Not only the Nobel Prize winning Hayek and followed recently by Jonah Goldberg in his number one best selling book, "Liberal Fascism" but still another renown scholar claims that Fascism really has a Left Wing pedigree.
PJ O'Donovan
Published: February 26, 2008
Does Fascism Have a Liberal Pedigree?
Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman
When we hear the word "fascist," most of us think of Nazis, murderous
racists, and capitalist dictatorships. Jonah Goldberg, never shy with
his opinions, has just published a book called Liberal Fascism: The
Secret History of the American Left from Mussolini to the Politics of
Meaning, (Doubleday, 2007). He has revisited the origins of fascism
and its qualities and has come to the surprising conclusions that all
fascisms are politically Leftist, not conservative. My review of his
book is here, but for a more easily absorbed analysis, I offer
examples of fascists who bridge a range of political objectives.
* Terminology. The first totalitarian who named his party
"Fascist" was Mussolini in Italy in the 1920s. But the real ancestor
of his movement and of all that have come since was the French
Revolution which attempted to establish "A People's Revolution."
Marxists, Nazis, Russian Communists, Chinese Communists, and today's
Muslim extremists (modeled by the Iranian Islamic Revolution) all
share a common philosophy and practices, as do Leftist anarchist
activists. These may not seem alike, but they are all variants of the
same theme.
* Seducing the Youth. All of these groups know that to
dominate the future, you need to seduce the youth. They all need non-
thinking, enthusiastic and hormone-driven young men to be the foot
soldiers who will kill for them. Most also need young women to cheer
them on and to produce babies for the movement. Universities are
favorite recruiting grounds for half-educated youth with illusions of
knowing more than their parents. Muslim suicide murderers come out of
this recruitment.
* Utopian Ideologies. All the above preached (and preach) a
utopian vision of a "Brave New World" that would be led by a great
leader (or party) and would enshrine the "the people" rather than the
rulers of the past. All believed that their new worlds must be born in
blood - the blood of its former ruling classes and the blood of its
former religion. All believe in a dictatorship with absolute,
unquestioned control. Democracy is scorned as being weak, sloppy, and
obsolete, although some hold pretend elections.
* Right-wing or Left-Wing. The terms "Right wing" and "Left
wing" came out of the Marxist quarrel with its fellow fascisms (Russia
against the Italians and Germans) over whether their socialism would
be national or international. Communists wanted their movement to be
international, whereas the others (including Spanish fascism) wanted
national movements. Hitler's movement called itself National
Socialist, but wanted to conquer the rest of the world, not convert
it.
* Utopian Differences. Most of the socialist-based fascisms
believe in a brave new world of the future, one with no connections
with prior history. But there are religion-based fascisms such as
today's Islamists and a very small number of Christian radicals who
believe in an imaginary utopia of the past. Muslim extremists want to
reestablish the Islamic Caliphate - never a good institution even in
its beginnings. And a small number of Christian radicals want to
enforce their notion of virtue by killing abortion doctors and
restoring "good old religion."
* American Exceptionalism. Although we have had fascist
moments in our history (see book review), our institutions still
sustain the notion of individual rights and there is a native anti-
intellectualism that is suspicious of utopian political
centralization. Elements of all the horrors listed above are with us
now in groups that periodically pour into our universities and onto
our streets, but they are the exception and not the rule in American
life. We need to be aware of the stakes and protect our liberal
(liberty) democracy from those fascists who would poison it. We would
regret a "father knows best" type of government.
http://www.globalthink.net/global/bio.html
Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman
A Short Biography
Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman is a writer and historian who formerly taught
World History and Islamic Civilization at Golden Gate University in
San Francisco, where she was also Executive Director of the San
Francisco United Nations Association and was a frequent speaker for
the World Affairs Council and the Commonwealth Club....
Jean Smith
<2381b37c-4750-4cfb...@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
"PJ O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com> wrote:
> http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/index.php?id=1386736
Avoiding the definition of fascism must help. Socrates died for
corrupting the youth.
--
"I think, on balance, NAFTA has been good for New York and America"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJ0swdRvYgw http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
What have we done http://mwhodges.home.att.net/exchange_rate.htm
John Dean http://www.uctv.tv/search-details.asp?showID=13162
Dr. Barry Worthington
> http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/index.php?id=1386736
Why do you people have to keep on publicising this pile of junk?
>
> Published: February 26, 2008
>
> Does Fascism Have a Liberal Pedigree?
>
> Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman
>
> When we hear the word "fascist," most of us think of Nazis, murderous
> racists, and capitalist dictatorships. Jonah Goldberg, never shy with
> his opinions, has just published a book called Liberal Fascism: The
> Secret History of the American Left from Mussolini to the Politics of
> Meaning, (Doubleday, 2007).
Yes....it's a pile of unhistorical crap......
>He has revisited the origins of fascism
> and its qualities and has come to the surprising conclusions that all
> fascisms are politically Leftist, not conservative.
Indeed....he is a political illiterate.....
> My review of his
> book is here, but for a more easily absorbed analysis, I offer
> examples of fascists who bridge a range of political objectives.
>
> * Terminology. The first totalitarian who named his party
> "Fascist" was Mussolini in Italy in the 1920s. But the real ancestor
> of his movement and of all that have come since was the French
> Revolution which attempted to establish "A People's Revolution."
Actually, Mussolini owed most of his inspiration to Gabriele
D'Annunzio and the Futurist movement.....
> Marxists, Nazis, Russian Communists, Chinese Communists, and today's
> Muslim extremists (modeled by the Iranian Islamic Revolution) all
> share a common philosophy and practices, as do Leftist anarchist
> activists. These may not seem alike, but they are all variants of the
> same theme.
How can anyone make bizarre assertions like this without a shred of
evidence?
(Sh*te deleted....)
Dr. Barry Worthington
Earl Evleth
0aaebbba-818b-464a...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com, "Dr.
Barry Worthington" <sh...@abertay.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Mar 2, 9:32 pm, "PJ O'Donovan" <Xent...@aol.com> wrote:
>> http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/index.php?id=1386736
>
> Why do you people have to keep on publicising this pile of junk?
>
PJ is our junk yard dog.
PJ O'Donovan
Dr barry Worthington>
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/index.php?id=1386736
Published: February 26, 2008
Does Fascism Have a Liberal Pedigree?
Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman
http://www.globalthink.net/global/bio.html
Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman
A Short Biography
Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman is a writer and historian who formerly taught
World History and Islamic Civilization at Golden Gate University in
San Francisco, where she was also Executive Director of the San
Francisco United Nations Association and was a frequent speaker for
the World Affairs Council and the Commonwealth Club....
"Few are ready to recognize that the rise of fascism and naziism was
not a reaction against the socialist trends of the preceding period
but a necessary outcome of those tendencies. This is a truth which
most people were unwilling to see even when the similarities of many
of the repellent features of the internal regimes in communist Russia
and National Socialist Germany were widely recognized. As a result,
many who think themselves infinitely superior to the aberrations of
naziism, and sincerely hate all its manifestations, work at the same
time for ideals whose realization would lead straight to the abhorred
tyranny."
Frederick Hayek- Nobel prize winning Economist in his book "The Road
to Serfdom".
"Basically National Socialism and Marxism are the same."
Friedrich A. Hayek
Nobel Laureate
F. A. Voigt, after years of close observation as a foreign
correspondent prior to and during WW2, wrote that, "Marxism has led to
Fascism and National Socialism, because, in all essentials, it is
Fascism and National Socialism." After spending twelve years in Russia
as an American correspondent only to have his own socialist ideals
shattered, W.H. Chamberlin concluded "socialism is certainly to prove
... the road not to freedom, but to dictatorship and
counter-dictatorships, to civil war of the fiercest kind." According
to author John Toland, Hitler himself said, "We are socialists, we are
enemies of today's capitalistic economic ... system." But the children
of the lie, those on the modern left, know that perfectly well. The
idolaters of the collectivist icons Emperor Clinton and his Empress to
follow just want the next collectivist dictatorship to end up under
their control. Their god is power, not truth.
Can't you hear them barking, "Oh, but get real! We're not National
Socialists. We're International Socialists!" Well - excuse me. But if
we rub the sleep from our pretty little eyes, what do we remember of
International Socialism? Besides Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and Kim Ill
Sung of course. I know, I know. It's bad enough to have brought
Mussolini and Hitler into the argument, but completely unfair to bring
the litany of International Socialists into the picture as well. For
years, if you dared to point out liberal inconsistencies by analogy to
certain historic personalities, your own argument was painted an ad
hominem, illogical appeal to passion. But the times are a-changing.
Even ultraliberal Jewish Harvard law professor and O.J. Simpson
defender, Alan Dershowitz, publicly stated before an assembly at Yale
that he'd defend Adolph Hitler. Furthermore, he insisted, he'd win. So
relax and consider concert pianist Balint Bazsony, author of America's
30 Year War. He survived not only National Socialism under the
Germans, but International Socialism under the Stalinists as well. And
here's what he tells us about his years in America after escaping
collectivist Hungary.
"During the late 1960s, I watched in despair as my brilliantly gifted
[American] piano students suddenly began to speak as if someone had
replaced their brains with prerecorded tapes. They spoke in phrases -
repeated mechanically - which were neither the product of, nor
accessible to, intelligent consideration. At first, these tapes seemed
to contain only a few slogans about "love and peace." Fruitful
conversation became impossible, but that was merely regrettable. The
situation became alarming when the "tapes" began to include words and
phrases that had become familiar to me in Hungary during the Nazi and
Soviet occupations, and which contributed to the reasons for my
decision to escape. Worse yet, the words and phrases were soon
followed by practices of similar pedigree.
"Reactionary," "exploitation," "oppressor and oppressed," and
"redistribution" were some of the words taken straight from the
Marxist repertoire. The term "politically correct" first came to my
attention through the writings of Anton Semionovich Makarenko, Lenin's
expert on education. Adolf Hitler preferred the version "socially
correct." Then came the affirmative action forms which classified
people by ancestry - first signed into law in Nazi Germany - and the
preferential treatment of specific categories, introduced by the
Stalinist government in 1950."
That's all very well and good, but Bazsony's students were just
children of the sixties. So be serious. What could America under
Liberal Democracy possibly have in common with the Fascist,
dictatorial policies of National or International Socialism? Well not
much, I suppose. Unless you include centrally monopolized banking,
militantly enforced progressive income tax, the involuntary military
draft, affirmative action for special cultural, racial, or political
groups, oppressive regulation of the environment, oppressive
regulation of business, oppressive regulation of commerce, a call to
national service, a call for a national identity system, a call for
nationally monopolized health care, a progressively intense call for a
ban on private ownership of firearms, a call for state assisted
euthanasia, a call for legalizing postpartum infanticide (can you
imagine people dragging their toddlers down to the "State Euthanasia
Center for Baal Worshipers," complaining that "this brat's got a bad
attitude?"), a call for a national police force with Pentagon
assistance, the creation of statutes by centralized executive order,
nationalized public education emphasizing radical collectivist and
politically correct propaganda, a centralized and progressively
unaccountable central government, personal and real asset forfeiture
for all manner of infraction, interest bearing State-monopolized fiat
money, a two-tiered legal system (one emphasizing an apologetic waiver
for cultural icons and bureaucrats on the left, and quite another for
"conservatives" on the right and the common man), a phalanx of central
ministry "alphabet soup" agencies attacking everyone from licensed
physicians to health food store proprietors, political assassination,
government cover-ups, Gramscian destruction of dissenting traditional
culture, disregard for the constitutional rule of law by the appeal of
popular propaganda or "democratic" expediency, a shouting down of
dissenters and objectors, redefinition of political terms to suit the
power elite, a call for the popular globalization of these
"progressive" institutions, and - well I don't know. As I said, not
much. Except that every one of these proposals appears to be fact.
Joseph Farah recently reminded us that, "America is not slouching
toward totalitarianism, it is rushing headlong toward it." And if so,
are there any apologists that can sincerely argue that a people
rushing toward a totalitarian police state aren't seriously flirting
with that harlot we call Fascism? And if we are, then denial herself
is the brutal, silent, black leather-clad dominatrix of the entire
affair. History would suggest she is an indifferent whore, much to the
tragic sadness of those throughout the ages who insist on getting
involved with her. She's just as likely to strike down her most
powerful despots and ideological advocates as she is the powerless and
innocent.
Earl Evleth
a850e2ce-5698-4a25...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com, "PJ
O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com> wrote:
> <Why do you people have to keep on publicising this pile of junk?
>
> Dr barry Worthington>
You did not answer this PJ. Why this piece of junk.
leona...@gmail.com
On Mar 4, 10:57 am, Earl Evleth <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> On 4/03/08 16:45, in article
a850e2ce-5698-4a25-b8c9-bbeed001f...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com, "PJ
O'Donovan" <Xent...@aol.com> wrote:
> > <Why do you people have to keep on publicising this pile of junk?
> > Dr barry Worthington>
>
> You did not answer this PJ. Why this piece of junk.
** That proves that Evleth knows even less of political
science/politics than he does of climatology,
Barry Worthington, too
** ALL left wing politics are fascist. Fascism arose in
1919 from socialism. The Italian socialst party's
secretary general Benito Mussolini reorganized it at
the end of WWI. All other socialist parties are fascist
albeit under local names, Falange, Nazi, Democrat,
Social Democrat, Labour, New Democrat, Liberal,
Viet Cong, etc
Dr. Barry Worthington
> <Why do you people have to keep on publicising this pile of junk?
>
> Dr barry Worthington>
>
> http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/index.php?id=1386736
>
> Published: February 26, 2008
>
> Does Fascism Have a Liberal Pedigree?
>
> Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman
>
> http://www.globalthink.net/global/bio.html
>
> Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman
>
> A Short Biography
>
> Dr. Laina Farhat-Holzman is a writer and historian who formerly taught
> World History and Islamic Civilization at Golden Gate University in
> San Francisco, where she was also Executive Director of the San
> Francisco United Nations Association and was a frequent speaker for
> the World Affairs Council and the Commonwealth Club....
>
> "Few are ready to recognize that the rise of fascism and naziism was
> not a reaction against the socialist trends of the preceding period
> but a necessary outcome of those tendencies. This is a truth which
> most people were unwilling to see even when the similarities of many
> of the repellent features of the internal regimes in communist Russia
> and National Socialist Germany were widely recognized.
What similarities?
>As a result,
> many who think themselves infinitely superior to the aberrations of
> naziism, and sincerely hate all its manifestations, work at the same
> time for ideals whose realization would lead straight to the abhorred
> tyranny."
>
> Frederick Hayek- Nobel prize winning Economist in his book "The Road
> to Serfdom".
>
> "Basically National Socialism and Marxism are the same."
> Friedrich A. Hayek
> Nobel Laureate
Oh, it's Hayek! He did write some absolute corkers. Chickened out of a
debate with Keynes, as I recall.....
> F. A. Voigt,
I have never heard of him....
>after years of close observation as a foreign
> correspondent prior to and during WW2, wrote that, "Marxism has led to
> Fascism and National Socialism, because, in all essentials, it is
> Fascism and National Socialism."
Why did he think that?
>After spending twelve years in Russia
> as an American correspondent only to have his own socialist ideals
> shattered, W.H. Chamberlin concluded "socialism is certainly to prove
> ... the road not to freedom, but to dictatorship and
> counter-dictatorships, to civil war of the fiercest kind."
This quote doesn't mention fascism....
>According
> to author John Toland,
Not a historian, methinks....
>Hitler himself said, "We are socialists, we are
> enemies of today's capitalistic economic ... system."
When and who to? What was particularly socialist about Nazi Germany?
>But the children
> of the lie, those on the modern left, know that perfectly well.
Know what?
>The
> idolaters of the collectivist icons Emperor Clinton and his Empress to
> follow just want the next collectivist dictatorship to end up under
> their control. Their god is power, not truth.
If you think that Hillary Clinton is 'left wing', you have clearly
lost your marbles....
>
> Can't you hear them barking, "Oh, but get real! We're not National
> Socialists. We're International Socialists!"
Hillary said that??????
>Well - excuse me. But if
> we rub the sleep from our pretty little eyes, what do we remember of
> International Socialism? Besides Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and Kim Ill
> Sung of course.
You actually think that these people had anything in common?
> I know, I know. It's bad enough to have brought
> Mussolini and Hitler into the argument, but completely unfair to bring
> the litany of International Socialists into the picture as well. For
> years, if you dared to point out liberal inconsistencies by analogy to
> certain historic personalities, your own argument was painted an ad
> hominem, illogical appeal to passion. But the times are a-changing.
>
> Even ultraliberal Jewish Harvard law professor and O.J. Simpson
> defender, Alan Dershowitz, publicly stated before an assembly at Yale
> that he'd defend Adolph Hitler.
Perhaps he was making a point about legal ethics?
(Rest of gibberish snipped......life is too short...)
Is there any point to this posting? I mean, it just seems to tail
off......
Dr. Barry Worthington
Dr. Barry Worthington
wrote:
> ORIGINAL NEWSGROUPS RESTORED
>
> On Mar 4, 10:57 am, Earl Evleth <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:> On 4/03/08 16:45, in article
>
> a850e2ce-5698-4a25-b8c9-bbeed001f...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com, "PJ
>
> O'Donovan" <Xent...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > <Why do you people have to keep on publicising this pile of junk?
> > > Dr barry Worthington>
>
> > You did not answer this PJ. Why this piece of junk.
>
> ** That proves that Evleth knows even less of political
> science/politics than he does of climatology,
> Barry Worthington, too
Well, I used to teach history in a university, so what would I know?
> ** ALL left wing politics are fascist. Fascism arose in
> 1919 from socialism. The Italian socialst party's
> secretary general Benito Mussolini reorganized it at
> the end of WWI. All other socialist parties are fascist
> albeit under local names, Falange, Nazi, Democrat,
> Social Democrat, Labour, New Democrat, Liberal,
> Viet Cong, etc
Sorry, but you seem to be some political nutter. Your assertion is
completely delusional. It's also pointless, because you don't indicate
why you believe this to be so.
Dr. Barry Worthington
John Rennie
<leona...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:efda9efa-0f3b-444d...@x30g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
Oh well then - I'm a Fascist as well as a Communist. I've been fighting
myself all these years. What laugh this books appears to be.
Planet Visitor II
news:8sGdnaTXVJHwE1Da...@giganews.com...
Don't be so hard on yourself, John. Many of different persuasions
and ideologies insist they are fighting against what, in fact, they are a
part of. ELF would not consider itself fascist, or communist
Planet Visitor II
Official publisher of AADP Official dictionary
All new -- http://www.planetvisitor.name/dictionary.html
Planet Visitor II
Pot...
Kettle...
Pitch Black...
Dr. Barry Worthington
> "Earl Evleth" <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in messagenews:C3F32706.113C91%evl...@wanadoo.fr...
> > On 4/03/08 16:08, in article
> > Barry Worthington" <sh...@abertay.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> >> On Mar 2, 9:32 pm, "PJ O'Donovan" <Xent...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>>http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/index.php?id=1386736
>
> >> Why do you people have to keep on publicising this pile of junk?
>
> > PJ is our junk yard dog.
>
> Pot...
> Kettle...
> Pitch Black...
>
> Planet Visitor II
> Official publisher of AADP Official dictionary
> All new --http://www.planetvisitor.name/dictionary.html
Oh God! Who left the cupboard door open?
Dr. Barry Worthington
Earl Evleth
"Planet Visitor II" <na...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> PJ is our junk yard dog.
>>
>
> Pot...
> Kettle...
> Pitch Black...
How terrible clever of you, where did you get that cliché from?
Earl Evleth
683e38d4-f0ba-437c...@13g2000hsb.googlegroups.com, "Dr. Barry
Worthington" <sh...@abertay.ac.uk> wrote:
> Pot...
>> Kettle...
>> Pitch Black...
>>
>> Planet Visitor II
>> Official publisher of AADP Official dictionary
>> All new --http://www.planetvisitor.name/dictionary.html
>
> Oh God! Who left the cupboard door open?
>
> Dr. Barry Worthington
PV has a thing about Black. Pitch Black is the worst.
I personally like black especially ebony.
Donna Evleth
> From: "John Rennie" <john-...@talktalk.net>
> Newsgroups:
> alt.activism.death-penalty,talk.politics.misc,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,so
> c.retirement
> Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 18:01:19 -0000
> Subject: Re: Not only the Nobel Prize winning Hayek and followed recently by
> Jonah Goldberg in his number one best selling book, "Liberal Fascism" but
> still another renown scholar claims that Fascism really has a Left Wing
> pedigree.
I, too, am thrilled to learn that I am a Fascist. After living through
World War II, I thought that this was what I opposed. I bought all those
war bonds to fight Fascism. Oh well, what do I know?
Donna Evleth
>
>
PJ O'Donovan
<< Pot...
Kettle...
Pitch Black...
PJ>>
> How terrible clever of you, where did you get that cliché from?
Earl Evleth>
My God! ???"terrible clever". Where is your old lady nitpickin
grammarian of your wife? She can't be too far in that 73 square meter
flat of yours.
Terrible is an "adjective" that would be grammatically incorrect to
describe another adjective "clever:",
"Terribly" ,"clever" is gramatically correcr, moron
So much for the pseudointellectualism of the Evleths.
How do you get two computers in that tiny little place that can't even
fit a microwave let alone a refrigerator big enough to have one of
those new fangled freezers?.
No wonder you have to eat out all the time.
Maybe you have one computer in that tiny little place and share it.
How did you raise a daghter there in that tiny little place ? No
wonder she decided to be an American rather than an anti American
Frog.
yitzhak isaac goldstein
> "Terribly" ,"clever" is gramatically correcr, moron
ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
y.
--
Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein | 'gu-ay hey lihyote yehoudi'
'AADP's Left-Wing Jewish Intellectual'
Official AADP Website: http://alt-activism-death-penalty.org/
Planet Visitor II
stealing from welfare programs. Remember your words -- "a black
mama riding up in her Caddy to collect her payments making perhaps
$8000 a week from multiple collection"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/ba74b62305b637b9
Where did you get that from, Earl? A 1923 Southern racist newspaper
clipping?
Planet Visitor II
Donna, Donna, Donna. What did your husband say? -- "The danger
of fighting monsters is becoming monsters ourselves." - Evelth.
Using only that as his handle, and only mentioning "Earl" within
his comment. A comment from him that must have caused a
few monitors damage from coffee, or something stronger, as
he dared to come out with his words of -- "ask yourself what
Christ would do in a situation where he had the possiblity of
putting a man to death."
I mean, Hail Mary... if you can't believe Earl... who can you
believe???? He offered a warning to ANYONE daring to fight
Fascism, Nazism, Racism or even Jesus Christ. That's a tough
act to follow, so you should not be fighting anything, my dear...
lest you become what you oppose -- According to Earl's
Gospel 1:23. Hallelujah!! Just let it happen... no sense taking
chances according to Earl.
XOXOXO
Planet Visitor II
Official publisher of AADP Official dictionary
All new -- http://www.planetvisitor.name/dictionary.html
> Donna Evleth
>>
>>
>
Planet Visitor II
news:683e38d4-f0ba-437c...@13g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
You tell us. You're the one living in Alice in Wonderland, doc.
"Either the well was very deep, or she fell very slowly, for she had plenty
of time as she went down to look about her and to wonder what
was going to happen next. First, she tried to look down and make
out what she was coming to, but it was too dark to see anything;
then she looked at the sides of the well, and noticed that they were
filled with cupboards and book-shelves; here and there she saw
maps and pictures hung upon pegs. She took down a jar from one
of the shelves as she passed; it was labelled `ORANGE MARMALADE',
but to her great disappointment it was empty: she did not like to
drop the jar for fear of killing somebody, so managed to put it into
one of the cupboards as she fell past it." -- AAIW
Too bad your bookshelves are bare (or as Earl would say "bear")
Planet Visitor II
Official publisher of AADP Official dictionary
All new --http://www.planetvisitor.name/dictionary.html
Dr. Barry Worthington
Planet Visitor II
It beats the hell out of any of yours, Earl. BTW -- Have you
given any thought to (or as you'd say - "too") taking those English
lessons you so desperately need?
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
> << Pot...
> Kettle...
> Pitch Black...
>
> PJ>>
>
> > How terrible clever of you, where did you get that cliché from?
>
> Earl Evleth>
>
> My God! ???"terrible clever". Where is your old lady nitpickin
> grammarian of your wife? She can't be too far in that 73 square meter
> flat of yours.
>
> Terrible is an "adjective" that would be grammatically incorrect to
> describe another adjective "clever:",
The punctuation of the above alone is enough to make me laugh my
motherfucking arse off but the construction, "Where is your old lady
nitpickin grammarian of your wife" is ham-fisted enough to have me
literally retching with mirth.
When you learn to speak the language you might have a better chance of
being taken seriously.
>
> "Terribly" ,"clever" is gramatically correcr, moron
"Correct" is the "correcr" (sic) spelling in English, Peabrain.
[snip remaining monitor-punching rage]
yitzhak isaac goldstein
> "Earl Evleth" <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:C3F375C5.113D2F%evleth> > James ''Nazi Bastard' Noles <na...@earthlink.net> wrote ...
> >
> >>> PJ is our junk yard dog.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Pot...
> >> Kettle...
> >> Pitch Black...
> >
> >
> > How terrible clever of you, where did you get that cliché from?
>
> It beats the hell out of any of yours, Earl. BTW -- Have you
> given any thought to (or as you'd say - "too") taking those English
> lessons you so desperately need?
Shouldn't that be 'lesson's' (sic), Nazi Noles..?
ROFLMAO !!!!!!!
yitzhak isaac goldstein
@wanadoo.fr...
> > On 4/03/08 21:45, in article
> > 683e38d4-f0ba-437c...@13g2000hsb.googlegroups.com, "Dr. Barry
> > Worthington" <sh...@abertay.ac.uk> wrote:
> >> Pot...
> >>> Kettle...
> >>> Pitch Black...
> >>>
> >>> Planet Visitor II
> >>> Official publisher of AADP Official dictionary
> >>> All new --http://www.planetvisitor.name/dictionary.html
> >>
> >> Oh God! Who left the cupboard door open?
> >>
> >> Dr. Barry Worthington
> >
> > PV has a thing about Black. Pitch Black is the worst.
> >
> > I personally like black especially ebony.
> >
> As I recall you implied that Black Americans are only interested in
> stealing from welfare programs. Remember your words -- "a black
> mama riding up in her Caddy to collect her payments making perhaps
> $8000 a week from multiple collection"
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/ba74b62305b637b9
One of Nazi Noles's most egregious lies to date. He relies on that post
by Earl being relatively long, and so most people won't verify Naz's
scummy lie.
What Earl in fact wrote was ...
'Ronnie`s Welfare Queen story (this was of a black mama riding
up in her Caddy to collect her payments making perhaps $8000
a week from multiple collection) was investigated by journalists
and shown to be an exaggeration'
The preceding paragraph starts with ...
'Apparently PV actually believes Ronnie Reagan's Welfare Queen
stories'
.. this, and the paragraph that I have quoted above making it abundantly
clear that Earl was quoting and _criticising_ someone else's opinions.
It seems that in Scum-Cuntland, it's no longer necessary to agree with
someone's words, to be accused of 'supporting' them. All it takes is to
mention them, and Nazi Noles is so desperate to demonise the opinions of
those whom he cannot possibly defeat with debate, that he will claim you
'agree' with them.
Poor Naz'. When does he plan to score a point? I feel like a bit of a
bully, hammering him 'senseful' all the time.
Earl Evleth
"yitzhak isaac goldstein" <yit...@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> James ''Nazi Bastard' Noles <na...@earthlink.net> wrote ...
>> "Earl Evleth" <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
>> news:C3F376C2.113D32%evleth
>
> One of Nazi Noles's most egregious lies to date. He relies on that post
> by Earl being relatively long, and so most people won't verify Naz's
> scummy lie.
>
> What Earl in fact wrote was ...
>
> 'Ronnie`s Welfare Queen story (this was of a black mama riding
> up in her Caddy to collect her payments making perhaps $8000
> a week from multiple collection) was investigated by journalists
> and shown to be an exaggeration'
>
What is implicit in the spread of the Welfare Queen story was
that is was racist in its message. In fact the message in
America was that mainly Blacks collect welfare and most
of cheat when they do so. In fact Whites outnumber Blacks
on welfare.
One can find examples of those who cheat on welfare big time.
There are small time cheats too, statistics on the expenditures
of the poor show they spend more money than they take it. As in
France there is a marché noir of those who work and collect at the
same time.
BUT THE BIG TIME cheaters are the capitalists, I posted the
following example a couple of years ago---there are others.
Like Boeing.
****
Justice Dept. Sues Tenet Over Medicare
Fri Jan 10, 8:13 AM ET
LOS ANGELES - Tenet Healthcare deliberately overcharged Medicare so it could
inflate revenues, the Justice Department (news - web sites) alleged in a
lawsuit that seeks more than $300 million from the nation's second-largest
hospital chain.
The suit, filed Thursday, accuses the Santa Barbara, Calif.-based company of
improperly assigning diagnosis codes for hospital stays between 1992 and
1998 in order to be paid higher reimbursements than it was entitled to.
The government is seeking three times the amount of the alleged
overpayments, which could run as high as $323 million.
Tenet said it expected the action after settlement talks broke down
Wednesday. The company previously reached a $17 million settlement with the
Department of Justice (news - web sites) over similar allegations involving
lab tests.
"We had been far apart in our discussions with the Department of Justice and
we're sorry we didn't come to a fair and equitable agreement," Tenet
spokesman Steven Campanini said. "We dispute many of their claims."
The alleged violations occurred at hospitals that were owned by various
corporate parents now owned by Tenet, including National Medical
Enterprises
and American Medical Holdings. In 1995, National Medical merged with
American Medical and changed its name to Tenet Healthcare. Tenet now owns
114 acute-care hospitals in 16 states.
The chain has been battered by a series of investigations and settlements
involving its billing practices.
In November, federal officials launched an audit of Tenet's Medicare
billings relating to supplemental or "outlier" payments. Such payments are
made to hospitals for expenses above fixed reimbursements. Over the past
three years, Tenet's share has run far above state and federal averages.
At least one analyst suspects Thursday's lawsuit may be connected to the
company's other problems.
"All these things are interrelated," said Nancy Weaver, an analyst with
investment bank Stephens Inc. "Once the government feels like they have a
bad actor in the industry, there's this pile-on effect."
Weaver said Tenet could afford the maximum penalty if it were to lose the
case, or settle it. The company has a strong balance sheet and is well
positioned to benefit from future health care trends, she said.
"They will have to pay some amount of money in order to get back into the
good graces of the regulators," she added. "Whether it will take a
management change, I don't know. I think we're at the beginning of a long
road."
Since October, Tenet's shares have plunged nearly 70 percent amid
allegations that two doctors at a Redding, Calif. hospital performed
hundreds of unnecessary heart surgeries, and that doctors at a hospital in
San Diego may have paid to recruit patients.
Federal officials have raided both hospitals as part of ongoing
investigations that have thus far focused on the doctors, not the Tenet
facilities. No charges have been filed.
PJ O'Donovan
fighting
myself all these years.
John Rennie>>
< I, too, am thrilled to learn that I am a Fascist. After living
through
World War II, I thought that this was what I opposed. I bought all
those
war bonds to fightFascism. Oh well, what do I know?
DonnaEvleth>
WWII in Europe was basically a war fought between two versions of
Socialism, National Socialism and International Socialism.
For the Marxist fundamentalist it was a "very good war" because we
saved the asses of their beloved Bolsheviks.
If hadn't been for that useful idiot for the Bolsheviks, Roosevelt,
and his "lend lease", Hitler would have obliterated the Bolsheviks and
we
should have let Hitler do it and avoided a 50 year cold war with the
Bolsheviks that followed.
In 1963, the Bolshevik General Zhukov stated :
"It is now said that the allies never helped us........ However, one
cannot deny that the Americans gave us so much material, without which
we could not have formed our reserves and could not have continued the
war." "And today it seems as though we had all this ourselves in
abundance".
(From the Journal of Slavic Military Studies, Vol. 7, No. 3, Sept.
1994, pp567-586
Of course, to historically revisionist Marxists worldwide FDR was a
hero
because he got us into a war on the side of the Bolsheviks in Hitler's
struggle
with Bolshevism and therefore it was a "good war".
Read "The Fifties" by David Halberstam, no right wing zealot by any
stretch.
On page 9 Halberstam says in describing the political scenario in
1948:
"many thought Roosevelt had dragged us "into the wrong war: wrong
allies, wrong enemies, wrong outcome". A peace that permitted Soviet
hegemony over Eastern Europe was unacceptable to many Americans."
yitzhak isaac goldstein
> On 5/03/08 13:02, in article 1idbqpj.nigxe614aybptN%yit...@yahoo.fr,
> "yitzhak isaac goldstein" <yit...@yahoo.fr> wrote:
>
> > James ''Nazi Bastard' Noles <na...@earthlink.net> wrote ...
> >> "Earl Evleth" <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
> >> news:C3F376C2.113D32%evleth
>
> >
> > One of Nazi Noles's most egregious lies to date. He relies on that post
> > by Earl being relatively long, and so most people won't verify Naz's
> > scummy lie.
> >
> > What Earl in fact wrote was ...
> >
> > 'Ronnie`s Welfare Queen story (this was of a black mama riding
> > up in her Caddy to collect her payments making perhaps $8000
> > a week from multiple collection) was investigated by journalists
> > and shown to be an exaggeration'
> >
>
> What is implicit in the spread of the Welfare Queen story was
> that is was racist in its message. In fact the message in
> America was that mainly Blacks collect welfare and most
> of cheat when they do so. In fact Whites outnumber Blacks
> on welfare.
Yes, but what is amusing is to see the birth 'in real time' of The
FuckWit Patented Gimmick (TM) N° 166, the 'the lie becomes the truth'
gimmick. Nazi Scum-Cunt Noles (NSCN) has now claimed that you agreed
with Reagan's opinion. Of course, you didn't, but as most of NN's
accusations will probably be posted from 'truth' and thus neither read
nor rebutted, he'll feel entitled in a few days to write, 'you "insist"
[sic] that ...'
Poor Naz'. It can't be easy, being thrashed every day. No wonder he's
always so angry.
Donna Evleth
> From: "PJ O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com>
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
> Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 07:09:23 -0800 (PST)
> Subject: Re: Not only the Nobel Prize winning Hayek and followed recently by
> Jonah Goldberg in his number one best selling book, "Liberal Fascism" but
> still another renown scholar claims that Fascism really has a Left Wing
> pedigree.
>
> Of course, to historically revisionist Marxists worldwide FDR was a
> hero
> because he got us into a war on the side of the Bolsheviks in Hitler's
> struggle
> with Bolshevism and therefore it was a "good war".
PJ, this is not the way I knew it. We got into World War II because Japan
attacked us at Pearl Harbor. You should remember Pearl Harbor. I remember
that day vividly. Then Hitler, who had a pact with Japan, declared war on
the US. However much Roosevelt may have wanted to come to the aid of allies
like Britain in 1940, and there is ample evidence of this, he knew there was
little hope of doing that given the temper of the time in the US. They
wanted to stay out of European engagements, because they remembered World
War I.
Hitler had declared war on Russia in June of 1941. If your theory about
Roosevelt is correct, why didn't he rush us into war then, if he so wanted
to side with the Bolsheviks? Why did he wait until Japan attacked us?
Donna Evleth
John Rennie
One or two delusional Americans have written books to the effect that
Roosevelt either knew or even actively encourage the Japanese to attack
Pearl Harbour. It's possible that these stupid people did obtain copies
of contingency plans of a planned Japanese attack. Such plans are
essential for all military chiefs. It was only a stroke of luck that
Admiral Halsey decided to take out the American carriers shortly before the
attack. If they had been sunk what was left of the American Pacific fleet
would have been too crippled to hit back until largely replaced. The very
idea that Roosevelt could have contemplated such a situation is beyond
contempt.
I pointed out to our ignorant peejay a few years ago that after Hitler
declared war it was the Germans who took the first offensive actions against
theAmericans when they sunk unprotected cargo vessels along the East coast.
His above remarks coupled with many made along the years convinces me that
peejay is pro-Nazi although he himself doesn't know it. That's not a
surprise - he is afterall our prize buffoon. Compared with him Jiggy is an
Einstein.
PJ O'Donovan
about
Roosevelt is correct, why didn't he rush us into war then, if he so
wanted
to side with the Bolsheviks? Why did he wait until Japan attacked
us?
Donna Evleth>
Roosevelt did in fact enter the war preemptively shortly after Hitler
declared war on
the Bolsheviks,
Read the German declaration of war and then try to spin there was
an absence of preemptive provocation on our part before Germany
declared war on the US. To my knowledge none of the allegations
advanced in the German declaration of war have ever been disputed.
© 1997 The Avalon Project.
The Avalon Project : The German Declaration of War with the United
States : December 11, 1941
The text of the note which the German representatives handed to Mr.
Ray
Atherton, Chief of the European Division of the State Department, at
9:30 A.M., December 11, the original of which had been delivered the
morning of December 11 to the American Charge d'Affaires in Berlin,
follows:
MR. CHARGE D'AFFAIRES:
The Government of the United States having violated in the most
flagrant manner and in ever increasing measure all rules of neutrality
in favor of the adversaries of Germany and having continually been
guilty of the most severe provocations toward Germany ever since the
outbreak of the European war, provoked by the British declaration of
war against Germany on September 3, 1939, has finally resorted to open
military acts of aggression.
On September 11, 1941, the President of the United States publicly
declared that he had ordered the American Navy and Air Force to shoot
on sight at any German war vessel. In his speech of October 27, 1941,
he once more expressly affirmed that this order was in force. Acting
under this order, vessels of the American Navy, since early September
1941, have systematically attacked German naval forces. Thus, American
destroyers, as for instance the Greer, the Kearney and the Reuben
James, have opened fire on German sub-marines according to plan. The
Secretary of the American Navy, Mr. Knox, himself confirmed
that-American destroyers attacked German submarines.
Furthermore, the naval forces of the United States, under order of
their Government and contrary to international law have treated and
seized German merchant vessels on the high seas as enemy ships.
The German Government therefore establishes the following facts:
Although Germany on her part has strictly adhered to the rules of
international law in her relations with the United States during every
period of the present war, the Government of the United States from
initial violations of neutrality has finally proceeded to open acts of
war against Germany. The Government of the United States has thereby
virtually created a state of war.
The German Government, consequently, discontinues diplomatic relations
with the United States of America and declares that under these
circumstances brought about by President Roosevelt Germany too, as
from
today, considers herself as being in a state of war with the United
States of America.
Accept, Mr. Charge d'Affaires, the expression of my high
consideration.
December 11, 1941.
RIBBENTROP.
Source:
Department of State Bulletin, December 13, 1941.
Washington, DC : Government Printing Office, 1941http://sangha.net/
messengers/roosevelt.htm
Even the Roosevelt memorial states without equivocation that
Roosevelt was preeminently provocative with Germany and "at war"
before Germany declared war on the US within weeks of Hitler going to
war against the Bolsheviks in the spring of 1941.
FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT MEMORIAL
"...Roosevelt extended the
privileges of lend-lease to the USSR. Thus, the United States was
virtually at war in the spring and summer of 1941, sending aid to
Britain and the USSR and even patrolling the Atlantic Ocean with the
U.S. Navy..."
TRUTH
>
>> James Noles <na...@earthlink.net> wrote ...
>>> "Earl Evleth" <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
>>> news:C3F376C2.113D32%evleth
>
>>
>> One of Nazi Noles's most egregious lies to date. He relies on that post
>> by Earl being relatively long, and so most people won't verify Naz's
>> scummy lie.
>>
>> What Earl in fact wrote was ...
>>
>> 'Ronnie`s Welfare Queen story (this was of a black mama riding
>> up in her Caddy to collect her payments making perhaps $8000
>> a week from multiple collection) was investigated by journalists
>> and shown to be an exaggeration'
>>
>
> What is implicit in the spread of the Welfare Queen story was
> that is was racist in its message.
And you spread that message, Earl.
> In fact the message in
> America was that mainly Blacks collect welfare and most
> of cheat when they do so.
And you spread that message, Earl.
> In fact Whites outnumber Blacks on welfare.
And you purposely hid that message, Earl.
<clipped Earl's anti-American arm-waving, while having proven himself
a racist bigot>
Q: Why do you spend so much time sucking up to Desmond?
A: Because the two of you need each other.
You can't stop sucking up to the guy who insisted the Jews are "legally
inhuman," and "the Jewish victims of the Holocaust were no different
than common executed murderers." Do you really need someone to
help you so bad.... that you lower yourself to siding with a Nazi
who has stated that he believes all individuals have a "supreme
sovereign right to their body," [1] which no state entity can LAWFULLY
take away, UNLESS that state is the Nazi state, and the individual is
Jewish? [2] Then he insists the Holocaust was legal, and the Nazis
could thus LAWFULLY take away that sovereign right from the
Jews! This is not rocket science, Earl. Read his two comments.
Ask yourself why he hates the Jews so much. Try to defend your Nazi
friend. Remember... you are known by the company you keep.
I truly feel sorry for you, and I feel even more sorry for Donna, having
to live with you.
[1] "The individual enjoys supreme sovereignty over his or
her body. No state entity, no person may lawfully interfere with
that right, or with that sovereignty." Desmond Coughlan See --
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/5ec82d5e1ac3f529
[2] "'The Holocaust' is a term used to refer to the legal execution
of 6,000,000 Jews in the Second World War." Desmond Coughlan
See --
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/88e428e1da2cf26f'
Just look at some of his own comments that he has demanded Google
remove because even he knows they constitute support for Nazi
doctrine, or the Holocaust. I've had to keep them recorded, because
he recognizes himself as a Nazi in the mirror. But he's your buddy --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_Fucktard_Wiesenthal_comment.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_Fucktard_claims_Jews_are_Inhuman.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_Fucktard_insists_Auschwitz_wouldn't_execute_elderly.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_Wrongly_Released_Murderer.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_claims_Europe_moral_with_Holocaust.htm
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_claims_Right_to_Life_cannot_be_lawfully_taken_away.jpg
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_claims_Shoah_not_evil.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_commits_waterboard_torture.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_insists_everyone_could_legally_kill_Jews_in_WWII.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_says_Holocaust_was_just.html
You really need help from a mental professional, Earl. Seriously...
at least have a physical examination of your cognitive process,
since there is something going on there that should disturb you,
if you were of sound mind. I simply cannot believe, despite
all the evidence to the contrary, that you are so supportive of
a person who has made such comments in support of Nazi
doctrine and the Holocaust, simply because he is manipulating
your mind.
TRUTH
All new - http://www.planetvisitor.name/dictionary.html
TRUTH
news:1idbq09.1s6bmlh13vz4a0N%yit...@yahoo.fr...
> James Noles <na...@earthlink.net> wrote ...
>> "Earl Evleth" <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:C3F375C5.113D2F%evleth
> @wanadoo.fr...
>> > On 4/03/08 20:33, in article I9udnRtG1OvWMlDa...@giganews.com,
>> >
>> >>> PJ is our junk yard dog.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Pot...
>> >> Kettle...
>> >> Pitch Black...
>> >
>> >
>> > How terrible clever of you, where did you get that cliché from?
>>
>> It beats the hell out of any of yours, Earl. BTW -- Have you
>> given any thought to (or as you'd say - "too") taking those English
>> lessons you so desperately need?
>
> Shouldn't that be 'lesson's' (sic), Nazi Noles..?
Only if your growth was stunted in the third grade, as yours (or
as you'd say -- "your's") was stunted, Nazi fucktard.
> ROFLMAO !!!!!!!
Desmond's words -- "Auschwitz wouldn't execute a 72-year-old
man..."
Shouldn't that be "did"? Desmond doesn't think so.
TRUTH
All new - http://www.planetvisitor.name/dictionary.html
|TRUTH HAS BEEN KILL FILED BY COUGHLAN
|GOD'S IN HIS HEAVEN
|ALL'S RIGHT WITH THE WORLD
> y.
Proof that Desmond Coughlan, who currently has taken the handle "Yitzhak
Goldstein" as a parody insult of a Jewish name, is a Nazi sympathizer. See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_Fucktard_Perfect_Equivalents.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_Fucktard_Wiesenthal_comment.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_Fucktard_claims_Jews_are_Inhuman.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_Fucktard_insists_Auschwitz_wouldn't_execute_elderly.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_Wrongly_Released_Murderer.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_claims_Europe_moral_with_Holocaust.htm
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_claims_Right_to_Life_cannot_be_lawfully_taken_away.jpg
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_claims_Shoah_not_evil.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_commits_waterboard_torture.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_insists_everyone_could_legally_kill_Jews_in_WWII.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_says_Holocaust_was_just.html
And see how he managed to claim that there was no Holocaust in Europe. See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_states_Poland_not_in_Europe.html
If Poland is not in Europe... well... there you go, folks... Europe is cleansed of
anything to do with killing Jews in the Holocaust.
Planet Visitor II
<yit...@yahoo.fr> wrote in message news:1idbqpj.nigxe614aybptN%yit...@yahoo.fr...
> James Noles <na...@earthlink.net> wrote ...
>> "Earl Evleth" <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:C3F376C2.113D32%evleth
> @wanadoo.fr...
>> > On 4/03/08 21:45, in article
>> > 683e38d4-f0ba-437c...@13g2000hsb.googlegroups.com, "Dr. Barry
>> > Worthington" <sh...@abertay.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> >> Pot...
>> >>> Kettle...
>> >>> Pitch Black...
>> >>>
>> >>> Planet Visitor II
>> >>> Official publisher of AADP Official dictionary
>> >>> All new --http://www.planetvisitor.name/dictionary.html
>> >>
>> >> Oh God! Who left the cupboard door open?
>> >>
>> >> Dr. Barry Worthington
>> >
>> > PV has a thing about Black. Pitch Black is the worst.
>> >
>> > I personally like black especially ebony.
>> >
>> As I recall you implied that Black Americans are only interested in
>> stealing from welfare programs. Remember your words -- "a black
>> mama riding up in her Caddy to collect her payments making perhaps
>> $8000 a week from multiple collection"
>> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/ba74b62305b637b9
>
> One of Nazi Noles's most egregious lies to date. He relies on that post
> by Earl being relatively long, and so most people won't verify Naz's
> scummy lie.
If you expect to defend those words from Earl, or argue that they
are not racist in and of themselves. you'll need to show a legitimate
reference to a source using the words "Black mama riding up in
her Caddy," Nazi fucktard.
> What Earl in fact wrote was ...
>
> 'Ronnie`s Welfare Queen story (this was of a black mama riding
> up in her Caddy to collect her payments making perhaps $8000
> a week from multiple collection) was investigated by journalists
> and shown to be an exaggeration'
Exactly. Now where did he get those exact words, if they are not
of his own invention? What newspaper or article that mentioned
this supposed rip-off of the welfare system, used the term "Black
mama riding up in her caddy," to describe the person or persons
who were supposedly ripping off the welfare system? But of course
you don't see those words as offensive to Black Americans, since
you are the one who, not once, but twice, insisted that if you were to
go to the U.S. from "crime-free Europe" (where you have been
robbed, assaulted and had your life threatened as you have reported
to AADP), you would be sure to be robbed at gun-point by no one
other than a Black American, who would say when robbing you --
"Gimmie da money, honkey mothafucka, oh ah toast yo ass !!'" See -
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/45f62f7879a8b34e
Now please don't try to stretch our credibility by insisting if you
were to be robbed by a WHITE American, he would call you a
"honkey"? In fact, if robbing you, only a Black would call you a
"honkey," given you are White.
But what the hell... all we need is the proof that you supported
the genocide of Black African Tutsis, as you called it "the wonderful
1981 election victory" of Mitterand, who went on to support with
arms and training the genocide of Black Africans in Rwanda.
Mitterand, who even dismissed Blacks as irrelevant, in his words
"In such countries, genocide is not too important." Your hero...
see what he accomplished --
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/europe/mitterrands-role-revealed-in-rwandan-genocide-warning-455637.html
and -
http://www.eursoc.com/news/fullstory.php/aid/1799/_Genocide_Is_Not_Too_Important_.html
and
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20070703/ai_n19339576
and --
http://www.genocidemadeinfrance.com/spip.php?article12
and --
http://www.dailymotion.com/cluster/politics/tag/guerre/video/x475w2_genocide-made-in-france-chez-drouot_politics?from=rss
> The preceding paragraph starts with ...
>
> 'Apparently PV actually believes Ronnie Reagan's Welfare Queen
> stories'
So where did Ronald Reagan, his staff, any press release, any
newspaper article, any magazine article, or any book written
about the subject, use the words Earl used of "Black Mama riding up
in her caddy"?
ROTFLMAO... That comment is as racist as they come. Meant
to directly insult Blacks through insinuation and a filthy reference.
Come on.. who was he quoting? Just tell me WHERE he obtained
those words if they are not his? David Duke?? Your hero, Pat
Robertson??? Come on.... cough it up... Nazi fucktard.
<fx: desi runs from the room screaming "this is my last monitor...
I can't ram my fist through my LAST monitor!!!!">
> .. this, and the paragraph that I have quoted above making it abundantly
> clear that Earl was quoting and _criticising_ someone else's opinions.
Quoting WHO???? Give me a name and a reference.
*deathly silence* The Nazi fucktard realizes he has been had.
<clip desi's senseless defense of a racist comment>
Hey, desi... Stormfront called... they're missing you and Earl.
TRUTH
All new - http://www.planetvisitor.name/dictionary.html
>
TRUTH
bombers to murder Jews" Coughlan <yit...@yahoo.fr> wrote in message
news:1idc0am.1ptiwhpllcug2N%yit...@yahoo.fr...
> Earl Evleth <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>
>> On 5/03/08 13:02, in article 1idbqpj.nigxe614aybptN%yit...@yahoo.fr,
>>
>> > James Noles <na...@earthlink.net> wrote ...
>> >> "Earl Evleth" <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
>> >> news:C3F376C2.113D32%evleth
>>
>> >
>> > One of Nazi Noles's most egregious lies to date. He relies on that post
>> > by Earl being relatively long, and so most people won't verify Naz's
>> > scummy lie.
>> >
>> > What Earl in fact wrote was ...
>> >
>> > 'Ronnie`s Welfare Queen story (this was of a black mama riding
>> > up in her Caddy to collect her payments making perhaps $8000
>> > a week from multiple collection) was investigated by journalists
>> > and shown to be an exaggeration'
Sure looks like he's blaming a "Black mama riding up in her Caddy" for
ripping off the welfare system." It's the same kind of "retraction" (sic) one
would find on the front page of a racist Southern newspaper in the
1930s. He certainly wasn't quoting anyone in particular. He was
determined to mention it was a "Black mama." Nor did Reagan
ever use the term "Black mama riding up in her caddy." That was
Earl's invention. I am quite certain that neither he nor you can find
any reference using those words in any newspaper or article anywhere.
>>
>> What is implicit in the spread of the Welfare Queen story was
>> that is was racist in its message.
And Earl spread it around.
>> In fact the message in
>> America was that mainly Blacks collect welfare and most
>> of cheat when they do so. In fact Whites outnumber Blacks
>> on welfare.
Funny Earl didn't mention that when he screamed about a "Black
mama." Those two words by themselves are racially offensive,
and were invented in AADP by Earl, who has no source to
claim for those two words of his.
> Yes, but what is amusing is to see the birth 'in real time' of The
> FuckWit Patented Gimmick (TM) N° 166, the 'the lie becomes the truth'
> gimmick. Nazi Scum-Cunt Noles (NSCN) has now claimed that you agreed
> with Reagan's opinion.
Where in the fuck did you ever come up with "Reagan's opinion"?
Show me one fucking reference from him where he used the term
"Black mama," as Earl used it. Just ONE... you racist, Jew-hating
motherfucker.
<fx: desi squeals... "Oh, fuck... now I'm in the shitter">
> Of course, you didn't, but as most of NN's
> accusations will probably be posted from 'truth' and thus neither read
> nor rebutted, he'll feel entitled in a few days to write, 'you "insist"
> [sic] that ...'
ROTFLMAO. All you have to do is claim you now read the TRUTH.
Hiding from it... doesn't make it go away, Nazi fucktard.
> Poor Naz'. It can't be easy, being thrashed every day. No wonder he's
> always so angry.
I find the two of you are mentally unstable in your hate for the U.S., and you...
you are beneath scorn. You are beneath anger. You have the mental mind
set of a serial killer, and need to be locked away deep with a straightjack,
being fed by a guard.
Somewhere there is a ladder missing a Nazi climbing up to drop that
Zyklon-B. And you must be searching for it hopelessly.
Have a nice day... Nazi fucktard.
Earl Evleth
f6bfca32-6cfe-4739...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com, "PJ
O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com> wrote:
> Roosevelt did in fact enter the war preemptively shortly after Hitler
> declared war on the Bolsheviks,
There was no state of war between Germany and the US before Hitler
declared it.
PJ O'Donovan
declared it.
Earl Evleth>
Even the Roosevelt memorial states without equivocation that
Roosevelt was preeminently provocative with Germany and "at war"
before Germany declared war on the US within weeks of Hitler going to
war against the Bolsheviks in the spring of 1941.
FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT MEMORIAL
"...Roosevelt extended the
privileges of lend-lease to the USSR. Thus, the United States was
virtually at war in the spring and summer of 1941, sending aid to
Britain and the USSR and even patrolling the Atlantic Ocean with the
U.S. Navy..."
virtual: adj., being such in force or effect....
virtually: adv., essentially although not foemally...
The Random House College Dictionary
Earl Evleth
c853996a-2873-4f31...@y77g2000hsy.googlegroups.com, "PJ
O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com> wrote:
I repeat
> <There was no state of war between Germany and the US before Hitler
> declared it.
> Earl Evleth>
This is history, not in its revisionist form
******
http://www.law.ou.edu/ushistory/germwar.shtml
US Historical Documents
US Declaration of War against Germany
December 11, 1941
The President's Message
To the Congress of the United States:
On the morning of Dec. 11 the Government of Germany, pursuing its course of
world conquest, declared war against the United States. The long-known and
the long-expected has thus taken place. The forces endeavoring to enslave
the entire world now are moving toward this hemisphere. Never before has
there been a greater challenge to life, liberty and civilization. Delay
invites great danger. Rapid and united effort by all of the peoples of the
world who are determined to remain free will insure a world victory of the
forces of justice and of righteousness over the forces of savagery and of
barbarism. Italy also has declared war against the United States.
I therefore request the Congress to recognize a state of war between the
United States and Germany, and between the United States and Italy.
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Donna Evleth
> From: "PJ O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com>
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 04:04:32 -0800 (PST)
> Subject: Re: Not only the Nobel Prize winning Hayek and followed recently by
> Jonah Goldberg in his number one best selling book, "Liberal Fascism" but
> still another renown scholar claims that Fascism really has a Left Wing
> pedigree.
>
PJ, you spend too much time in the virtual world. "Virtually at war" is not
the same as a declaration of war, no matter how you try to spin it. Germany
declared war on the United States after Japan attacked at Pearl Harbor.
That was where reality took over from the virtual.
Donna Evleth
>
>
PJ O'Donovan
the same as a declaration of war, no matter how you try to spin it.
Donna Evleth>
It is not my "spin" but published "spin" by scholars on the subject.
What have you published covering the events leading up to the American
war with Germany in WWII
I doubt you will bother to read the following published by a well
known Socialist scholar and writer but I'll post it anyhow and I'll
repost 2 sections contained therein.
"..12. The orders to American warships to shoot at sight at German
submarines, formally announced on September 11.
13. The beginning of actual hostilities may be dated from this time
rather than from the German declaration of war, which followed Pearl
Harbor...."
How Franklin Roosevelt Lied America Into War
by William Henry Chamberlin
William Henry Chamberlin
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
William Henry Chamberlin (1897-1969) was an American historian and
journalist. He was the author of several books about the Cold War,
Communism and US foreign policy, the most famous of which was The
Russian Revolution 1917-1921 (1935). Chamberlin wrote the book whilst
stationed in Russia between 1922-34 as the Moscow correspondent of The
Christian Science Monitor.
[edit] Early Life and Education
Chamberlin was born in Brooklyn and educated in Pennsylvania schools
and later at Haverford College. At the age of twenty five he moved to
Greenwich Village and was deeply affected by the cultural bohemianism
and Bolshevik politics there. He worked for Heywood Broun the book
editor of the New York Tribune. He also published under the pseudonym
of A.C. Freeman and was a socialist pacifist, albeit one who supported
the Communists in the USSR. (von Mohrenschildt 1970).
[edit]
Books
* America's Second Crusade. Chicago: Regnery, 1962.
* Appeasement: Road to War. 1962
* Beyond Containment. Chicago: Regnery, 1983.
* Collectivism: A False Utopia
* The Confessions of an Individualist (1940).
* The German Phoenix (1965)
* Japan Over Asia
* The Russian Revolution 1917-1921 (1935).
* Russia's Iron Age
* Soviet Planned Economic Order
* Soviet Russia: A Living Record and a History Little, Brown &
Company, 1930
* World Order or Chaos
How Franklin Roosevelt Lied America Into War
by William Henry Chamberlin
"According to his own official statements, repeated on many occasions,
and with special emphasis when the presidential election of 1940 was
at
stake, Franklin D. Roosevelt's policy after the outbreak of the war in
Europe in 1939 was dominated by one overriding thought: how to keep
the
United States at peace. One of the President's first actions after the
beginning of hostilities was to call Congress into special session and
ask for the repeal of the embargo on the sales of arms to belligerent
powers, which was part of the existing neutrality legislation. He
based
his appeal on the argument that this move would help to keep the
United
States at peace. His words on the subject were:
Let no group assume the exclusive label of the "peace bloc." We
all
belong to it ... I give you my deep and unalterable conviction, based
on years of experience as a worker in the field of international
peace,
that by the repeal of the embargo the United States will more probably
remain at peace than if the law remains as it stands today ... Our
acts
must be guided by one single, hardheaded thought -- keeping America
out
of the war.
This statement was made after the President had opened up a secret
correspondence with Winston Churchill, First Lord of the Admiralty and
later Prime Minister in the British government. What has been revealed
of this correspondence, even in Churchill's own memoirs, inspires
considerable doubt as to whether its main purpose was keeping America
out of the war.
Roosevelt kept up his pose as the devoted champion of peace even after
the fall of France, when Great Britain was committed to a war which,
given the balance of power in manpower and industrial resources, it
could not hope to win without the involvement of other great powers,
such as the United States and the Soviet Union. The President's
pledges
of pursuing a policy designed to keep the United States at peace
reached a shrill crescendo during the last days of the 1940 campaign.
Mr. Roosevelt said at Boston on October 30: "I have said this before,
but I shall say it again and again and again: Your boys are not going
to be sent into any foreign wars."
The same thought was expressed in a speech at Brooklyn on November 1:
"I am fighting to keep our people out of foreign wars. And I will keep
on fighting."
The President told his audience at Rochester, New York, on November 2:
"Your national government ... is equally a government of peace -- a
government that intends to retain peace for the American people."
On the same day the voters of Buffalo were assured: "Your President
says this country is not going to war."
And he declared at Cleveland on November 3: "The first purpose of our
foreign policy is to keep our country out of war."
So much for presidential words. What about presidential actions?
American involvement in war with Germany was preceded by a long series
of steps, not one of which could reasonably be represented as
conducive
to the achievement of the President's professed ideal of keeping the
United States out of foreign wars. The more important of these steps
may be briefly listed as follows:
1. The exchange of American destroyers for British bases in the
Caribbean and in Newfoundland in September, 1940.
2. This was a clear departure from the requirements of neutrality
and was also a violation of some specific American laws. Indeed, a
conference of top government lawyers at the time decided that the
destroyer deal put this country into the war, legally and morally.
3. The enactment of the Lend-Lease Act in March, 1941.
4. In complete contradiction of the wording and intent of the
Neutrality Act, which remained on the statute books, this made the
United States an unlimited partner in the economic war against the
Axis
Powers all over the world.
5. The secret American-British staff talks in Washington in
January-March, 1941.
6. Extraordinary care was taken to conceal not only the contents of
these talks but the very fact that they were taking place from the
knowledge of Congress. At the time when administration spokesmen were
offering assurances that there were no warlike implications in the
Lend-Lease Act, this staff conference used the revealing phrase, "when
the United States becomes involved in war with Germany."
7. The inauguration of so-called naval patrols, the purpose of
which
was to report the presence of German submarines to British warships,
in
the Atlantic in April, 1941.
8. The dispatch of American laborers to Northern Ireland to build a
naval base, obviously with the needs of an American expeditionary
force
in mind.
9. The occupation of Iceland by American troops in July, 1941. This
was going rather far afield for a government which professed as its
main concern the keeping of the United States out of foreign wars.
10. The Atlantic Conference of Roosevelt and Churchill, August 9-12,
1941.
11. Besides committing America as a partner in a virtual declaration
of war aims, this conference considered the presentation of an
ultimatum to Japan and the occupation of the Cape Verde Islands, a
Portuguese possession, by United States troops.
12. The orders to American warships to shoot at sight at German
submarines, formally announced on September 11.
13. The beginning of actual hostilities may be dated from this time
rather than from the German declaration of war, which followed Pearl
Harbor.
14. The authorization for the arming of merchant ships and the
sending of these ships into war zones in November, 1941.
15. The freezing of Japanese assets in the United States on July 25,
1941.
16. This step, which was followed by similar action on the part of
Great Britain and the Netherlands East Indies, amounted to a
commercial
blockade of Japan. The warmaking potentialities of this decision had
been recognized by Roosevelt himself shortly before it was taken.
Addressing a delegation and explaining why oil exports to Japan had
not
been stopped previously, he said:
It was very essential, from our own selfish point of view of
defense, to prevent a war from starting in the South Pacific. So our
foreign policy was trying to stop a war from breaking out down
there.... Now, if we cut the oil off, they [the Japanese] probably
would have gone down to the Netherlands East Indies a year ago, and we
would have had war.
17. When the Japanese Prime Minister, Prince Fumimaro Konoye,
appealed for a personal meeting with Roosevelt to discuss an amicable
settlement in the Pacific, this appeal was rejected, despite the
strong
favorable recommendations of the American ambassador to Japan, Joseph
C. Grew.
18. Final step on the road to war in the Pacific was Secretary of
State Hull's note to the Japanese government of November 26. Before
sending this communication Hull had considered proposing a compromise
formula which would have relaxed the blockade of Japan in return for
Japanese withdrawal from southern Indochina and a limitation of
Japanese forces in northern Indochina.
19. However, Hull dropped this idea under pressure from British and
Chinese sources. He dispatched a veritable ultimatum on November 26,
which demanded unconditional Japanese withdrawal from China and from
Indochina and insisted that there should be "no support of any
government in China other than the National government [Chiang
Kai-shek]." Hull admitted that this note took Japanese-American
relations out of the realm of diplomacy and placed them in the hands
of
the military authorities.
20. The negative Japanese reply to this note was delivered almost
simultaneously with the attack on Pearl Harbor. There was a strange
and
as yet unexplained failure to prepare for this attack by giving
General
Short and Admiral Kimmel, commanders on the spot, a clear picture of
the imminent danger. As Secretary of War Stimson explained the
American
policy, it was to maneuver the Japanese into firing the first shot,
and
it may have been feared that openly precautionary and defensive moves
on the part of Kimmel and Short would scare off the impending attack
by
the Japanese task force which was known to be on its way to some
American outpost.
Here is the factual record of the presidential words and the
presidential deeds. No convinced believer in American nonintervention
in wars outside this hemisphere could have given the American people
more specific promises than Roosevelt gave during he campaign of 1940.
And it is hard to see how any President, given the constitutional
limitations of the office, could have done more to precipitate the
United States into war with Germany and Japan than Roosevelt
accomplished during the 15 months between the destroyer-for-bases deal
and the attack on Pearl Harbor.
Former Congresswoman Clare Boothe Luce found the right expression when
she charged Roosevelt with having lied us into war. Even a sympathizer
with Roosevelt's policies, Professor Thomas A. Bailey, in his book,
The
Man in the Street, admits the charge of deception, but tries to
justify
it on the following grounds:
Franklin Roosevelt repeatedly deceived the American people during
the period before Pearl Harbor ... He was like the physician who must
tell the patient lies for the patient's own good ... The country was
overwhelmingly noninterventionist to the very day of Pearl Harbor, and
an overt attempt to lead the people into war would have resulted in
certain failure and an almost certain ousting of Roosevelt in 1940,
with a complete defeat of his ultimate aims.
Professor Bailey continues his apologetics with the following
argument,
which leaves very little indeed of the historical American conception
of a government responsible to the people and morally obligated to
abide by the popular will:
A president who cannot entrust the people with the truth betrays a
certain lack of faith in the basic tenets of democracy. But because
the
masses are notoriously shortsighted and generally cannot see danger
until it is at their throats, our statesmen are forced to deceive them
into an awareness of their own long-run interests. This is clearly
what
Roosevelt had to do, and who shall say that posterity will not thank
him for it?
Presidential pledges to "keep our country out of war," with which
Roosevelt was so profuse in the summer and autumn of 1940, could
reasonably be regarded as canceled by some new development in the
international situation involving a real and urgent threat to the
security of the United States and the Western Hemisphere.
But there was no such new development to justify Roosevelt's moves
along the road to war in 1941. The British Isles were not invaded in
1940, at the height of Hitler's military success on the Continent.
They
were much more secure against invasion in 1941. Contrast the scare
predications of Secretary Stimson, Secretary Knox, and General
Marshall, about the impending invasion of Britain in the first months
of 1941, with the testimony of Winston Churchill, as set down in his
memoirs: "I did not regard invasion as a serious danger in April,
1941,
since proper preparations had been made against it."
Moreover, both the American and British governments knew at this time
that Hitler was contemplating an early attack upon the Soviet Union.
Such an attack was bound to swallow up much the greater part of
Germany's military resources.
It is with this background that one must judge the sincerity and
realism of Roosevelt's alarmist speech of May 27, 1941, with its
assertion: "The war is approaching the brink of the western hemisphere
itself. It is coming very close to home." The President spoke of the
Nazi "book of world conquest" and declared there was a Nazi plan to
treat the Latin American countries as they had treated the Balkans.
Then Canada and the United States would be strangled.
Not a single serious bit of evidence in proof of these sensational
allegations has ever been found, not even when the archives of the
Nazi
government were at the disposal of the victorious powers. The threat
to
the security of Great Britain was less serious in 1941 than it was in
1940. There is no concrete evidence of Nazi intention to invade the
American hemisphere in either year, or at any predictable period.
One is left, therefore, with the inescapable conclusion that the
promises to "keep America out of foreign wars" were a deliberate hoax
on the American people, perpetrated for the purpose of insuring
Roosevelt's re-election and thereby enabling him to proceed with his
plan of gradually edging the United States into war.
On Mar 6, 4:34 am, Donna Evleth <devl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > From: "PJ O'Donovan" <Xent...@aol.com>
Earl Evleth
f5f395d3-b4a8-4dd1...@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com, "PJ
O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com> wrote:
> It is not my "spin" but published "spin" by scholars on the subject.
OK you name your DATE that war was declared either way.
PJ O'Donovan
subject....
How Franklin Roosevelt Lied America Into War
by William Henry Chamberlin
"..12. The orders to American warships to shoot at sight at German
submarines, formally announced on September 11. (1941)
13. The beginning of actual hostilities may be dated from this time
rather than from the German declaration of war, which followed Pearl
Harbor...."
PJ>>
<OK you name your DATE that war was declared either way.
Earl Evleth>
Hitler's prior hostile acts against Poland was the provocation for
Britain, France, Australia and New Zealand to declare war on Germany
on Sept 3, 1939.
Roosevelt's prior hostile acts against Germany was the provocation for
Germany to declare war on the US on Dec. 11, 1941.
John Rennie
I wonder how our resident buffoon would evaluate Sweden. It supplied war
material to both Britain and Germany (Bofors) prior to 1939. Does that make
Sweden 'virtually' at war with both countries? Incidentally the American
Navy had every right to patrol the Atlantic - that's the bit of water that
America's East Coast is washed by. I added that because I don't think
peejay knows where it is.
Earl Evleth
200844bc-c990-4882...@v3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com, "PJ
O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com> wrote:
> <OK you name your DATE that war was declared either way.
>
> Earl Evleth>
>
> Hitler's prior hostile acts against Poland was the provocation for
> Britain, France, Australia and New Zealand to declare war on Germany
> on Sept 3, 1939.
The US is not mentioned
> Roosevelt's prior hostile acts against Germany was the provocation for
> Germany to declare war on the US on Dec. 11, 1941.
Germany had a treaty with Japan.
"Adolf Hitler made his announcement at the Reichstag in Berlin saying he had
tried to avoid direct conflict with the US but, under the Tripartite
Agreement signed on 27 September 1940, Germany was obliged to join with
Italy to defend its ally Japan."
Donna Evleth
> From: "PJ O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com>
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 07:00:31 -0800 (PST)
> Subject: Re: Not only the Nobel Prize winning Hayek and followed recently by
> Jonah Goldberg in his number one best selling book, "Liberal Fascism" but
> still another renown scholar claims that Fascism really has a Left Wing
> pedigree.
>
> Hitler's prior hostile acts against Poland was the provocation for
> Britain, France, Australia and New Zealand to declare war on Germany
> on Sept 3, 1939.
>
> Roosevelt's prior hostile acts against Germany was the provocation for
> Germany to declare war on the US on Dec. 11, 1941.
What happened to the fact that Hitler felt bound by the treaty he had signed
with Japan to declare war on the US at this time? You do like to dance away
from that one, don't you?
Donna Evleth
>
PJ O'Donovan
signed
with Japan to declare war on the US at this time?
Donna Evleth>
Since when did Hitler much give a damn about treaties?
Tell us now his adherence to his treaty with the Bolsheviks before he
invaded them was an example.
Your original question was why Roosevelt didn't go to war when Hitler
invaded Russia in the spring of 1941.
If Roosevelt didn't go to war in the spring of 1941, what would
possess those memorializing Roosevelt at his memorial to state:
"the United States was virtually at war in the spring and summer of
1941"???
BTW I just walked back from our local library, about a mile down the
road to print out some stuff.
Ask Earl where his half assed whois search engine shows me now versus
where I was a few minutes ago when I posted him from the computer
there.
On Mar 6, 10:01 am, Donna Evleth <devl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > From: "PJ O'Donovan" <Xent...@aol.com>
Earl Evleth
d8007319-d63c-4cd2...@n36g2000hse.googlegroups.com, "PJ
O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com> wrote:
> Since when did Hitler much give a damn about treaties?
True, he did match some other countries
in that regard.
for instance, the British wrote
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1970312.stm
***
US renounces world court treaty
Critics say existing tribunals' powers must be extended
The United States has withdrawn from a treaty to establish an International
Criminal Court (ICC), provoking outrage from human rights organisations.
Unsigning the treaty will throw the United States into opposition against
the most important new institution for enforcing human rights in 50 years
Kenneth Roth Human Rights Watch
In a letter to the United Nations delivered on Monday, the US says it will
not consider itself bound by the treaty - even though Bill Clinton signed up
to it in 2000.
The US has vehemently opposed the setting up of the ICC, fearing its
soldiers and diplomats could be brought before the court which will hear
cases of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The Washington Working Group on the ICC - an umbrella group of organisations
supporting the court - said withdrawing from the treaty was a "rash action
signalling to the world that America is turning its back on decades of US
leadership in prosecuting war criminals since the Nuremberg trials."
US 'undermined'
Judge Richard Goldstone, the first chief prosecutor at The Hague war crimes
tribunal on the former Yugoslavia, echoed these sentiments saying:
"I think it is a very backwards step. It is unprecedented which I think to
an extent smacks of pettiness in the sense that it is not going to affect in
any way the establishment of the international criminal court".
"The US have really isolated themselves and are putting themselves into bed
with the likes of China, the Yemen and other undemocratic countries," he
added.
US senior diplomat Pierre-Richard Prosper said the letter "neutralised" Mr
Clinton's signature on the treaty.
Nearly 100 nations have signed up and may ratify the treaty in the future
China, India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Iraq and Turkey have failed to sign up
to the treaty Egypt, Iran, Israel and Russia have failed to ratify the
treaty "It frees us from some of the obligations that are incurred by
signature. When you sign you have an obligation not to take actions that
would defeat the object or purpose of the treaty," he said.
By unsigning the treaty, the US would no longer have to extradite people
wanted by the court, he said.
"What we've learnt from the war on terror is that rather than creating an
international mechanism to deal with these issues it is better to organise
an international mandate that authorises states to use their unilateral
tools to tackle the problems we have," Mr Prosper said.
US Secretary of State Colin Powell, announcing the decision on Sunday, said
the court would undermine US judicial authority.
He said it would be accountable to no higher authority - including the UN
Security Council - and would be able "to second-guess the United States
after we have tried somebody".
'Wrong side of history'
For President George W Bush's critics, this decision serves as further proof
of a unilateralist approach to foreign policy and puts him at odds with
allies, including Canada and the European Union, which support the ICC.
"The administration is putting itself on the wrong side of history," said
Kenneth Roth, director of Human Rights Watch.
"Unsigning the treaty will not stop the court. It will only throw the United
States into opposition against the most important new institution for
enforcing human rights in 50 years," he said.
The court itself still has enough international support to begin work in The
Hague next year - but without US backing, correspondents say it will be a
far less powerful and effective player on the world stage.
Donna Evleth
> From: "PJ O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com>
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 10:51:47 -0800 (PST)
> Subject: Re: Not only the Nobel Prize winning Hayek and followed recently by
> Jonah Goldberg in his number one best selling book, "Liberal Fascism" but
> still another renown scholar claims that Fascism really has a Left Wing
> pedigree.
>
> <What happened to the fact that Hitler felt bound by the treaty he had
> signed
> with Japan to declare war on the US at this time?
>
> Donna Evleth>
>
> Since when did Hitler much give a damn about treaties?
Since he respected his treaty with Japan.
>
> Tell us now his adherence to his treaty with the Bolsheviks before he
> invaded them was an example.
OK, he didn't respect that one. I never said he did. He was selective. On
the other hand, he did respect his treaty with Mussolini's Italy, and bailed
out Italy which was in difficulty in its invasion of Greece. Respect for
his treaty with Mussolini, incidentally, threw him behind schedule for his
invasion of Russia. He would pay for that later.
>
> Your original question was why Roosevelt didn't go to war when Hitler
> invaded Russia in the spring of 1941.
>
> If Roosevelt didn't go to war in the spring of 1941, what would
> possess those memorializing Roosevelt at his memorial to state:
>
> "the United States was virtually at war in the spring and summer of
> 1941"???
I repeat: "virtually at war" is not the same as "declaration of war".
>
Donna Evleth
PJ O'Donovan
by William Henry Chamberlin
"..12. The orders to American warships to shoot at sight at German
submarines, formally announced on September 11. (1941)
13. The beginning of actual hostilities may be dated from this time
rather than from the German declaration of war, which followed Pearl
Harbor...."
PJ>>
<....he respected his treaty with Japan.......
Donna Evleth>
The Triparite act between Germany, Italy and Japan was signed on Sept ,
27, 1940.
Hitler saw it primarily as his deterrent to keep America out of the
war in Europe as
articulated by a noted noted British historian.
"Hitler attributed the British prolongation of the war, despite
extensive German bombing to the hope of American intervention and
Russian aid. He thought the
Triparite pact had reduced the risk of the former and that the German
troops moved to the eastern border were a deterrent to Stalin."
"Hitler 1936- 1945: Nemesis"
by Ian Kershaw
pg. 327 328
But Hitler was wrong. It did not stop Roosevelt from engaging in
preemptive hostile acts of war against the Germans beginning shortly
thereafter in the spring of 1941 immediately after Hitler invaded the
Soviet Union as articulated in Germany's declaration of war against
the US on Dec 11, 1941.
Ian Kershaw
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Professor Sir Ian Kershaw (born April 29, 1943 in Oldham, Lancashire,
England) is a British historian, noted for his biographies of Adolf
Hitler........
Works
His books include:
* Bolton Priory Rentals and Ministers; Accounts, 1473-1539, (ed.)
(Leeds, 1969)
* Bolton Priory. The Economy of a Northern Monastery, (Oxford,
1973)
* Popular Opinion and Political Dissent in the Third Reich.
Bavaria, 1933-45, (Oxford, 1983, rev. 2002)
* The Nazi Dictatorship. Problems and Perspectives of
Interpretation, (London, 1985, 4th ed., 2000) ISBN 0-340-76028-1
* The 'Hitler Myth'. Image and Reality in the Third Reich (Oxford,
1987, rev. 2001). ISBN 0-19-280206-2
* Weimar. Why did German Democracy Fail?, (ed.) (London, 1990)
ISBN 0-312-04470-4
* Hitler: A Profile in Power, (London, 1991, rev. 2001)
* Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison, (ed. with
Moshe Lewin) (Cambridge, 1997) ISBN 0-521-56521-9
* Hitler, 1889-1936: Hubris, (London, 1998) ISBN 0-393-32035-9
* Hitler, 1936-1945: Nemesis, (London, 2000) ISBN 0-393-32252-1
* The Bolton Priory Compotus, 1286-1325, (ed. with David Smith)
(London, 2001)
* Making Friends with Hitler: Lord Londonderry and the British
Road to War, (London, 2004) ISBN 0-7139-9717-6
* Fateful Choices: Ten Decisions That Changed the World, 1940-1941
(London, 2007) ISBN 1-5942-0123-4
John Rennie
'Virtually' means just that to peejay. He 'virtually' went to war against
Korea although he didn't actually go there.
It's just another of those words that's not in his 250 word dictionary,
Donna.
Earl Evleth
fd44c43c-55bf-499b...@60g2000hsy.googlegroups.com, "PJ
O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com> wrote:
> by William Henry Chamberlin
You have dragged this guy up before. Given his life history I understand
why.
PJ O'Donovan
by William Henry Chamberlin
"..12. The orders to American warships to shoot at sight at German
submarines, formally announced on September 11. (1941)
13. The beginning of actual hostilities may be dated from this time
rather than from the German declaration of war, which followed Pearl
Harbor...."
PJ>>
<by William Henry Chamberlin
You have dragged this guy up before. Given his life history I
understand
why
Earl Evleth>
Fallacy: Ad Hominem
Description of Ad Hominem
Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man"
or "against the person."
An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or
argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the
author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically,
this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the
character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her
actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the
person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be
evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is
making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following
form:
1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B makes an attack on person A.
3. Therefore A's claim is false.
The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the
character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most
cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made
(or the quality of the argument being made)
Florida
wrote:
> On Mar 4, 4:56 pm, "leonard7...@gmail.com" <leonard7...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > ORIGINAL NEWSGROUPS RESTORED
>
> > On Mar 4, 10:57 am, Earl Evleth <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:> On 4/03/08 16:45, in article
>
> > a850e2ce-5698-4a25-b8c9-bbeed001f...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com, "PJ
>
> > O'Donovan" <Xent...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > <Why do you people have to keep on publicising this pile of junk?
> > > > Dr barry Worthington>
>
> > > You did not answer this PJ. Why this piece of junk.
>
> > ** That proves that Evleth knows even less of political
> > science/politics than he does of climatology,
> > Barry Worthington, too
>
> Well, I used to teach history in a university, so what would I know?
>
> > ** ALL left wing politics are fascist. Fascism arose in
> > 1919 from socialism. The Italian socialst party's
> > secretary general Benito Mussolini reorganized it at
> > the end of WWI. All other socialist parties are fascist
> > albeit under local names, Falange, Nazi, Democrat,
> > Social Democrat, Labour, New Democrat, Liberal,
> > Viet Cong, etc
>
> Sorry, but you seem to be some political nutter. Your assertion is
> completely delusional. It's also pointless, because you don't indicate
> why you believe this to be so.
'Belief' is the right way to view POD's career in propaganda.
His topics are a series of proofs that, given the choice, he chose to
abandon reality. He hopes to substitute rightwing political
expediency for the facts the rest of us depend on, thus his unbroken
string of posts featuring ultra-right political fantasy.
More simply put, you were right. He's a nutter.
Florida
> <<How Franklin Roosevelt Lied America Into War
> by William Henry Chamberlin
>
> The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the
> character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most
> cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made
> (or the quality of the argument being made)
Thus your reason for posting an Ad Hominem attack on FDR would
be... what, exactly?
Discredit the New Deal, perhaps? Convince somebody, somewhere,
that medical care for all Americans is a 'waste of money'. Hope to
convince someone that medical businesses are entitled to whatever they
can gouge out of the American public? Hope to protect corporations
from needing to be accountable to the American people who made them
rich? Hm?
PJ O'Donovan
Planet Visitor II
Hey, Earl... tell us again about "Leslie" (sic) Clark. I don't believe
there is any other poster in AADP that is so sure of himself, and
yet so ignorant of world politics, as you are (except for your
friend that is -- which goes without saying).
<fx: Earl searches frantically for a "Leslie" Clark he can claim
was the one he mentioned>
Hey... try this one, Earl. Maybe he's the one you mentioned. --
http://www.leslieclark.com/
Florida
PJ O'Donovan
Donna Evleth
> From: "PJ O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com>
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Newsgroups:
> alt.activism.death-penalty,talk.politics.misc,uk.politics.misc,aus.politics,so
> c.retirement
> Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 09:31:54 -0800 (PST)
> Subject: Re: Not only the Nobel Prize winning Hayek and followed recently by
> Jonah Goldberg in his number one best selling book, "Liberal Fascism" but
> still another renown scholar claims that Fascism really has a Left Wing
> pedigree.
>
So why do you make so many references to "left-wing wackos"? "Ad Hominem" is
just a fancy name for name calling.
Donna Evleth
>
>
>
Earl Evleth
"Planet Visitor II" <na...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> You have dragged this guy up before. Given his life history I understand
>> why.
>
> Hey, Earl...
Carfull PV, you're stalking, when you come into discussion follow the
subject
John Rennie
You've left out his little favourite, 'DemocRAT', Donna. What a childlike
person our little peejay is?
PJ O'Donovan
Hominem" is
just a fancy name for name calling.
Donna Evleth>
I enjoy and practice the axiomatic mafioso expression: "Don't get
mad. Get even."
Shall I search and paste now the many times you have personally
called me "pee" when my handle is a simple PJ. A simple google search
which you still have never figured how to do will provide empirical
indisputable data.
Shall we search the incessant use of referring to me as "peabrain" or
"peejay" that your left wing whacko socialist cohorts who you
constantly encourage have found necessary in their laughable attempts
to denigrate me and marginalize my responses.
I am having great fun with all of this with you left wing whackos and
the more you call me "pee', "peabrain" and "peejay" the more I enjoy
it. If you don't like it, TS.
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
> > From: "PJ O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com>
Need we say more? No.
> > <<How Franklin Roosevelt Lied America Into War
> >
> > by William Henry Chamberlin
> >
> > "..12. The orders to American warships to shoot at sight at German
> > submarines, formally announced on September 11. (1941)
> >
> > 13. The beginning of actual hostilities may be dated from this time
> > rather than from the German declaration of war, which followed Pearl
> > Harbor...."
> >
> > PJ>>
> >
> > <by William Henry Chamberlin
> >
> > You have dragged this guy up before. Given his life history I
> > understand
> > why
> >
> > Earl Evleth>
> >
> > Fallacy: Ad Hominem
> >
> > Description of Ad Hominem
> >
> > Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man"
> > or "against the person."
[snip text that Peabrain could not understand]
> So why do you make so many references to "left-wing wackos"? "Ad Hominem" is
> just a fancy name for name calling.
And a failure to identify Earl's logical fallacy which was, in fact, an
example of Poisoning the Well.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/poisoning-the-well.html
Example 1, "Don't listen to him, he's a scoundrel."
Peabrain doesn't stretch very far in terms of brainpower. He saw the
fancy looking words and posted them, once again, without any kind of
real understanding.
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
> I am having great fun with all of this with you left wing whackos and
> the more you call me "pee', "peabrain" and "peejay" the more I enjoy
> it. If you don't like it, TS.
What a crock of shit. The anger in any replies you make to me is
palpable and causes me to laugh so hard that it physically hurts.
Go on. Call me "girly man" or "faggot". You know you want to.
ROTFLMAO!!!!
John Rennie
"Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <sa...@notinnedmeatdodo.com.au> wrote in message
news:1idhcmf.ycalev1cw3y3oN%sa...@notinnedmeatdodo.com.au...
Don't see why peejay thinks peejay is a derogatory term. It's straight
phonetic takeoff of his initials which are fake anyway.
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
If there's an insult in Peabrain's handle, it's to Mr O'Rourke who is,
at least, clever and funny.
John Rennie
And must do his best to stay alive now that Buckley's departed. There are
very few decent conservatives left.
Planet Visitor II
"Earl Evleth" <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:C3F7744D.114930%evl...@wanadoo.fr...
> On 7/03/08 19:15, in article JpudnUkufOMCFUza...@giganews.com,
> "Planet Visitor II" <na...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>> why.
>>
>> Hey, Earl... tell us again about "Leslie" (sic) Clark. I don't believe
>> there is any other poster in AADP that is so sure of himself, and
>> yet so ignorant of world politics, as you are (except for your
>> friend that is -- which goes without saying).
>>
>> <fx: Earl searches frantically for a "Leslie" Clark he can claim
>> was the one he mentioned>
>>
>> Hey... try this one, Earl. Maybe he's the one you mentioned. --
>> http://www.leslieclark.com/
>
>
> subject
When you come into a discussion perhaps you should know who are
talking about. Who was that "Leslie" Clark you were raving about,
Earl??? You don't really think I'm going to let this go until you
admit that you can't quite get a handle on names, when you begin
pontificating geopolitically, Do you?? You can run.. but you can't
hide this time.
*deathly silence*
Hey, gentle reader... Earl doesn't know who Wesley Clark is...
and called him "Leslie" Clark. ROTFLMAO.
Earl Evleth
"John Rennie" <john-...@talktalk.net> wrote:
> You've left out his little favourite, 'DemocRAT', Donna. What a childlike
> person our little peejay is?
One could counter with the term "RepubliCons" but it would only have
a meaning in French
Donna Evleth
> From: "PJ O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com>
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
> Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:30:10 -0800 (PST)
> Subject: Re: Not only the Nobel Prize winning Hayek and followed recently by
> Jonah Goldberg in his number one best selling book, "Liberal Fascism" but
> still another renown scholar claims that Fascism really has a Left Wing
> pedigree.
>
Shall we compare the number of times I called you "pee" - which I told you I
decided to stop doing, and I have kept my word - with the number of times
you have called me "left wing wacko", which you obviously have no intention
of stopping doing?
Donna Evleth
>
>
>
>
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
> Shall we compare the number of times I called you "pee" - which I told you I
> decided to stop doing, and I have kept my word - with the number of times
> you have called me "left wing wacko", which you obviously have no intention
> of stopping doing?
Are you really worried, Donna?
Peabrain's entire stance is based on labelling you a "left wing whacko",
which you are patently not. As far as I'm concerned you as obviously a
moderate. I would be far more likely to earn the label "left wing
whacko", even though my belief system is not dictated to by ideology.
Remember, of course, that my belief that people should feel free to
engage in any consensual activity they desire with their genitals has
had Peabrain label me a "faggot".
Earl Evleth
1idib0e.12b2jt497lgalN%sa...@notinnedmeatdodo.com.au, "Mr Q. Z. Diablo"
<sa...@notinnedmeatdodo.com.au> wrote:
> Peabrain label me a "faggot".
But "whacko faggot" has a certain ring. And being effete would be even
worse. But being an intellectual would have been the very worst.
PJ O'Donovan
<Shall we compare the number of times I called you "pee" - which I
told you I
decided to stop doing, and I have kept my word - with the number of
times
you have called me "left wing wacko", which you obviously have no
intention
of stopping doing?
Donna Evleth>
Again another example of your "meticulous attention to detail"?
You should really learn how to do a simple search before you spout off
your nonsense.
Google searches:
41 results for xentinc donna evleth left wing whacko
74 results for xentinc donna evleth pee
Donna Evleth
> From: "PJ O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com>
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
> Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 04:54:15 -0800 (PST)
> Subject: Re: Not only the Nobel Prize winning Hayek and followed recently by
> Jonah Goldberg in his number one best selling book, "Liberal Fascism" but
> still another renown scholar claims that Fascism really has a Left Wing
> pedigree.
>
>
And if you spelled it "left wing wacko", as you generally do? You cheated.
Try again.
Donna Evleth
>
>
>
>
>
Earl Evleth
Evleth" <dev...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> And if you spelled it "left wing wacko", as you generally do? You cheated.
> Try again.
as a google user interesting, left wing wacko gets 97800 hits where
as left wing whacko gets only 29200.
Using the words whacko and wacko all alone one gets 429,000 and 8,260,000
respectively. Spelled backwords okcaw gets 421 hits but
okcahw only gets 16.
At this point I have run out of google research raw material.
PJ O'Donovan
41 results for xentinc donna evleth left wing whacko
74 results for xentinc donna evleth pee
PJ>>
<And if you spelled it "left wing wacko", as you generally do? You
cheated.
Try again.
Donna Evleth>
This is what I get searching in aadp using the alternate spelling.
27 results for xentinc donna evleth left wing wacko
According to my arithmetic you are still slightly ahead of me relative
to you calling me "pee" and me calling you either "left wing whacko"
or "left wing wacko".
PJ O'Donovan
where
as left wing whacko gets only 29200.
Earl Evleth>
The correct search method would require both alternatives to be
enclosed in qoutation marks.
"Left wing whacko" then gets 3810 hits.
" Left wing wacko" then gets 888 hits.
The fallaciousness of your search method has been pointed out to you
many times in AADP but like your confusion surrounding whois searches
you prove again you are unable to comprehend.
yitzhak isaac goldstein
> "Virtually at war" is not
> the same as a declaration of war,
Tell that to the deathie scum on AADP. They think that Bush can violate
the Constitution because 'America' (sic) is 'at war'.
Y.
--
Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein | 'gu-ay hey lihyote yehoudi'
'AADP's Left-Wing Jewish Intellectual'
Official AADP Website: http://alt-activism-death-penalty.org/
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
> On 8/03/08 13:12, in article
> 1idib0e.12b2jt497lgalN%sa...@notinnedmeatdodo.com.au, "Mr Q. Z. Diablo"
> <sa...@notinnedmeatdodo.com.au> wrote:
>
> > Peabrain label me a "faggot".
>
> But "whacko faggot" has a certain ring.
Earl made a funny.
Hahahahahahahaha!!!
> And being effete would be even
> worse. But being an intellectual would have been the very worst.
I make no claims to being an intellectual. I am merely smarter than the
average bear, which puts me not only streets but blocks and districts
ahead of Peabrain.
Earl Evleth
d50d737c-64bc-467f...@47g2000hsb.googlegroups.com, "PJ
O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com> wrote:
> "Left wing whacko" then gets 3810 hits.
> " Left wing wacko" then gets 888 hits.
You forgot to test the versions spelled backwards
Donna Evleth
> From: "PJ O'Donovan" <Xen...@aol.com>
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
> Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 11:48:40 -0800 (PST)
> Subject: Re: Not only the Nobel Prize winning Hayek and followed recently by
> Jonah Goldberg in his number one best selling book, "Liberal Fascism" but
> still another renown scholar claims that Fascism really has a Left Wing
> pedigree.
>
Suit yourself. This argument does not seem worth pursuing. Stupid.
Boring.
Donna Evleth
>
>
>
TRUTH
news:1idhcol.1xxon0r1ja3zcwN%yit...@yahoo.fr...
> James Noles <na...@earthlink.net> wrote ...
>> "Earl Evleth" <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:C3F7744D.114930%evleth>> > James Noles <na...@earthlink.net> wrote ...
>> >
>> >>
>> >>> You have dragged this guy up before. Given his life history I understand
>> >>> why.
>> >>
>> >> Hey, Earl... tell us again about "Leslie" (sic) Clark. I don't believe
>> >> there is any other poster in AADP that is so sure of himself, and
>> >> yet so ignorant of world politics, as you are (except for your
>> >> friend that is -- which goes without saying).
>> >>
>> >> <fx: Earl searches frantically for a "Leslie" Clark he can claim
>> >> was the one he mentioned>
>> >>
>> >> Hey... try this one, Earl. Maybe he's the one you mentioned. --
>> >> http://www.leslieclark.com/
>> >
>> >
>> > Carfull PV, you're stalking, when you come into discussion follow the
>> > subject
>>
>> When you come into a discussion perhaps you should know who are
>> talking about.
>
> end sentences with a preposition.
Hehe... you mean lecture "their's" (sic) English... Nazi fucktard?
>> Hey, gentle reader... Earl doesn't know who Wesley Clark is...
>> and called him "Leslie" Clark. ROTFLMAO.
>
> Hey, gentle reader ... Nazi Noles doesn't know where New Zealand is...
> and called it 'the Aucklands'. ROFLMAO !!!
The difference, Nazi fucktard, is that I am not burdened with a superego.
I admit fallability. You and Earl are unable to do so. Notice that Earl
made a small blunder that could have been swept away in one moment,
simply by claiming he knew the right name but permitted his mind to
wander without a map to get back. It is certain he knows of Wesley
Clark, since he mentioned that name in the past. But he can't admit to
ANY mistake. He can't do that... he never could. Neither can you,
as you defend him. Hell, I've never mentioned the name "Wesley Clark,"
but I damn sure know who he is. And I'd never use the name "Leslie"
to refer to his first name. While I suspect that my mention of Wesley
Clark was the first you've ever heard of him.
However; I've never called New Zealand, the "Aucklands." I confused
the "Auckand Islands" with the New Zealand city of Auckland. If you're
going to call me out, you should at least have your shit straight, NFC.
TRUTH
All new - http://www.planetvisitor.name/dictionary.html
> Y.
Proof that Desmond Coughlan, who currently has taken the handle "Yitzhak
Goldstein" as a parody insult of a Jewish name, is a Nazi sympathizer. See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_Fucktard_Perfect_Equivalents.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_Fucktard_Wiesenthal_comment.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_Fucktard_claims_Jews_are_Inhuman.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_Fucktard_insists_Auschwitz_wouldn't_execute_elderly.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_Wrongly_Released_Murderer.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_claims_Europe_moral_with_Holocaust.htm
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_claims_Right_to_Life_cannot_be_lawfully_taken_away.jpg
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_claims_Shoah_not_evil.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_commits_waterboard_torture.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_insists_everyone_could_legally_kill_Jews_in_WWII.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_says_Holocaust_was_just.html
And see how he managed to claim that there was no Holocaust in Europe. See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_states_Poland_not_in_Europe.html
If Poland is not in Europe... well... there you go, folks... Europe is cleansed of
anything to do with killing Jews in the Holocaust.
yitzhak isaac goldstein
> Yitzhak 'Beautifully Jewish' Goldstein wrote:
> > James ''Nazi Bastard' Noles <na...@earthlink.net> wrote ...
> >> "Earl Evleth" <evl...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:C3F376C2.113D32%evl
eth
> > @wanadoo.fr...
> >> > On 4/03/08 21:45, in article
> >> > 683e38d4-f0ba-437c...@13g2000hsb.googlegroups.com, "Dr. Ba
rry
> >> > Worthington" <sh...@abertay.ac.uk> wrote:
> >> >> Pot...
> >> >>> Kettle...
> >> >>> Pitch Black...
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Planet Visitor II
> >> >>> Official publisher of AADP Official dictionary
> >> >>> All new --http://www.planetvisitor.name/dictionary.html
> >> >>
> >> >> Oh God! Who left the cupboard door open?
> >> >>
> >> >> Dr. Barry Worthington
> >> >
> >> > PV has a thing about Black. Pitch Black is the worst.
> >> >
> >> > I personally like black especially ebony.
> >> >
> >> As I recall you implied that Black Americans are only interested in
> >> stealing from welfare programs. Remember your words -- "a black
> >> mama riding up in her Caddy to collect her payments making perhaps
> >> $8000 a week from multiple collection"
> >> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/ba74b62305b63
7b9
> >
> > One of Nazi Noles's most egregious lies to date. He relies on that post
> > by Earl being relatively long, and so most people won't verify Naz's
> > scummy lie.
>
> If you expect to defend those words from Earl, or argue that they
> are not racist in and of themselves. you'll need to show a legitimate
> reference to a source using the words "Black mama riding up in
> her Caddy," Nazi fucktard.
Once again, you demonstrate your abject and debilitating
incomprehension of rhetoric, combined with a pitiful need to demonise
your betters as you know only too well that your are wholly incapable of
engaging us intellectually.
<fx: Nazi Noles stares in open-mouthed _awe_ at Yitzhak's _mighty_ power
in language ...>
Indeed, you have demonstrated that 'intellectual' to you is every bit as
much a 'bad word' as 'black', or 'Jew'.
> > What Earl in fact wrote was ...
> >
> > 'Ronnie`s Welfare Queen story (this was of a black mama riding
> > up in her Caddy to collect her payments making perhaps $8000
> > a week from multiple collection) was investigated by journalists
> > and shown to be an exaggeration'
> Exactly. Now where did he get those exact words, if they are not
> of his own invention?
Exactly what is racist about the expression 'black mama'?
> since
> you are the one who, not once, but twice, insisted that if you were to
> go to the U.S. from "crime-free Europe" (where you have been
> robbed, assaulted and had your life threatened as you have reported
> to AADP)
Blatant lies, NN. I have never been 'robbed'. I have never been
'assaulted', and only once did I come face to face with someone acting
aggressively.
Why do you lie so much, Nazi Noles? Oh, no wait: we know why you lie so
much. It's because you're an uneducated fuckwit who without lies, is
recognised as an an uneducated fuckwit. Hey, even with your lies,
you're recognised an an uneducated fuckwit.
So the question is thus: why make your lies so easy to destroy? It's
child's play. All I need to do is reach out and slap you down. Like
this...
slappity-slappity-slap !
slappity-slappity-slap !
slappity-slappity-slap !
You're so easy, Naz'.
> , you would be sure to be robbed at gun-point by no one
> other than a Black American, who would say when robbing you --
Where did I say that, Nazi Noles?
> "Gimmie da money, honkey mothafucka, oh ah toast yo ass !!'" See -
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/45f62f7879a8b34e
Just out of idle curiosity, Naz', why are you still attempting to pass
of your 'dolly coughlan' posts as mine?
> Now please don't try to stretch our credibility by insisting if you
> were to be robbed by a WHITE American,
Oh-oh, folks .. he's in 'BLOCK' (sic) 'CAPITALS' (sic) mode again ...
get ready for some spitting, some screaming and some punching his
computer monitor.
> he would call you a
> "honkey"? In fact, if robbing you, only a Black would call you a
> "honkey," given you are White.
No, Nazi Noles: I am white.
> But what the hell... all we need is the proof that you supported
> the genocide of Black African Tutsis,
I'm sure you mean, 'black African Tutsis', Shithead.
> as you called it "the wonderful
> 1981 election victory" of Mitterand, who went on to support with
> arms and training the genocide of
So the fact that you voted for Bush in 2000, means that you 'support the
war in Iraq', then, Nazi Noles?
That would appear to be your somewhat moronic belief. That if one votes
for or supports the election of someone, then one automatically condones
all acts carried out by that person.
Can you possibly see how much of an arsehole you are?
> Black Africans in Rwanda.
I'm sure you mean, 'black Africans in Rwanda', Naz'.
Or perhaps you mean, 'Black (sic) African's (sic) in Uganda (sic)' ...
<laughs for two seconds before ducking as a small, bony white (sorry,
'White' (sic) .. ROFLMAO!!!) fist shoots out and 'CLUNKS' (sic) against
NN's monitor...>
> Your hero, Pat
> Robertson??? Come on.... cough it up... Nazi fucktard.
My 'hero', when I have never even mentioned his name, Nazi Noles?
A search on google for 'pat robertson' with one or more of the following
words...
desmond
coughlan
desi
dezi
yitzhak
goldstein
"pat robertson" (desmond OR coughlan OR goldstein OR desi OR dezi OR
yitzhak) group:alt.activism.death-penalty
One. Written by you. I've never mentioned Pat Robertson. In fact, no
one has ever even mentioned Pat Robertson in the same post or context as
my name. This is like the time you accused dirtdog of being
'anti-Israel' when in fact his posting history did not contain a single
occurrence of the word 'Israel'.
Can you possibly see what an arsehole you are?
> <fx: desi runs from the room screaming "this is my last monitor...
> I can't ram my fist through my LAST monitor!!!!">
More mindless copying of others' retorts. Can't you come up with
anything original ?
> And see how he managed to claim that there was no Holocaust in Europe. See --
> http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_states_Poland_not_in_Europ
e.html
> If Poland is not in Europe... well... there you go, folks... Europe is cleanse
d of
> anything to do with killing Jews in the Holocaust.
Oh, well .. .look at that, guys 'n' gals.
Three instances of the string 'Europe is cleansed', and all three of
them written by Noles (with a further one by SFB, quoting your words).
You are a liar, Nazi Noles.
slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap
!slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap !slappity-slappity-slap!
Planet Visitor II
news:1iddi74.1lnho8ex2fq62N%yit...@yahoo.fr...>> Desmond Coughlan wrote:
>> > James Noles <na...@earthlink.net> wrote ...
Oh... you call that "rhetoric"? You sick motherfucker. It's "rhetoric,"
all right... but properly called "racist rhetoric." Meant to persuade the
reader that Blacks are ripping off the welfare system, and Whites are
the victims. If that isn't the case, why not have used the non-racial
word "someone" rather than "black mama," with the additional claim
of "riding up in a caddy"? Why not just say "someone illegally abusing
the welfare system by making multiple claims"? No... that wouldn't
have achieved Earl's objective. The objective of making it appear
Blacks are the ONLY ones ripping off the welfare system.
Of course, with you being a racist, the racist implication behind Earl's
comment is totally on you. You'll defend it as if it came down from
God, in your Aryan Nation beliefs, while wearing your KKK robe.
According to you, it MUST be only a "black mama" cheating the
welfare system. According to you a "white mama" would never do
that, right???
> combined with a pitiful need to demonise
> your betters as you know only too well that your are wholly incapable of
> engaging us intellectually.
The only ones who are being demonized are Blacks, with Earl doing
the demonizing and you supporting it.
> <fx: Nazi Noles stares in open-mouthed _awe_ at Yitzhak's _mighty_ power
> in language ...>
Only in your dreams, Nazi fuckwit. What we have here is a clear case of
you defending a racist comment. Which isn't an extraordinary event,
since you have a habit of defending racism, including your own.
> Indeed, you have demonstrated that 'intellectual' to you is every bit as
> much a 'bad word' as 'black', or 'Jew'.
Neither are "bad words," unless they are accompanied by claims that
"Jews are in the absolute no different morally or legally than proven
and executed murderers," as you've argued, or claims of "a black
mama riding up in her caddy to collect her payments making perhaps
$8000 a week from multiple collection," as Earl argued. That's
the "intellectual" difference to which you are blind.
>> > What Earl in fact wrote was ...
>> >
>> > 'Ronnie`s Welfare Queen story (this was of a black mama riding
>> > up in her Caddy to collect her payments making perhaps $8000
>> > a week from multiple collection) was investigated by journalists
>> > and shown to be an exaggeration'
>
>> Exactly. Now where did he get those exact words, if they are not
>> of his own invention?
>
> Exactly what is racist about the expression 'black mama'?
If you have to ask, you already prove my point.
Exactly what is not racist about blaming generalized welfare fraud
only on a "Black mama"? Yellow journalism of that kind went out
in the 60s, even in the deepest part of the racist south of the U.S.
Unfortunately... it is still within the deep recesses of Earl's beliefs.
The fact that you dismiss it as non-racist shows only that racism
still exists on the surface of your beliefs. Even Earl isn't defending
it. He's gone very quiet. Of course, you won't, because you are
a racist. Earl has started to realize just how disgraceful his comment
was. You'll defend it as if it is your own. Earl is not a racist, but
he carries some strong baggage with him. I don't care whether he
apologizes to the group or not... his ego will almost certainly prevent
him doing so. But I believe the penny has dropped as far as him
being aware of just how bad his comment was. You are a born racist...
through and through, and think you can get away with it by calling
your enemies "racists," to cover up your own obvious racism.
>> since
>> you are the one who, not once, but twice, insisted that if you were to
>> go to the U.S. from "crime-free Europe" (where you have been
>> robbed, assaulted and had your life threatened as you have reported
>> to AADP)
>
> Blatant lies, NN. I have never been 'robbed'.
ROTFLMAO. Are you claiming that God came down and ripped off
your laptop while you were sitting in the park in the afternoon sun?
Are you and the guy who ripped off your laptop best of friends now?
> I have never been
> 'assaulted', and only once did I come face to face with someone acting
> aggressively.
You used the words "I stated that an individual had made an attempt on
my life. I do not know what nationality the person is, and I care even
less." See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_attempt_on_his_life.html
Don't you just hate it when you find I've kept some of your comments,
making it necessary for you to try and forge a comment and claim it came
from me, in one your amateur attempts? Didn't you just hate it when
Andrew proved you to be a liar?
So... that's exactly what I said you had mentioned, so why now are you
trying to reduce the degree of the crime? Were there "mitigating
circumstances" behind that "attempt on your life"?
> Why do you lie so much, Nazi Noles?
Hehehehehe (copyright Jim Noles)... Each time you claim I lie, I prove that
you're the liar, Nazi fucktard.
<clip the Nazi fucktard believing insults can hide his lies>
>> , you would be sure to be robbed at gun-point by no one
>> other than a Black American, who would say when robbing you --
>
> Where did I say that, Nazi Noles?
Jesus... just below, Nazi fucktard. And in another comment from you --
It was --
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/4a4c081cdf22b699
Oh, wait.. ROTFLMAO... the Nazi fucktard just demanded Google
remove it. It was there no less than a month ago. But he's not that slick.
I kept a picture of his comment that was in Google. See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_thinks_all_Blacks_are_criminals.htm
His words -- "I ride my bike to work and back ... not once have I had
a revolver stuck in my face, accompanied by the eloquent words, 'Gimme da
dough, mothafucka o ah toast yo ass !!'
>> "Gimmie da money, honkey mothafucka, oh ah toast yo ass !!'" See -
>> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/45f62f7879a8b34e
>
> Just out of idle curiosity, Naz', why are you still attempting to pass
> of your 'dolly coughlan' posts as mine?
Aside from your "illiterite" comment... because it is your words. Need another
one, where you insist you would only be robbed by, as you so eloquently
put it, "n******" (in the plural)? See --
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_again_claims_only_a_Black_would_mug_him.htm
>> Now please don't try to stretch our credibility by insisting if you
>> were to be robbed by a WHITE American,
>
> Oh-oh, folks .. he's in 'BLOCK' (sic) 'CAPITALS' (sic) mode again ...
> get ready for some spitting, some screaming and some punching his
> computer monitor.
Pretty pathetic attempt to avoid the truth, Nazi fucktard. Whether you
know it or not, Block letters are not prohibited in Usenet, nor do they
always represent "shouting." But you'll use any subterfuge to avoid
the consequences of your past comments.
>> he would call you a
>> "honkey"? In fact, if robbing you, only a Black would call you a
>> "honkey," given you are White.
>
> No, Nazi Noles: I am white.
Proving only that your comment was blatantly racist.
>> But what the hell... all we need is the proof that you supported
>> the genocide of Black African Tutsis,
>
> I'm sure you mean, 'black African Tutsis', Shithead.
Trying to make such a scandal about that capitalization, the only thing
you are sure of is your own racism. You don't make that big a stink
about the Holocaust.
>> as you called it "the wonderful
>> 1981 election victory" of Mitterand, who went on to support with
>> arms and training the genocide of
>
> So the fact that you voted for Bush in 2000, means that you 'support the
> war in Iraq', then, Nazi Noles?
Let's put our cards on the table. I did not vote for Bush in 2000. You
have no proof that I did. While I have proof of your SUPPORT for
Mitterand in his 1981 election victory. Thus proof of your support
for the genocide of Black Africans he was responsible for. You
cannot use an unproven accusation to cancel a truth. I have
proven in your words what you supported. You have only a handful
of empty air.
> That would appear to be your somewhat moronic belief. That if one votes
> for or supports the election of someone, then one automatically condones
> all acts carried out by that person.
I haven't seen you distance yourself one inch from Mitterand's role in
that genocide. In fact your big effort was directed at my mistake in
using "Uganda," rather than "Rwanda." As if that expunged the genocide
of Tutsis, and absolved Mitterand of his complicity in that genocide.
Now your big effort to defend Mitterand is concentrating on my use
of "Black" in referring to those whose race is "Black." While the
OED offered the same conclusion. See --
http://battle-evil.com/Black.jpg
The words -- "In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries also applied (now
somewhat less frequently because of the increasing use of the word Black)
to individuals of African ancestry born in or resident in the United States
or in other English-speaking countries. (Now customarily written with
a capital initial.)
Is there something you don't understand about the words "written with
a capital initial"?
> Can you possibly see how much of an arsehole you are?
>
Can you possibly see how much of a racist you are?
>> Black Africans in Rwanda.
>
> I'm sure you mean, 'black Africans in Rwanda', Naz'.
I'm sure you are trying to absolve Mitterand and his son of any
complicity in that genocide.
> Or perhaps you mean, 'Black (sic) African's (sic) in Uganda (sic)' ...
>
> <laughs for two seconds before ducking as a small, bony white (sorry,
> 'White' (sic) .. ROFLMAO!!!) fist shoots out and 'CLUNKS' (sic) against
> NN's monitor...>
Poor Nazi Coughlan... laughs at the Holocaust... now laughs at the
genocide of Black Africans. Is there anything he doesn't laugh
at other than the execution of a proven murderer, which he insists
is the "greatest evil facing mankind," considering all the evils in the
world today?
>> Your hero, Pat
>> Robertson??? Come on.... cough it up... Nazi fucktard.
>
> My 'hero', when I have never even mentioned his name, Nazi Noles?
It's his agenda that makes him your hero. Just as you defended Patrick
Buchanan.
<clip attempts by the Nazi fucktard to distance himself from views that
expose hate for the Jews, while the Nazi fucktard has insisted that
"Auschwitz wouldn't execute a 72-year-old man...">
>> <fx: desi runs from the room screaming "this is my last monitor...
>> I can't ram my fist through my LAST monitor!!!!">
>
> More mindless copying of others' retorts. Can't you come up with
> anything original ?
Jesus... just how desperate are you? Why are you always so angry?
>> And see how he managed to claim that there was no Holocaust in Europe. See --
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_states_Poland_not_in_Europe.html
>> If Poland is not in Europe... well... there you go, folks... Europe is cleansed of
>> anything to do with killing Jews in the Holocaust.
>
> Oh, well .. .look at that, guys 'n' gals.
>
> http://minilien.fr/a0kbe7
> Three instances of the string 'Europe is cleansed', and all three of
> them written by Noles (with a further one by SFB, quoting your words).
All three of them referring to your comment, Nazi fucktard. But I
know you insist your comments in support of Nazi doctrine are
"copyright." LOL. There'll be a lot more on the way, Nazi filth...
as I continue to expose your support for the Nazis, including Hitler's
invasion of Poland, which you claimed was "not a criminal offense."
> You are a liar, Nazi Noles.
And you're a Nazi who supports the Holocaust, and tried to
reduce the number of Jews exterminated in Auschwitz.
Still have that homicidal side of you. Bet you wish you could rip out my
liver... don't you? Life is good.... you can't get your filthy hands on
me. The closest you came was that cyber-stalking phone call you
made to my private home, which caused my wife to say -- "Jesus...
what a horrible Arab-accented French that guy had."
TRUTH
news:1ids3zd.1yhcxzs1o16yhaN%yit...@yahoo.fr...
>>
>> ROTFLMAO. Are you claiming that God came down and ripped off
>> your laptop while you were sitting in the park in the afternoon sun?
>> Are you and the guy who ripped off your laptop best of friends now?
>
> Shabbat is almost upon us and we need to prepare.
Yeah... get all that spray paint bought and organized before the "big night" of
you and your gang visiting Jewish graveyards.
> However, as it's so
> easy (not to mention fun) to hammer you ...
>
> http://alt-activism-death-penalty.org/extra-media/rob.jpg
>
> Oh, look ...
>
> 'USAGE In law, to rob is to take something from someone by causing fear
> of harm, whether or not actual harm occurs. The term is widely, but
> _incorrectly_ [my emphasis], used to refer to theft:: our house was
> robbed while we were away. Technically, the more correct statement would
> be | our house was burglarized while we were away'
Don't tell me you weren't afraid when your laptop was taken from you
in broad daylight, in a public park. I'm sure the excreta was pouring
down your pant leg. As you sat there petrified in fear.
> I have never been 'robbed'.
You were "robbed" when God forceable took you off the assembly
line and created a monster. But it says something about you... and
your ever present attempts to defend criminals, all the way up from
petty crime to murder. We have a name for people like you in the
U.S. --> "bottom-feeding, scum-sucking social-outcast parasites."
> And Naz'-Cunt cops yet another hiding.
Poor Nazi fucktard. Tell us all how Judge Zobel could not overturn
a guilty verdict of the "great white whale." See --
http://www.battle-evil.com/dipshit_gimmicks/gimmick_2.html
Remember??? "PV is right." Don't you ever forget it.
> <thump! ... hammer! ... crash! ... thwack! ... pummel-pummel-pummel ...
> 'spnak' (sic) ... 'spnak' (sic) ...'spnak' (sic) ... whump-squeal! ...
> slap... punch ... kick ... 'spnak' (sic) ... 'spnak' (sic) ...hammer!
> ...thrash ... thump! ... whump-squeal ... 'spnak' (sic)
> ...pummel-pummel-pummel ... bash! ... beat! ... 'spnak' (sic) ...
> 'spnak'(sic) ...'spnak' (sic) ... >
Why are you always so angry, Nazi fucktard?
Is that any way for the only ersatz-Jew in AADP to act?
TRUTH
news:1idsvwz.2tqw1g1kwe5oaN%yit...@yahoo.fr...
> James ''pro-Jewish' Noles <na...@earthlink.net> wrote ...
>> Desmond "Nazi to the Core" Coughlan <yit...@yahoo.fr> wrote in message
Of course not... Both you and David Duke call it "rhetoric," Nazi fucktard.
> http://alt-activism-death-penalty.org/extra-media/rhetoric.jpg
It's "rhetoric," all right... but properly called "racist rhetoric." Meant
to inflame racial prejudices and persuade the reader that Blacks are
ripping off the welfare system, and Whites are the victims. If that isn't
the case, why not have used the non-racial word "someone" rather
than "black mama," with the additional claim of "riding up in a caddy"?
Why not just say "someone illegally abusing the welfare system by
making multiple claims"? No... that wouldn't have achieved Earl's
objective. The objective of making it appear Blacks are the ONLY
ones ripping off the welfare system.
Of course, with you being a racist, the racist implication behind Earl's
comment is totally on you. You'll defend it as if it came down from
God, in your Aryan Nation beliefs, while wearing your KKK robe.
According to you, it MUST be only a "black mama" cheating the
welfare system. According to you a "white mama" would never do
that, right???
> There it is: your doom.
I'm not the one defending racist "rhetoric." That's what you're
doing right now. Earl's comment is the same "rhetoric" as that of
David Duke. Except that David Duke tries to come off as not
as racist as Earl showed himself to be. For example --
http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php/stormfront-radio-town-hall-fromm-141878p281.html
Your favorite group, and David Duke... His words -- "Much like
Reagan gave lip service to opposing immigration, affirmative action,
welfare abuse, busing, etc. Only problem is that under Reagan
every one of these nefarious categories advanced relentlessly under
the Reagan Presidency!" There is not the slightest doubt that both
you and Earl would agree with every word offered by David Duke,
and claim you're not a racist in doing so.
>> It's "rhetoric," all right...
>
> Yes, Nazi Noles. Don't you have anything more intelligent to do than
> repeat my words?
Sure... it's racist rhetoric. Satisfied???
>> properly called "racist rhetoric." Meant to persuade the reader
>> that Blacks are ripping off the welfare system, and Whites are
>> the victims.Blacks are ripping off the welfare system,
>
> You dirty, racist cunt. That comment is every bit as despicable as when
> you claimed that ...
Those are the words YOU'RE defending, Nazi fucktard. Earl's words
were "a black mama riding up in her Caddy to collect her payments
making perhaps $8000 a week from multiple collection." That certainly
implies that Blacks are the one's that are responsible for all welfare
fraud. They are the ones that state that a Black is ripping off the
welfare system. And you obviously support whipping up that kind of
inflammatory racist rhetoric.
> "His anti-Americanism is far down the list of his inhuman behavior here
> in AADP. In fact, he is only anti-American, because he believes that
> 'the Jews run American foreign policy' while he hates Blacks, in general.
> Other than that... Le Pen has a strong supporter in the person of Desmond
> Coughlan... itinerate, illiterate, immigrant common laborer from Ireland...
> feeding off the French liberal social system."
> James 'pro-Jewish' Noles, 10 February 2004
> http://minilien.fr/a0juw7
"Auschwitz wouldn't execute a 72-year-old man..."
Desmond "I LOVE Auschwitz" Coughlan, Jan 1 2004
http://tinyurl.com/2g37l4
Sure looks like proof of your support for Le Pen, Nazi fucktard.
> What's next in your litany of hatred towards Jews and blacks, Naz'?
> Plan to claim that whites are the victims ?
We are all victims of hate like yours, Nazi fucktard. Why are you always
so angry, when I expose a comment from someone else or from you
that is clearly racist?
>> properly called "racist rhetoric." Meant to persuade the reader
>> that Blacks are ripping off the welfare system, and Whites are
>> the victims.Blacks are ripping off the welfare system,
> <speechless>
I suppose you're also speechless in your support for Auschwitz.
> You're a repulsive Nazi, Nazi Noles.
I'm not the one who agreed with the Hitler doctrine that the "Jews
are legally inhuman." That's what you supported... in your own
words.
"The issue is whether or not, the Nazis, in declaring Jews 'inhuman',
were acting illegally. They were not."
Desmond "The Jews are inhuman... run...run... run" Coughlan. Feb 26 1999
http://tinyurl.com/29hfoo
>> > <fx: Nazi Noles stares in open-mouthed _awe_ at Yitzhak's _mighty_ power
>> > in language ...>
>
>> Only in your dreams, Nazi fuckwit. What we have here is a clear
>> case of you defending a racist comment. Which isn't an extraordinary
>> event, since you have a habit of defending racism, including your own.
> Get a handle on that temper, Naz', all right? Oops, sorry .. 'alright'
> (sic).
Mindless drivel 1) I see you didn't deny you are defending a racist
comment. You only argue that I am getting angry in exposing your
defending that racist comment.
> *rofl*
Mindless drivel 2) I notice you often laugh at your own racism and
the Holocaust, Nazi fucktard.
>> > Exactly what is racist about the expression 'black mama'?
>
>> If you have to ask, you already prove that you're a racist.
>>
>> Exactly what is not racist about blaming generalized welfare fraud
>> only on a "Black mama"? Yellow journalism of that kind went out
>> in the 60s, even in the deepest part of the racist south of the U.S.
>> Unfortunately... it is still within the deep recesses of Earl's beliefs.
>> The fact that you dismiss it as non-racist shows only that racism
>> still exists on the surface of your beliefs. Even Earl isn't defending
>> it. He's gone very quiet. Of course, you won't, because you are
>> a racist. Earl has started to realize just how disgraceful his comment
>> was. You'll defend it as if it is your own. Earl is not a racist, but
>> he carries some strong baggage with him. I don't care whether he
>> apologizes to the group or not... his ego will almost certainly prevent
>> him doing so. But I believe the penny has dropped as far as him
>> being aware of just how bad his comment was. You are a born racist...
>> through and through, and think you can get away with it by calling
>> your enemies "racists," to cover up your own obvious racism.
> that you're an illiterate wankstain?
As long as we agree that you're a racist... I don't give a shit what
kind of insult you happen to throw at me in your angry frustration.
> Come now, Naz'. It's not like anyone here needed convincing of that
> fact, is it?
Why are you so angry, Nazi fucktard? Could it be your fear that
others will see you support comments such as "a black mama riding
up in her caddy to collect her payments making perhaps $8000 a
week from multiple collection"? You do support that comment...
15000%. Don't you??
>> > Blatant lies, NN. I have never been 'robbed'.
Pardon me... but I've not had my laptop stolen. You're the loser, sport.
In "crime-free Europe." HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (copyright JN).
>> > I have never been
>> > 'assaulted', and only once did I come face to face with someone acting
>> > aggressively.
>>
>> You used the words "I stated that an individual had made an attempt on
>> my life. I do not know what nationality the person is, and I care even
>> less." See --
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_attempt_on_his_life.html
>> Don't you just hate it when you find I've kept some of your comments,
>> making it necessary for you to try and forge a comment and claim it came
>> from me, in one your amateur attempts? Didn't you just hate it when
>> Andrew proved you to be a liar?
>>
>> So... that's exactly what I said you had mentioned, thus why now are you
>> trying to reduce the degree of the crime? Were there "mitigating
>> circumstances" behind that "attempt on your life"?
> Ho, ho, ho ... come on, Naz' ... you expect .. no, listen Noles, stop
> punching your monitor, man .. you exp- ... Noles, _listen_ !! ... you
> expect _anyone_ to take your 'onetimeuse' (which in itself is a
> delicious demonstration of your pathoogical mendacity) as some sort of
> 'reference' ?
"pathoogical mendacity" ROTFLMAO. How many times have I told
you not to use big words that confuse you, Nazi fucktard?
You can deny it all you want, but the proof is there, Nazi fucktard.
It's not my problem that you remove your comments whenever they
come back to bite you, and then lie and deny you ever posted them.
Nor will it for one moment stop me from exposing every comment
I see from you in which you offer racist or Jew-hating "rhetoric."
Your methods are those of character assassination, and poisoning
the well ad hominem, which you use against me, against Andrew,
against jigsaw, against anyone who dares to confront your lies, and
countless offering of racism and mindless drivel. Going so far as
in the past to attack a mother who had lost her son to murderer,
with you insisting she was "lying," and _needed to get over it_.
You're one sick fucker, Nazi scum... but you're just an object for
me to ridicule, as far as I'm concerned.
However; what I really love, is that you try to deny it, and forget that some
of your posts still exist in Google... including that one. See --
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/4874de3771182337
>> Don't you just hate it when you find I've kept some of your comments,
>
> There are few things on AADP guaranteed to make me leap as high with
> joy, as the group's proven and acknowledged liar, seeking to convince us
> that his website is somehow 'proof' of anything (other than of your
> obsessive and increasingly violent desire to 'win one').
Why are you always so angry when I post your own words? Are you
ashamed of them as soon as you post them? Obviously, given your
attempts at denial there is exposed in you an inbred fear of your past
comments in AADP. I have no such fear, as I can either defend or
apologize for any comment I have ever made in AADP. It's how I
remain honest to myself... which makes me far, far better than you...
lying Nazi scum. I don't need to claim I'm infallible as you need to
claim to cover up your lies, your hate, your support for the Nazis
and the Holocaust... and of course, your endless stream of mindless
drivel. I don't need to demand Google remove my comments, as
you have found it essential to remove yours. What are you afraid
of, given your claim to be infallible, Nazoscum?
>> making it necessary for you to try and forge a comment and claim it came
>> from me, in one your amateur attempts?
>
> Poor Naz' is sore that with one text file that took me 90 seconds to
> create, I demonstrated _conclusively_ that the pages on your website
> that you peddle as 'proof', are as reliable as a three-euro note.
> Especially one with, erm ... <fx: bites bottom lip to hold in
> laughter>... 'faces' (sic) on it ...
You didn't prove anything, since there was not even a thread with the
title you gave in your forgery, nor was there a post from euro, which
you tried to include as part of your forgery. Of course the difference is
you prove you are willing to lie to hide your own comments, while there
is no way for you to prove that any post of yours that I expose is a
lie. Because they aren't. Both Andrew and I PROVED your post
was a fabrication. Try to prove any that I provide of your comments
are fabrications.
Here are a few. Which one do you claim is a fabrication of your comment?
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_Fucktard_Perfect_Equivalents.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_Fucktard_Wiesenthal_comment.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_Fucktard_claims_Jews_are_Inhuman.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_Fucktard_insists_Auschwitz_wouldn't_execute_elderly.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_Wrongly_Released_Murderer.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_claims_Europe_moral_with_Holocaust.htm
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_claims_Right_to_Life_cannot_be_lawfully_taken_away.jpg
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_claims_Shoah_not_evil.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_commits_waterboard_torture.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_insists_everyone_could_legally_kill_Jews_in_WWII.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_says_Holocaust_was_just.html
The blood slowly drains out of the fucktard's face, as a whiter shade
of pale causes him to suffer a severe reaction to the truth.
> ROFL !!!!
Mindless drivel 3)
>> Didn't you just hate it when Andrew proved you to be a liar?
>
> LMAO !!!
Mindless drivel 4)
> So desperate is The FuckWit to score a point, that all it takes is for
> someone to disagree with me, and NN is in there claiming, 'victory' for
> that person.
That person has continued to do a job on you whenever he feels like
it. Such as after you claimed his words meant he believed you are Jewish
he offered you the nickname of "ersatz-Jew." ROTFLMAO. Remember
how you reacted to that? In your typical method of calling those who
you see threaten you "Nazis." What was it you called Andrew? I
believe it was "retarded Nazi." How typical of you to use that method.
When caught in your own web of lies and mindless drivel, fall back on
"character assassination." All you have left.
> Shit who knows, eh? Next he'll be claiming that
> Super-Retard's (go on, Nazi Noles .. show your _monstrous_ ignorance by
> jumping on that apostrophe, demonstrating that you haven't a _clue_ how
> to use a gerund... go on, Nazi Noles ..make my day... *snigger*) not
> answering me is his 'spanking' me.
Mindless drivel 5)
"There can be no legitimacy in the Arab claim to land that was never their's"
Desmond "God... I wish I had continued going to school" Coughlan. Mar 8 2008
http://tinyurl.com/2q67u8
You do jump around like a Goebbel's jumping bean when angry, Nazi
fucktard. Go on, Nazi scum... show your _monstrous_ ignorance by
jumping on that apostrophe.
> Oops.. for once, Nazi Scum-Cunt Noles (NS-CN) got there first.
Mindless drivel 6)
>> So... that's exactly what I said you had mentioned, so why now are you
>> trying to reduce the degree of the crime? Were there "mitigating
>> circumstances" behind that "attempt on your life"?
>>
>> > Why do you lie so much, Nazi Noles?
>>
>> Hehehehehe (copyright Jim Noles)...
>
> 'I was staggered by desi's presumption that his words were _protected_
> by _copyright_. Let's get real here. There is no protection against
> anything in Usenet.'
> James 'Slug-in-Foot' Noles, 24 February 2003
> http://tinyurl.com/2kvft8
Once again poor Nazi fucktard Coughlan misses the mark in detecting
any sarcasm.
>> Each time you claim I lie, I prove that you're the liar, Nazi fucktard.
> I'm right.
You always claim your lies are "right."
>> >> , you would be sure to be robbed at gun-point by no one
>> >> other than a Black American, who would say when robbing you --
>> >
>> > Where did I say that, Nazi Noles?
>> >
>> Jesus... just below, Nazi fucktard. And in another comment from you --
>> It was --
>> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/4a4c081cdf22b699
>> Oh, wait.. ROTFLMAO... the Nazi fucktard just demanded Google
>> remove it. It was there no less than a month ago. But he's not that slick.
>> I kept a picture of his comment that was in Google. See --
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_thinks_all_Blacks_are_criminals.htm
>> His words -- "I ride my bike to work and back ... not once have I had
>> a revolver stuck in my face, accompanied by the eloquent words, 'Gimme da
>> dough, mothafucka o ah toast yo ass !!'
>>>>
>>>> "Gimmie da money, honkey mothafucka, oh ah toast yo ass !!'" See -
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activism.death-penalty/msg/45f62f7879a8b34e
>
>> >Just out of idle curiosity, Naz', why are you still attempting to pass
>> > of your 'dolly coughlan' posts as mine?
>>
>> Aside from your ""illiterite" (sic)" comment... because it is your words. Need another
>> one, where you insist you would only be robbed by, as you so eloquently
>> put it, "n******" (in the plural)? See --
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_again_claims_only_a_Black_would_mug_him.htm
>>
>
> Where did I say that only a '"Black" [sic] "American" [sic]' would rob
> me, Scum-Cunt?
Hey... follow the "chevrons," Nazi fucktard. You insist anything else is
beyond your intellect.
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_thinks_all_Blacks_are_criminals.htm
>> His words -- "I ride my bike to work and back ... not once have I had
>> a revolver stuck in my face, accompanied by the eloquent words, 'Gimme da
>> dough, mothafucka o ah toast yo ass !!'
>
> A statement of fact, Nazi Noles.
That's what all racists use as an argument. You know... like you insist that
because there are more murders committed by Blacks, you assert that _it
must be in their genes_. Since that's exactly what your comment implied.
Why is it that you feel it is a fact that you would only be robbed by a Black
man if you came to the U.S.? Try to answer in words of more than one
syllable, and not use any arguments from your Stormfront newsgroup.
> I can also state that I have never had
> a gun stuck in my face, accompanied by the words, 'I say, old bean ..
> would you mind giving me all of your money or I shall have no choice but
> to use this firearm?'
But that isn't what you said... is it? Try to connect the dots with what you
originally said, rather than your "revised copy" purposely trying to hide the
racism which existed in your "original copy."
> Maybe I'm now claiming that 'only a well-spoken Englishman would rob
> me', eh?
Regardless... we are examining what you DID SAY... not what you claim
you might have said. You might have said the Jewish victims of the
Holocaust were "legally human." But you DIDN'T... did you? Instead
you argued Hitler's doctrine, that the Jews were "legally inhuman."
"The issue is whether or not, the Nazis, in declaring Jews 'inhuman',
were acting illegally. They were not."
Desmond "The Jews are inhuman... run...run... run" Coughlan. Feb 26 1999
http://tinyurl.com/29hfoo
> Game and set to Yitzhak.
Mindless drivel 7)
> You stupid fuck.
Mindless drivel 8)
I rather enjoy it when you claim I'm stupid for exposing your racism and
support for the Holocaust.
>> See --
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_again_claims_only_a_Black_would_mug_him.htm
>
> Fuckin' 'ell, you're accumulating the racist spouting these days, aren't
> you, Naz' ?
I do the best job I can of finding all your racist comments. It's a tough job,
considering you try to remove them the moment I recall them for you, and
there are a mountain of them as there is.
<clip the Nazi fucktard attempting to deny his hate for Blacks>
>> >> Now please don't try to stretch our credibility by insisting if you
>> >> were to be robbed by a WHITE American,
>
>> > Oh-oh, folks .. he's in 'BLOCK' (sic) 'CAPITALS' (sic) mode again ...
>> > get ready for some spitting, some screaming and some punching his
>> > computer monitor.
>
>> Pretty pathetic attempt to avoid the truth, Nazi fucktard. Whether you
>> know it or not, Block letters are not prohibited in Usenet,
>
> Exactly where did I claim that they were 'prohibited', Filth?
Well... you sure do a good job of whining about it. Just like you whined
about the Nazis having had their "human rights" taken away from them,
while there is no record of even a single post from you mentioning the
"human rights" the Jews had, who were exterminated by the Nazis.
>> nor do they always represent "shouting." But you'll use any subterfuge
>> to avoid the consequences of your past comments.
>>
>> >> he would call you a
>> >> "honkey"? In fact, if robbing you, only a Black would call you a
>> >> "honkey," given you are White.
>> >>
> It is accepted practice in e-mails and on Usenet, to only employ
> capitals at the beginning of sentences, or on initials (logos etc.) that
> legitimately use them. Block capitals are considered to be 'shouting'.
> That is why underscores are used on either side of the word, as before
> typsetting equipment could handle italics (which are used to denote
> emphasis) or in handwritten texts (which are by definition, mostly
> 'italic' anyway), underlining was used. 7-bit ASCII doesn't allow
> underlining, and so hey presto, underscores are used.
Mindless drivel 9) Just in case you don't think I read your drivel...
it's "typesetting equipment," you moron.
> No doubt the number of multisyllabic words in that paragraph had you
> scratching your head, and Nadia wiping saliva off your slack, rubbery
> lips, but I hope that others will have learned something.
Mindless drivel 10)
I suppose you found all of that in your "libray" (sic). ROTFLMAO
>> > No, Nazi Noles: I am white.
>
>> Proving only that your comment was blatantly racist.
>
> So you must be racist as well, then, Naz', as you're white, too.
No, sport. Once again you lack the intellect to connect the dots.
If one is White, and offers a racist comment against a Black, one
is a racist. I am White, but have never made a racist comment
against a Black. Being White doesn't make one a racist... Being
a racist makes one a racist. Look in the mirror and you will see
both a White... AND a racist.
>> >> But what the hell... all we need is the proof that you supported
>> >> the genocide of Black African Tutsis,
>> >
>> > I'm sure you mean, 'black African Tutsis', Shithead.
>>
>> Trying to make such a scandal about that capitalization, the only thing
>> you are sure of is your own racism. You don't make that big a stink
>> about the Holocaust.
>>
> yank your chain concerning
The only "chain" you'd really like to pull is the one that dropped the
Zyklon-B, Nazi fucktard.
>> > So the fact that you voted for Bush in 2000, means that you 'support the
>> > war in Iraq', then, Nazi Noles?
>
>> Let's put our cards on the table. I did not vote for Bush in 2000.
>
> Yes, you did, Nazi Noles.
No, I didn't, shit-for-brains.
>> You have no proof that I did.
>
> As long as you can't prove that you are not lying, Nazi Noles, we must
> assume that you voted for him.
The assumption is always in the negative. There is no proof I voted for
Bush at any time, thus the assumption is that I have not voted for Bush.
There is no proof that you are Jewish, thus the assumption is that you
are not Jewish. You are the one claiming I voted for Bush in 2000.
You are the one claiming you are Jewish. He who asserts... must
prove, Nazi fucktard. Now if I was claiming I had voted for Bush,
or that you are Jewish, I would have to prove it. Luckily I do not
make either claim. Unless I assert that I even voted in 2000, you
can't claim you know I did.
You really have no idea how logic works, do you?
> <fx: NN stares at his screen ... 'I didn't even see that one a-comin'!!>
The Nazi fucktard extracts his bloodied fist from within another monitor
and with sparks flying everywhere, weeps inconsolably, "That fucking PV
has done it to me, AGAIN!!"
>> While I have proof of your SUPPORT for
>> Mitterand in his 1981 election victory.
>
> Which isn't the same as supporting any crimes he later committed. If
> you claim it is, then you must also accept that you are responsible for
> the war in Iraq.
That's what you say NOW. But your past support for his leftist course of
action in France has been seen over and over. Aren't you the one who
insists you don't need proof to claim I voted for Bush in 2000? How
quickly your POV changes when the shoe is on the other foot.
>> I haven't seen you distance yourself one inch from Mitterand's role in
>> that genocide.
>
> Why should I 'distance' myself from something for which I bear no
> responsibility, FuckWit ?
Heh... that's what the Nazis said... "Es war nicht meine Schuld."
The burden of that genocide rests within an agenda that you supported.
After all... it was only two months ago (1/1/2008) that you wrote about how
you would love to have met him, and that you still regret his death.
You PRAISED him in referring to him as a "moral leader." Claiming
his views "resonate with the positions of the majority" of the French.
Now suddenly you insist you were always trying to distance yourself
from his positions. Is it your claim that Mitterand's view that "in such
countries, genocide is not too important," resonated with the positions
of the majority of French citizens?
A simple "yes," or "no," will do, Nazi scum.
<clip the fuckwit claiming I support Stalin because the fuckwit supported
Mitterand>
>> In fact your big effort was directed at my mistake in
>> using "Uganda," rather than "Rwanda."
>
> No, Nazi Scum-Cunt, my 'big effort' is in taunting you mercilessly and
> ensuring that you don't have time to answer anyone else on the group.
Why are you always so angry, Nazi fucktard? Especially when I
go about exposing you in your support for Black African genocide?
>> > <laughs for two seconds before ducking as a small, bony white (sorry,
>> > 'White' (sic) .. ROFLMAO!!!) fist shoots out and 'CLUNKS' (sic) against
>> > NN's monitor...>
>
>> Poor Nazi Coughlan... laughs at the Holocaust...
>
> As I recall things, Nazi Noles, you were the one who answered 'ROFLMAO'
> when I posted my moving account of a visit to the Memorial of the Shoah
> here in Paris ...
>
> http://minilien.fr/a0jvdh
That's because that was a Memorial to those you have insisted were "in the
absolute... perfect equivalents, both morally and legally" to proven and executed
murderers. That's because that was a Memorial to those you insisted you
could not believe their extermination was "evil" (morally wrong). That's
because that was a Memorial to those you insisted were legally exterminated.
That's because that was a Memorial to those you insisted were "legally
inhuman." Is that clear enough, or shall I mention the other insults you
have thrown at the Jews, including the hundreds of times you used an
ethnic slur in referring to the Jews, when you posted comments to me? You're
the one who tried to make a game of it, by posting pictures intended only
to embellish your lie that you are Jewish. Like the laughable times you
referred to yourself as a "Rabbi" in your handle, or the sickening times
you claimed to "wear the yellow star," as the same victim of that Shoah.
Did you wear it when you went to "visit" that Memorial? That would have
been just like you.
>> >> Your hero, Pat
>> >> Robertson??? Come on.... cough it up... Nazi fucktard.
>
>> > My 'hero', when I have never even mentioned his name, Nazi Noles?
>
>> It's his agenda that makes him your hero.
>
> Without ever mentioning his name?
Absolutely. Do you argue you have to mention the NAME of Hitler to
agree with his agenda?
> You retarded mongol.
More of your racist hate. And again you refuse to capitalize any race
that you hate.
>> Just as you defended Patrick Buchanan.
>
> Please show the group where I 'defended Patrick Buchanan', Liar.
Heh... I didn't happen to save that particular thread, and I see you've
removed all your comments that stated -- "I LOVE Pat Buchanan."
Guess I can't "prove" you LOVE Pat Buchanan.... just have to say
it's "my opinion."
>> Why are you always so angry?
>
> HAHAHAHA !!!
Mindless drivel 12)
> Nothing original here, move along now ...
Mindless drivel 13)
>> >> And see how he managed to claim that there was no Holocaust in Europe. See
> --
>> >> http://home.earthlink.net/~onetimeuse/Nazi_fucktard_states_Poland_not_in_Europe.html
>> >> If Poland is not in Europe... well... there you go, folks... Europe is cleansed of
>> >> anything to do with killing Jews in the Holocaust.
>> >
>> > Oh, well .. .look at that, guys 'n' gals.
>> >
>> > http://minilien.fr/a0kbe7
>>
>> > Three instances of the string 'Europe is cleansed', and all three of
>> > them written by Noles (with a further one by SFB, quoting your words).
>>
>> All three of them referring to your comment, Nazi fucktard.
>
> A comment which doesn't exist, Nazi Noles. So again, remind us of where
> I ever wrote, 'Europe is cleansed of anything to do with killing Jews in
> the Holocaust'.
Where do any quotation marks exist, Nazi fucktard? There is clear evidence
in your words that you are geographical challenged, and refuse to believe
Poland is in Europe. That alone is sufficient proof to connect the dots
that you wish to protect the Nazi death camps, because you insisted that
the Nazis were "deprived of their human rights."
<clip another homicidal episode from the Nazi fucktard>
>> Bet you wish you could rip out my
>> liver... don't you? Life is good.... you can't get your filthy hands on
>> me. The closest you came was that cyber-stalking phone call you
>> made to my private home, which caused my wife to say -- "Jesus...
>> what a horrible Arab-accented French that guy had."
>
> How telling that of all the accents with which NN would seek to demonise
> me .. he chose an Arab accent.
My wife made that determination. I'm just the messenger, since you hung
up in fear before I ever came to the phone. If you didn't want to be
exposed you should have never cyber-stalked me and my family.
Since even you have insisted that those who stalk others by "posting
private details concerning anyone or anyone's family to the internet... are
on the same evolutionary level as murderers." Those were you own
words... but you felt they didn't apply when you cyber-stalked me... since
you stated in AADP that you wanted to "punish" me in a way more
furious and personal than simple death threats in Usenet. You wanted
to raise your death threats to a personal level.
<clip the Nazi fucktard claims that "racism wins again">
Two criminals walk out of prison.
#1 is a murderer who was sentenced to death but through a paperwork
fuck up is released, and goes on to murder desi's wife.
#2 is a homeowner never convicted of any crime, who was convicted
of punching a neo-Nazi who was trying to plant a Nazi sign in his front yard.
Guess which one desi insists should have been executed?
Now run along and wash the cum off your hands, Nazi filth.