using lawful means and that use the police as
gatekeepers to prevent any opposition using unlawful means.
> Or maybe you can name a liberal regime that has been responsible for or
> presided over a massacre or mass starvation of its own people, comperable
> to those perpetrated frequently by your chosen allies.
Sure. The African National Congress in South Africa. On 21 September
last year, a spokesman for Agri South Africa, the farmer's
organization, reported that killings of farmers in South Africa were
proceeding at approximately 15 times the rate in Zimbabwe but were not
being reported. White farmers are being killed for political reasons
rather than as a result of crime. Between January 2001 and April 2002
there were more than 1,400 armed attacks on white farms, with nearly
200 deaths of farmers and families. In the previous five years some
700 white farmers were killed. Only 11 white farmers were killed from
September 2001 to September 2002 in Zimbabwe.
Perhaps the Israeli regime would be another example. You might object
that Mr Sharon is hardly a liberal, and I might agree with you, but
even more 'liberal' Israeli regimes have been bloody.
But I do take your general point. 'Liberal' regimes generally murder
by proxy and overseas rather than slaughtering their own people. They
do this typically when destabliziling regimes that they don't like, or
supporting allies who are rather less than liberal themselves. Liberal
regimes do not generally need to kill their own people -- they control
them using the media, the education system and the police.
> I'll wait.
>
> Steven Mock
David
david_michael
<snip>
> >> You are certainly entitled to you opinions and I don't see you as being any
> >> danger to my America so when Ken McVay smears you and I post what I have been
> >> posting about him and his hypocrisy do not take it that I am personally
> >> defending you but rather I see him and his co-conspirators as being real dangers
> >> whereas your isolated kook rants are merely passe!
> :
> >And yet you have no refutation of the points that I have raised.
>
> Your point is your opinions. You are entitled to your opinions even though it's
> my opinion your current opinions are kookdum.
Perhaps you would change your mind were you to study them more
carefully. :-)
> >The main conflict today is not between the US and Iraq. It's between
> >the liberal international Establishment and all who oppose it. In THAT
> >conflict, you're firmly on the side of Ariel Sharon and, indeed, Kenny
> >McVay.
>
> I understand where you come from and I am on record as posting numerous times
> that America should sever all ties with Israel and especially based on the false
> teaching that Jews and Israel are God's "Chosen Vessels." I have no use for
> McVay or Sharon and you know it
But by supporting the current American setup you are on PRECISELY the
same side as those characters, Mr Bradbury. Heck, only the other day,
while the world was looking at Iraq, America slipped Israel another 10
billion dollars of its taxpayers' money! By supporting America and its
role in the world you are supporting the very people who are
bankrolling everything that you appear to loathe in politics (except
me!).
> BUT I don't condone terrorist attacks against my
> homeland on account of the naivity of politicians who have been brought up from
> infancy that Jews etc. are Chosen.
As a general strategy I would not advocate terror attacks simply
because the cost/benefit ratio is usually hopelessly wrong. In Israel
and Afghanistan I do have a lot of sympathy with the bombers because
the Palestinians and Afghans are fighting to liberate their countries
and they have no other way to resist. The 11 September 2001 attacks
were something utterly unique in that they gave a clear message to
America that if it exports terror and degeneracy overseas, for example
in financing Israeli action against the Palestinians, then there are
people around who will make America pay dearly. One hopes that future
presidents will get the message that if there is to be a more peaceful
world then America must stop bankrolling murder overseas and must act
only within its own borders. If future presidents get that message --
if the events of 11 September 2001 really do encourage America to get
back within its own borders -- then the lives that will be saved,
including maybe American lives, will, in the long run, exceed those
that were lost.
> Here is what I posted just the other day:
>
> On 19 Mar 2003 05:13:45 GMT, <20030319001345...@mb-fi.aol.com>
> ewe...@aol.com (Ewe812) wrote:
>
> >Bush has IRAQnaphobia
> >
> >Patrick Buchanan: Cabal of US Officials Colluding with Israel to Ignite Wars:
> >http://www.amconmag.com/03_24_03/cover.html
>
> I would have preferred Patrick Buchanan over George Bush BUT I voted for Bush
> because (realistically) a vote for Buchanan would have been a vote for Al Gore
> just as a vote for Ross Perot was really a vote for Bill Clinton! See what I
> mean. Do you really think America would have been better off if Al Gore became
> president instead of George Bush? I am speaking political realities rather than
> what either of us desire.
I think that Buchanan is a man of integrity and a good American
patriot. I think that he would have pursued a far more effective
policy against terrorism: a policy of not provoking it! I know from
personal communication that Nick Griffin of the BNP admires Buchanan's
work and Buchanan generally thinks like a Euronationalist. I don't
think he's a complete answer to the world's problems by any means, but
he's heading in the right direction. I don't see much to choose
between Gore and Bush -- Gore is frighteningly like our Blair. (Don't
forget that Blair, who is Bush's 'staunchest ally', is the leader of
Britain's Labour Party -- a party that until very recently was very,
very socialist indeed.)
<snip>
> Rather than bashing a man of good intent for following what he was indoctrinated
> with since youth you should be a beaming light to help all non-Jews to see the
> error of still thinking Jews and "their" Israel are God's CHOSEN ONES today. Be
> part of the solution rather than being part of the problem. :-)
Well there are two fundamental differences between us here. First, I
don't accept any religion. Before you call me a godless commie I
hasten to add that I have friends in the Christian Identity movement,
and some who are very devoutly religious Afrikaners, and I certainly
am not against religion -- indeed, I would encourage religious groups
to get out there and start up their own communities. Second, I suppose
we're advocating two very different kinds of nationalism. You're
preaching loyalty to a nation state that already exists -- America:
you want to preserve and defend America, and maybe turn it back to
what it once was before it went bad. I've given up on defending
existing nation states. I think that pretty much every nation state on
earth has been utterly subverted and that they are so completely
rigged that no amount of conventional politicking can ever retrieve
them. In short -- your sort of nationalism has been utterly defeated
for all time. We live in a completely liberal, globalized,
multicultural world. So what should we do if we don't like it? Trying
to turn back the clock is a non-starter. Rather, we should try to
build new 'nations', or 'homelands' or 'communities' -- call them what
you will. We need to create, secure and defend our own new autonomous
zones. You might say that it sounds like 'kookdom', but (1) it's
certainly no more kookish than the idea that the direction of existing
governments can be changed through the electoral system or by violent
force, and (2) there are actually some very good examples where people
have got together and created their own viable communities -- the
Afrikaners of Orania and the Mennonites of Paraguay being two that
spring to mind. Ironically, the most compelling example of all is the
state of Israel: an entirely new state created primarily as a homeland
for one ethnic group. So it IS possible. It won't happen overnight and
much work needs to be done, but I think that it is a very practicable
way forward for those who accept that the enemy has taken over the
world, that it cannot be defeated (at least not at the moment) and
that the best thing to do is to turn our back on it and create
something better for ourselves and our children. That's the
national-anarchist theory and I have to say I'm persuaded by it. I
hope that one day you will be too.
David
Gord McFee
Amazing how Sara scares the hell out of those types.
--
Gord McFee
I'll write no line before its time
Visit the Holocaust History Project
http://www.holocaust-history.org
steve wolk
"Gord McFee" <gord....@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:f6dm7v47m0fgvael9...@4ax.com...
Notice how Dr. Yellowbelly has fled from this?
Orac
"steve wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote:
Is anyone surprised that he did?
Orac
david_...@onetel.net.uk (david_michael) wrote:
> And this is what I mean when I say, proudly and defiantly, DEATH TO
> AMERICA!
<YAWN> Really, David, you have become quite tiresome in this.
Orac
Steven Mock <sm...@nizkor.org> wrote:
> You are now trying to pull the same trick on an international level,
> blaming the liberal international system for the violence and starvation
> that characterizes the current world order. When, in fact, the immediate
> perpetrators of this violence and starvation are almost invariably
> autocratic dictators, religious fanatics, and movements seeking to impose
> utopian visions on an unwilling populace (of which I count communism among
> the latter) - the very entities you count on your side of the stuggle
> between proponants and opponants of the international system.
Indeed. It is exactly the sort of regimes that David Michael seems to
like the most that cause the most death and suffering in the world
today, regimes like the North Korean regime, Saddam Hussein's regime,
and, no doubt, the Taliban (with whom David Michael, after September 11,
famously claimed solidarity and with whom he claimed that he'd like to
go and fight--if it weren't for those pesky differences in religion and
language, that is). Such are the nations David Michael makes common
cause with against western Democracies.
Gord McFee
2003 21:14:38 GMT, Orac <Or...@wabcmail.com> wrote:
> In article <pomcnWBaTdb...@comcast.com>,
> "steve wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote:
>
> > "Gord McFee" <gord....@rogers.com> wrote in message
> > news:f6dm7v47m0fgvael9...@4ax.com...
> > > In <dp6cnbdzqfS...@comcast.com>, on Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:55:14
> > > -0500, "steve wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Coward.
> > >
> > > Amazing how Sara scares the hell out of those types.
> >
> >
> >
> > Notice how Dr. Yellowbelly has fled from this?
>
> Is anyone surprised that he did?
No, we're not. :-)
steve wolk
> In <Orac-98455F.1...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>, on Sat, 22 Mar
> 2003 21:14:38 GMT, Orac <Or...@wabcmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <pomcnWBaTdb...@comcast.com>,
> > "steve wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote:
> >
> > > "Gord McFee" <gord....@rogers.com> wrote in message
> > > news:f6dm7v47m0fgvael9...@4ax.com...
> > > > In <dp6cnbdzqfS...@comcast.com>, on Thu, 20 Mar 2003
00:55:14
> > > > -0500, "steve wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Coward.
> > > >
> > > > Amazing how Sara scares the hell out of those types.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Notice how Dr. Yellowbelly has fled from this?
> >
> > Is anyone surprised that he did?
>
> No, we're not. :-)
He ALWAYS flees. Right after he ALWAYS lies.
Sara Salzman
"steve wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote:
> "Gord McFee" <gord....@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:agns7vomdi6mj8pbv...@4ax.com...
> > In <Orac-98455F.1...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>, on Sat, 22 Mar
> > 2003 21:14:38 GMT, Orac <Or...@wabcmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <pomcnWBaTdb...@comcast.com>,
> > > "steve wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Gord McFee" <gord....@rogers.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:f6dm7v47m0fgvael9...@4ax.com...
> > > > > In <dp6cnbdzqfS...@comcast.com>, on Thu, 20 Mar 2003
> 00:55:14
> > > > > -0500, "steve wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > Coward.
> > > > >
> > > > > Amazing how Sara scares the hell out of those types.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Notice how Dr. Yellowbelly has fled from this?
> > >
> > > Is anyone surprised that he did?
> >
> > No, we're not. :-)
>
>
> He ALWAYS flees. Right after he ALWAYS lies.
>
>
>
> > Visit the Holocaust History Project
> > http://www.holocaust-history.org
>
>
I'll still be there, though. Dr. Homeland will be hiding somewhere.
Sara
--
If Ernst Zundel is a refugee, Daffy Duck is Albert Einstein. Some
propositions are so ludicrous that they are a betrayal of common
sense and human dignity if allowed a moment's oxygen.
- REX MURPHY, The Globe and Mail
William Daffer
[snip]
> And this is what I mean when I say, proudly and defiantly, DEATH TO
> AMERICA!
Jesus, what a self-important little twit you are!
whd
--
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:18:49 +0100, in message
<3b9e...@news-uk.onetel.net.uk>, David E. Michael expressed support
for the craven cowards who hijacked four airliners, flying two into
the Twin Towers, one into the Pentagon and simply crashing the fourth,
with an attendant loss of life estimated in the thousands, with the
words:
"This afternoon a truly wonderful thing has happened . . . Today was
a glorious day. May there be many others like it."
For the complete post of this terrorist sympathizer, see:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3b9e5465%40news-uk.onetel.net.uk
steve wolk
> In article <ldydne8wyuW...@comcast.com>,
> "steve wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote:
>
> > "Gord McFee" <gord....@rogers.com> wrote in message
> > news:agns7vomdi6mj8pbv...@4ax.com...
> > > In <Orac-98455F.1...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>, on Sat, 22
Mar
> > > 2003 21:14:38 GMT, Orac <Or...@wabcmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <pomcnWBaTdb...@comcast.com>,
> > > > "steve wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "Gord McFee" <gord....@rogers.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:f6dm7v47m0fgvael9...@4ax.com...
> > > > > > In <dp6cnbdzqfS...@comcast.com>, on Thu, 20 Mar 2003
> > 00:55:14
> > > > > > -0500, "steve wolk" <Bar...@Seville.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > > Coward.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Amazing how Sara scares the hell out of those types.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Notice how Dr. Yellowbelly has fled from this?
> > > >
> > > > Is anyone surprised that he did?
> > >
> > > No, we're not. :-)
> >
> >
> > He ALWAYS flees. Right after he ALWAYS lies.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Visit the Holocaust History Project
> > > http://www.holocaust-history.org
> >
> >
>
> I'll still be there, though. Dr. Homeland will be hiding somewhere.
>
> Sara
About as far, I suspect, as one can get from London without leaving the
country. He'll probably be standing in front of something yellow so he can
blend in.