Peeler wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 14:47:14 +0100, clinically insane, pedophilic, serbian
> bitch Razovic, the resident psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous
> sexual cripple, making a total ass of herself as "† The Reverend", farted
> again:
>
>
>>> Nithing, you are so obsessed with the diarrhoea!
>>>> You are a gook.
>>> That would be better than being a Nazi nithing.
>>
>> How the fuck CAN it be, gook? I'm WHITE and you're not just SUBHUMAN
>> but mongoloid too!
>
> That's easy, sexual cripple: YOU are RETARDED and PERVERTED and SUBHUMAN. HE
> is SMART and STRAIGHT! Smart and straight beats white, perverted and
> subhuman any time!
Of course.
>
>>> You are a nithing
>>
>> You are a gook.
>
> He isn't. But you ARE a nithing! And the best part of it: you KNOW it
> yourself! You just DON'T know what to do about it! LMAO
He could commit seppuku.
>
>> <inane repetition b'rissed>
>
> The TRUTH about you nithing restored:
>
> Bill explains what nithings are.
>
>
http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=9446
>
> Define and Dehumanize the Enemy: Jihadists as Nithings or Nidings
>
> by Bill Levinson
> It is an ancient principle of magic (which modern people recognize as
> stories that reflect a society’s culture and psychology) that
> knowledge of a person’s real or True Name delivers power over that
> person. What it really means is that, if you know the person’s
> psychology, you can gain an advantage over him. It is also well known
> that the side that controls the language of an argument controls the
> argument. As an example, Hamas terrorists and their enablers refer to
> Israel’s military as an “occupation force” and terrorisitic violence
> against civilians as “resistance.”
>
> We have long sought a single word that strips the enemy of all
> humanity, and reduces him to something less than an animal that is
> worthy of nothing less than extermination. As far as we know, the
> English language contains no such word, although “dreck” (garbage or
> refuse) comes close. “Homo sapiens by BIRTH, subhuman by CHOICE”
> describes Islamic supremacists perfectly, but it is a phrase and not a
> word. We now propose to refer to Islamic supremacists as nithings or
> nidings: a Scandinavian word that strips its object of all humanity.
> Webster’s dictionary (1913) defines it as “A coward; a dastard; — a
> term of utmost opprobrium.”
>
> We remind readers who object to the dehumanization of Islamic
> supremacists that those enemies are already attempting to dehumanize
> Jews, and to a lesser degree Christians, with images that could have
> come directly from Adolf Hitler. As they have chosen to sow the
> dragon’s teeth, our position is that they must now reap their rightful
> harvest: the complete hatred and loathing of all civilized human
> beings.
> nithings
>
> Nithing or niding was more than a common insult, because Scandinavian
> culture required its subject to fight a duel with the accuser or
> become an outlaw: totally devoid of rights, honor, and even
> recognition as a human being. Per the Wikipedia entry,
>
> The actual meaning of the adjective argr or ragr [= Anglo-Saxon
> earg] was the nature or appearance of effeminacy, especially by
> obscene acts. Argr was the worst, most derogatory swearword of all
> known to the Norse language. According to Icelandic law, the accused
> was expected to kill the accuser at once. …If the accused did not
> retort by violent attack yielding either the accuser to take his words
> back or the accuser’s death, he was hence proven to be a weak and
> cowardly nithing by not retorting accordingly.
>
> A nithing was devoid of all human rights, and he was considered the
> enemy of civilized humanity: a perfect depiction of Islamic
> supremacists. The word therefore strips the enemy of all humanity, and
> degrades him to the status of a wolf or strangler (per Scandinavian
> tradition) or a virulent disease like the Black Plague. Black Plague
> is a deadly and contagious disease whose vector consists of plague-
> carrying rats, while the Green Plague of militant “Islam” is a deadly
> and contagious ideology that is spread by bipedal rats: nidings or
> nithings, non-humans that raise violent hands to all of civilized
> Humanity.
>
> The immediate consequence of being proven a nithing was
> outlawing. The outlawed did not have any rights, he was exlex (Latin
> for “outside of the legal system”), in Anglo-Saxon utlah, Middle Low
> German uutlagh, Old Norse utlagr. Just as feud yielded enmity among
> kinships, outlawry yielded enmity of all humanity.[63] …”Yet that is
> but one aspect of outlawry. The outlaw is not only expelled from the
> kinship, he is also regarded henceforth as an enemy to mankind.”
>
> The actual definition of a nithing is somewhat more involved and
> complex, and it gets into sexual perversions and zoomorphical
> transformations (Loki’s transformation of himself into a mare to have
> sexual intercourse with a stallion, and thus beget Odin’s horse
> Sleipner is probably an example), but the following line is pertinent:
> “The nithing used its malicious seid magic to destroy anything owned
> and made by man, ultimately the human race and Midgard itself[6], due
> to its basically unlimited envy, hate, and malice that were nith.”
>
> "Destruction of everything owned and made by Man” (the Palestinians’
> destruction of the greenhouses in Gaza comes to mind immediately) and
> “unlimited envy, hate, and malice” describe militant “Islam”
> perfectly, and further underscore the application of nithing or niding
> to describe it. The propensity for mindless destruction also appears
> in Orson Scott Card’s Alvin Maker series, in which a supernatural
> enemy is known as the Unmaker: a personification of evil that is the
> total antithesis of God the Creator.
>
> The Unmaker is the main antagonist in Orson Scott Card’s
> alternate history/fantasy series The Tales of Alvin Maker. Never
> directly confronted, it is a supernatural force that breaks apart
> matter and aims to destroy and consume everything and everyone. …To
> make something is to oppose the Unmaker, but a point often made is
> that this is futile. By natural law the Unmaker can tear down faster
> than any man can build.
>
> This also is an outstanding definition of militant “Islam” or Islamic
> supremacy: an ideology that seeks to destroy everything into which it
> comes in contact, and with which no reason, negotiation, or compromise
> is possible.
>
> In summary, a nithing or niding is the enemy of Civilization, a
> subhuman (through its behavioral choices, and emphatically NOT due to
> its racial or ethnic origin) monster with total hatred and malice
> toward all human industry and arts, and worthy of nothing but
> extermination like any virulent disease. This is the word we will now
> apply to Islamic supremacists and their enablers, and we encourage
> others to do likewise.
>
The following article explains his pathology.
http://archive.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/03/11/historys_oldest_hatred/
History's oldest hatred
By Jeff Jacoby
Globe Columnist / March 11, 2009
Email|Print|Single Page||Text size – +
ANTI-SEMITISM is an ancient derangement, the oldest of hatreds, so
it is strange that it lacks a more meaningful name. The misnomer
"anti-Semitism" - a term coined in 1879 by the German agitator Wilhelm
Marr, who wanted a scientific-sounding euphemism for Judenhass, or
Jew-hatred - is particularly inane, since hostility to Jews has never
had anything to do with Semites or being Semitic.
Perhaps there is no good name for a virus as mutable as anti-Semitism.
"The Jews have been objects of hatred in pagan, religious, and secular
societies," write Joseph Telushkin and Dennis Prager in "Why the Jews?,"
their classic study of anti-Semitism. "Fascists have accused them of
being Communists, and Communists have branded them capitalists. Jews who
live in non-Jewish societies have been accused of having dual loyalties,
while Jews who live in the Jewish state have been condemned as
'racists.' Poor Jews are bullied, and rich Jews are resented. Jews have
been branded as both rootless cosmopolitans and ethnic chauvinists. Jews
who assimilate have been called a 'fifth column,' while those who stay
together spark hatred for remaining separate."
There was Jew-hatred before there was Christianity or Islam, before
Nazism or Communism, before Zionism or the Middle East conflict. This
week Jews celebrate the festival of Purim, gathering in synagogues to
read the biblical book of Esther. Set in ancient Persia, it tells of
Haman, a powerful royal adviser who is insulted when the Jewish sage
Mordechai refuses to bow down to him. Haman resolves to wipe out the
empire's Jews and makes the case for genocide in an appeal to the king:
"There is a certain people scattered and dispersed among . . . all the
provinces of your kingdom, and their laws are different from those of
other peoples, and the king's laws they do not keep, so it is of no
benefit for the king to tolerate them. If it please the king, let it be
written that they be destroyed."
When the king agrees, Haman makes plans "to annihilate, to kill and
destroy all the Jews, the young and the elderly, children and women, in
one day . . . and to take their property for plunder."
What drives such bloodlust? Haman's indictment accuses the Jews of
lacking national loyalty, of insinuating themselves throughout the
empire, of flouting the king's law. But the Jews of Persia had done
nothing to justify Haman's murderous anti-Semitism - just as Jews in
later ages did nothing that justified their persecution under the Church
or Islam, or their repression at the hands of Russian czars and Soviet
commissars, or their slaughter by Nazi Germany. When the president of
Iran today calls for the extirpation of the Jewish state, when firebombs
are hurled at synagogues in London and Paris and Chicago, it is not
because Jews deserve to be victimized.
Many Jews are no saints, but the paranoid frenzy that is anti-Semitism
is not explained by what Jews do, but by what they are. They are the
object of anti-Semitism, not its cause. That is why the haters'
rationales can be so wildly inconsistent and their agendas so
contradictory. What do those who vilify Jews as greedy bankers have in
common with those who revile them as fiendish Bolsheviks? Nothing, save
an irrational obsession with Jews.
At one point, Haman lets the mask slip. He boasts to his friends and
family of "the glory of his riches, and the great number of his sons,
and everything in which the king had promoted him and elevated him."
Still, he seethes with rage and frustration: "Yet all this is worthless
to me so long as I see Mordechai the Jew sitting at the king's gate."
That is the unforgivable offense: "Mordechai the Jew" refuses to blend
in, to be just like everyone else. He goes on sitting there -
undigested, unassimilated, and therefore unbearable.
Of course Haman had his ostensible reasons for targeting Jews. So did
Hitler and Arafat, so does Ahmadinejad. Sometimes the anti-Semite
focuses on the Jew's religion, sometimes on his laws and lifestyle,
sometimes on his professional achievements. Under it all, however, it is
the Jew's Jewishness that the anti-Semite cannot abide.
With all their flaws and failings, the Jewish people endure, their role
in history not yet finished. So the world's oldest hatred endures too,
as obsessive and indestructible - and deadly - as ever.