Re: [from offlist] Re: Stormfap go bye-bye now...

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 06:29:49PM -0400, John Newman wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Aug 31, 2017, at 1:10 AM, Zenaan Harkness  wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 05:40:46PM -0700, Razer wrote:
> >> 
> >> 
> >> On 08/30/2017 11:45 AM, grarpamp wrote:
> >>> Just as with Dailystormer and dozens to hundreds
> >>> of other controversial sites past and present, whether
> >>> HTML, IRC, filesharing, or simple p2p messaging,
> >>> Stormfront will be back online as a .i2p or .onion,
> >>> or on whatever other censorship resistant overlay
> >>> networks exist.
> >>> 
> >>> These cryptos and nets are mainstream now,
> >>> where others fail, expect them.
> >> 
> >> I expect Fascism is eternal...
> >> http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/
> >> 
> >> Ps. Promoting the extermination of anyone based on an unalterable trait
> >> is a little 'above the bar' that would generally be called
> >> "controversial" in ANY society. That's why these scumbag-operated
> >> domains get shut down.
> > 
> > Do you admit satire, black humour, any humour for that matter?
> > 
> 
> So was it a “joke” when you repeatedly defended the Duterte death
> squads, and spoke of him from your default point of view - a fascist
> apologist?
> 
> That was some pretty black humor, indeed ;)

You failed to respond in material particular at the time, and now
you proclaim to be the humorous authority on what I said?

Carry on with your hogwash John ...


> > Are you able to distinguish humour as it arises from the internal
> > causes of an individual human?
> > 
> > And are you able to properly assess the nature of a human when you
> > witness them type some words which can on their face, genuinely be
> > interpreted as humorous by some other humans?
> > 
> > Or is free humorous speech another one of these "less equal than
> > other free speech" things just like you hold that some facts are less
> > equeal than others?
> 
> 
> Do you actually think you’re funny? Do you really need the thin
> veil of “humor” for your noxious views? Just own that shit.  I mean,
> you are a joke - a bad, stale, unfunny sort of joke - but not in
> the way you're trying to claim.
> 
> 
> 
> P.S. I don’t support registrars and providers dropping sites for
> posting the type of shit Zzz likes to read..  I hope shit calms
> down and “silicon valley” realizes the mistakes they are making.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [from offlist] Re: Stormfap go bye-bye now...

[John Newman]

> On Aug 31, 2017, at 1:10 AM, Zenaan Harkness  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 05:40:46PM -0700, Razer wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 08/30/2017 11:45 AM, grarpamp wrote:
>>> Just as with Dailystormer and dozens to hundreds
>>> of other controversial sites past and present, whether
>>> HTML, IRC, filesharing, or simple p2p messaging,
>>> Stormfront will be back online as a .i2p or .onion,
>>> or on whatever other censorship resistant overlay
>>> networks exist.
>>> 
>>> These cryptos and nets are mainstream now,
>>> where others fail, expect them.
>> 
>> I expect Fascism is eternal...
>> http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/
>> 
>> Ps. Promoting the extermination of anyone based on an unalterable trait
>> is a little 'above the bar' that would generally be called
>> "controversial" in ANY society. That's why these scumbag-operated
>> domains get shut down.
> 
> Do you admit satire, black humour, any humour for that matter?
> 

So was it a “joke” when you repeatedly defended the Duterte death
squads, and spoke of him from your default point of view - a fascist
apologist?

That was some pretty black humor, indeed ;)


> Are you able to distinguish humour as it arises from the internal
> causes of an individual human?
> 
> And are you able to properly assess the nature of a human when you
> witness them type some words which can on their face, genuinely be
> interpreted as humorous by some other humans?
> 
> Or is free humorous speech another one of these "less equal than
> other free speech" things just like you hold that some facts are less
> equeal than others?


Do you actually think you’re funny? Do you really need the thin
veil of “humor” for your noxious views? Just own that shit.  I mean,
you are a joke - a bad, stale, unfunny sort of joke - but not in
the way you're trying to claim.



P.S. I don’t support registrars and providers dropping sites for
posting the type of shit Zzz likes to read..  I hope shit calms
down and “silicon valley” realizes the mistakes they are making.







signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: [from offlist] Re: Stormfap go bye-bye now...

[juan]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 17:40:46 -0700
Razer  wrote:

> 
> Ps. Promoting the extermination of anyone based on an unalterable
> trait is a little 'above the bar' that would generally be called
> "controversial" in ANY society. T

yet extermination of all inferior races is your quintessential
jewish philosophy, isn't it?

Re: [from offlist] Re: Stormfap go bye-bye now...

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 05:40:46PM -0700, Razer wrote:
> 
> 
> On 08/30/2017 11:45 AM, grarpamp wrote:
> > Just as with Dailystormer and dozens to hundreds
> > of other controversial sites past and present, whether
> > HTML, IRC, filesharing, or simple p2p messaging,
> > Stormfront will be back online as a .i2p or .onion,
> > or on whatever other censorship resistant overlay
> > networks exist.
> >
> > These cryptos and nets are mainstream now,
> > where others fail, expect them.
> 
> I expect Fascism is eternal...
> http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/
> 
> Ps. Promoting the extermination of anyone based on an unalterable trait
> is a little 'above the bar' that would generally be called
> "controversial" in ANY society. That's why these scumbag-operated
> domains get shut down.

Do you admit satire, black humour, any humour for that matter?

Are you able to distinguish humour as it arises from the internal
causes of an individual human?

And are you able to properly assess the nature of a human when you
witness them type some words which can on their face, genuinely be
interpreted as humorous by some other humans?

Or is free humorous speech another one of these "less equal than
other free speech" things just like you hold that some facts are less
equeal than others?

Re: [from offlist] Re: Stormfap go bye-bye now...

[Razer]

On 08/30/2017 11:45 AM, grarpamp wrote:
> Just as with Dailystormer and dozens to hundreds
> of other controversial sites past and present, whether
> HTML, IRC, filesharing, or simple p2p messaging,
> Stormfront will be back online as a .i2p or .onion,
> or on whatever other censorship resistant overlay
> networks exist.
>
> These cryptos and nets are mainstream now,
> where others fail, expect them.

I expect Fascism is eternal...
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1995/06/22/ur-fascism/

Ps. Promoting the extermination of anyone based on an unalterable trait
is a little 'above the bar' that would generally be called
"controversial" in ANY society. That's why these scumbag-operated
domains get shut down.

Rr

Re: [from offlist] Re: Stormfap go bye-bye now...

[grarpamp]

Just as with Dailystormer and dozens to hundreds
of other controversial sites past and present, whether
HTML, IRC, filesharing, or simple p2p messaging,
Stormfront will be back online as a .i2p or .onion,
or on whatever other censorship resistant overlay
networks exist.

These cryptos and nets are mainstream now,
where others fail, expect them.

Re: [from offlist] Re: Stormfap go bye-bye now...

[Razer]

On 08/29/2017 07:46 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> As an interesting aside "Razer", various of the sentences you have
> written to this list quite possibly WOULD be interpreted as
> incitement to violence/murder, by your local State authorities.


The bar for incitement charges at a state or federal level is very high
and suggesting Nazis, in general, be offed in self-defense, doesn't even
get above crotch (where you kick them) level.

It's all in the wording. As example, when dealing with
blackshirts the police:




Rr

Re: [from offlist] Re: Stormfap go bye-bye now...

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 10:13:14AM -0700, Razer wrote:
> Because I'd prefer to keep convos started on-list, onlist.
> On 08/28/2017 08:00 PM, Steven Schear wrote:
> > I am unconvinced this solution betters all our freedoms.
> >
> > "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most
> > of one's time defending *scoundrels*. For it is
> > against *scoundrels* that oppressive laws are first aimed, and
> > oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at
> > all."
> > H.L. Mencken
> 
> Fixing the "scoundrel problem" is an intractable problem I have
> ZERO time for.

Fair enough, no one's asking you to fix that problem.

Some might say it can't be fixed, others might say there's no point
trying to fix such an intractable problem - but in any case let's
leave that for a separate thread.


> Allowing an ideology to be promulgated negating human
> existence

Your argument is factless - if even some particular individual has
"promulgated negating human existence", and has so promulgated in a
way which is criminal (e.g. incitement to murder another individual
for example) then perhaps there would be grounds for you to report
that particular individual to your local State authorities.

But not only do such possible facts probably not exist in all but the
rarest of situations, you "Razer" continue, repeatedly, to fail to
present even ONE SINGLE fact in support of your position - other than
your usual hand waving exercises such as "those nasty White
Supremacists keep promulgating negating human existence".

That's a f*king strawman and you know it!

Put up a fact or you're an ongoing fraud and a bully.


As an interesting aside "Razer", various of the sentences you have
written to this list quite possibly WOULD be interpreted as
incitement to violence/murder, by your local State authorities.

Your hypocrisy on this point alone evidence that you "Razer" a real
bully, and at the very least, really aggressive in your communication
(and indeed offensive).  Perhaps you want to take a look at the
finger you keep pointing outwards...


> due to some unalterable trait is simply suicide for a society,
> and as can be seen from history, any society nearby.

Put up a fact, Razer.


> Ps. I take issues with Snopes interpolation of the famous AH quote about
> 'destroying the nucleus' where Hitler also said the Nazi rise was
> assisted by the violent counter-elements.
> 

Come on, at least put the quote in so we can read it:

  In January 2017, white nationalist Richard Spencer was punched in
  the face, igniting a debate about when it is acceptable to punch
  someone who espouses beliefs widely regarded as reprehensible
  (generally taking the form of the question, “Is it ever acceptable
  to punch a Nazi?”). In the ensuing discussion, the following
  popular quote, often attributed to Adolf Hitler, reappeared and
  recirculated:

  "Only one thing could have stopped our movement – if our
   adversaries had understood its principle and from the first day
   smashed with the utmost brutality the nucleus of our new
   movement."
   Attributed to Adolf Hitler.


  Daniel Guérin documented this quote in his 1939 book Fascism and
  Big Business.
  
https://books.google.com/books?id=vUNYMAAJ=fascism+and+big+business+daniel+guerin=searchwithinvolume=nucleus
  However, Guérin may have paraphrased Hitler’s actual words as the
  quote was presented alongside another utterance from a National
  Socialist leader, Joseph Goebbels, and not with the full text of
  the speech itself:

  "If in the beginning, when the Hitler bands were still weak, the
   workers’ parties had answered them blow for blow, there is no
   doubt their development would have been hampered. On this point
   we have the testimony of the National Socialist leaders
   themselves.

   Hitler confessed in retrospect: Only one thing could have
   broken our movement – if the adversary had understood its
   principle and from the first day had smashed, with the most
   extreme brutality, the nucleus of our new movement.”

   And goebbels: “If the enemy had known how weak we were,
   it would probably have reduced us to jelly…. It would
   have crushed in blood the very beginning of our work.”"


  Guérin cited a speech Hitler delivered at the Nuremberg Congress on
  3 September 1933.

  A 1934 book containing Hitler’s speeches, titled  “Die Reden
  Hitlers am Reichsparteitag 1933,”
  
http://archive.org/stream/Die-Reden-Hitlers-am-Reichsparteitag-1933/DieRedenHitlersAmReichsparteitag1933193427Doppels.ScanFraktur#page/n21/mode/1up
  contained a German version of this speech. A translation from the
  web site Zuriz confirmed that the quote was largely accurate,
  although it was missing some vital context:

  "“And so, I established in 1919 a programme and tendency that
   was a conscious slap in the face of the democratic-pacifist world
   (…) [We knew] it might take five or ten