Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

Judaism is a religion of
exile.


On 1/9/2018 10:27 AM, \0xDynamite wrote:
Not at all. 


No temple, don't actually want the temple back, because of the 
disturbing theological implications of actually having the temple, 
because actually having the temple immediately re-activates a pile of 
ancient Jewish law that today's pharisees do not want to touch with a 
ten foot pole.


If you don't genuinely want the temple back, then modern Judaism is a 
religion of exile and not a religion of Israel.  The Maccabees wanted 
the temple back.  Do you think Jonathan Maccabee would be wailing at the 
western wall?


Israel was founded by secular socialist Jews, because religious Jews 
were frightened of getting the temple back, and still are frightened of 
getting the temple back.


If you get the temple back, sixteen hundred years of excuses and 
rationalizations for phariseeism vanish, and the pharisees are back to 
being the guys who lost the war and caused the exile, while the Kohens 
are the guys who won the war with the Greeks.  The Kohens defeated a 
mighty formidable enemy, which victory looked astonishingly like a 
divine miracle, so the Pharisees thought that they would Jew God by 
provoking an even bigger war with an even more formidable enemy. And 
then destroying their own food supplies while under siege to force a 
miracle.


Did not work out as well for them as it worked out for the Kohens.


Judaism needs to give a lot
more attention to the final commandment,



Orthodox Jews do not really covet


Yet they devote a thousand times as much energy, effort, and thought to 
that line about the boiling a kid in its mother's milk, than they devote 
to the final commandment.


When Jews try to wreck Christmas, is that not coveting?

When Jews demanded that they be allowed to join the golf club, was that 
not coveting?



The [Jewish] religion has a permanent chip on its shoulder.



They were the only ones who remained loyal, Christians erected an
alternative God.


If you had remained loyal, you would have taken the temple mount back, 
rebuilt the temple, staffed it with Kohens, and put a Kohen in the line 
of Jonathan Maccabee in charge of it.


If you had remained loyal, you would have given effect to the law of 
Deuteronomy and Proverbs, the law of Moses and Solomon, on marriage and 
the family.


If you had remained loyal, you would be entirely untroubled by other 
people celebrating Christmas.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[\0xDynamite]

>> It's unfair to Jews to classify these people as "jews".  I think it's
>> mostly anti-semitic overgeneralization.  If they don't believe in the
>> story of Moses and GOD himself, they aren't really Jews, and they
>> shouldn't call themselves Jews.  It's like Africans in England calling
>> themselves "slaves".
>
> Fair enough.  Certainly religious Jews do not cause the problems that
> secular Jews cause.
>
> However, religious Jews have departed a long way from the religion
> founded by Moses, Solomon,

Not within the orthodoxy, like those still in Israel.  Only those who
followed Gregorian calendar really.

> Judaism is a religion of
> exile.

Not at all.   It is the West which has exiled them, particularly
science itself.  Science and nearly everyone in the West has
ostracized the very religion and truth of the Jews.  It has,
effectively, excommunicated them from participation by laughing at
their very basis:  that they came from a divine being rather than
recent, speculative theories of evolution.  Even if evolution is true
in various ways, it takes nothing from the Jews.  To my knowledge they
have no explanation for the American Indians for example.

>  Judaism needs to return from exile.

But it is indeed the West which has exiled itself from its own
homeland and forgotten itself.  Now, in America, apart from the
fundamentalist Christians, nearly 100% of people are now schizoid on
the issue of where they came from.

> Judaism needs to give a lot
> more attention to the final commandment,

Orthodox Jews do not really covet, they recognize all that the West
has made without them, yet they cannot break their loyalty to GOD, so
they remain in cycle of either waiting for the Messiach to clear
things up, or to abandon their GOD -- not a very good situation.

> and a lot less to boiling a
> young goat in its mother's milk,

Much of these, I claim, including the news on television is
myth-making, governed by the ambivalence of the West towards Israel.
Even Christians don't care where Jesus lived and loved.

> Judaism is an obnoxious religion (though genuine Jewish believers are
> massively under represented among criminals, even in the crime of white
> collar fraud) because its exilic nature makes it hostile and angry.

No, very few, understand the othodoxy, because they still believe that
they are superior for being a Westerner.   The West acted the same way
towards the Indians:  they NEVER understood them and still don't --
they just rest on their lazy ass as if they're superior.

>  The
> religion has a permanent chip on its shoulder.

They were the only ones who remained loyal, Christians erected an
alternative God.  Muslims got lost in being chosen for a prophesy,
some of which got fulfilled in 2001, and most others seemingly have
abandoned the whole enterprise entirely.

Neither you, nor I, can say that they are wrong.   Nor any scientist.
I've explored all the pseudo-scientific arguments against theism --
they are all flawed and mostly amount to: "Well, we can't PROVE that
GOD exists" or "we found these bones buried in the ground that are
humanoid" -- an unscientific basis in which to conclude that those who
immigrated into the lands of the Americas were those buried people's
descendants.

Anyway, there's a lot of loose talk about nothing, and a lot of
concrete needs to fix the world, none of which the secularists have
moved hardly an inch of Earth for.  There a lot of unearned pride
among secularists, too, so be careful calling the kettle black, when
your the pot.

Mark

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[\0xDynamite]

>>  Now  what about you applying your racial science to the thieves
>>  in wall street?
>
> That the thieves on wall street are predominantly Jewish, most
> notoriously Bernie Madoff, former Chairman of the NASDAQ stock market,
> is well known.

It's unfair to Jews to classify these people as "jews".  I think it's
mostly anti-semitic overgeneralization.  If they don't believe in the
story of Moses and GOD himself, they aren't really Jews, and they
shouldn't call themselves Jews.  It's like Africans in England calling
themselves "slaves".

> And of the thieves on wall street that are not Jewish, the remainder are
> for the most part middle easterners or South Asians.
>
> Though I suspect that you classify *everyone* on wall street as a thief,
> in which case you will come to a different conclusion.  If you classify
> them all as thieves, Jews are still disproportionately over represented,
> but not by nearly as much.

Again, this is generally anti-semitic hogwash.  They are no more Jews
than you or me.  I don't blame you for it, but if you trace the
origins of all of these claims, they're always anti-semitic:  either
Christian or athiests.

Mark Janssen (non-Jewish name!), PhD

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[Steve Kinney]

On 01/07/2018 07:24 PM, jam...@echeque.com wrote:
> 
>> > On 1/5/2018 3:49 AM, Marina Brown wrote:
>> > > The phenomenon i am talking about are "libertarians" who > > don't
>> care about personal liberty, freedom to travel, > > and other stuff
>> most of us on this list hold dear.
> 
>> On 01/04/2018 04:01 PM, jam...@echeque.com wrote:
>> > You don't seem terribly keen on the right of a white woman > to
>> stroll along the San Francisco dock with her father > without being
>> capriciously and whimsically murdered
>> > for being white.
>> >
>> > I see a whole lot of Silicon Valley's best people fleeing > the Bay
>> Area because of political repression and tribal violence.  > Is this
>> not a restriction on personal liberty
>> > and freedom of travel?
>> >
>> > Silicon Valley, like East Germany before the communists built  > >
>> the Berlin wall, is suffering massive loss of its best people
>> > wall, is suffering massive loss of its best people >  - for much the
>> same reasons
> On 1/8/2018 7:04 AM, Steve Kinney wrote:
>> Whining, whimpering, sniveling cowards are gonna whine, whimper and
>> snivel regardless:  Because I Feared For My Life is their license to
>> kill niggers and other Inferior Others 
> 
> If black people were being unreasonably killed by white people, or in
> the past used to be unreasonably killed by white people, you would have
> better poster boys than Trayvon Martin and Emmett Till.
> 
> And if women could do science, you would have better poster girls the
> Marie Curie.
> 
> And if white frat boys were raping coeds, you would have better poster
> girls than Jackie Coakley and Crystal Mangum.

Don't need "poster boys" and grrlz when we got folks who happily
volunteer to make racists look like exactly what they are:  Net total
losers.  As in, weak minded "born inferior" individuals.  Some of them
may have IQ scores in the triple digits, but the motivational basis of
their personalities remains infantile.  There's no fixing that.

I <3 the way 2017's big recruitment push by the alt-Reich ended in
ignominious defeat:  Your team folded up like a house of cards, due in
large part to the shallow, neurotic basis of your leadership cadres'
organizational thinking and methods.  It doesn't help that so many of
them present as natural born poster children for the "white trash"
stereotype.

After Charlottesville, spontaneous public turnouts against publicly
announced NeoNazi / KKK events outnumbered organized "Antifa" formation
turnouts by about 100 to 1.  Whine, whimper and snivel all you want:  No
matter how brave vs. arrogant a face you put on it, losers are losers
and a continued commitment to failure impresses nobody but your fellow
dead enders.

:o)








signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

> On 1/5/2018 3:49 AM, Marina Brown wrote:
> > The phenomenon i am talking about are "libertarians" who 
> > don't care about personal liberty, freedom to travel, 
> > and other stuff most of us on this list hold dear.


> On 01/04/2018 04:01 PM, jam...@echeque.com wrote:
> You don't seem terribly keen on the right of a white woman 
> to stroll along the San Francisco dock with her father 
> without being capriciously and whimsically murdered

> for being white.
>
> I see a whole lot of Silicon Valley's best people fleeing 
> the Bay Area because of political repression and tribal violence.  
> Is this not a restriction on personal liberty

> and freedom of travel?
>
> Silicon Valley, like East Germany before the communists built  > > the Berlin 
wall, is suffering massive loss of its best people
> wall, is suffering massive loss of its best people 
>  - for much the same reasons

On 1/8/2018 7:04 AM, Steve Kinney wrote:

Whining, whimpering, sniveling cowards are gonna whine, whimper and
snivel regardless:  Because I Feared For My Life is their license to
kill niggers and other Inferior Others 


If black people were being unreasonably killed by white people, or in 
the past used to be unreasonably killed by white people, you would have 
better poster boys than Trayvon Martin and Emmett Till.


And if women could do science, you would have better poster girls the 
Marie Curie.


And if white frat boys were raping coeds, you would have better poster 
girls than Jackie Coakley and Crystal Mangum.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[Steve Kinney]

On 01/04/2018 04:01 PM, jam...@echeque.com wrote:
> On 1/5/2018 3:49 AM, Marina Brown wrote:
>> The phenomenon i am talking about are "libertarians" who don't care
>> about personal liberty, freedom to travel, and other stuff most of us
>> on this list hold dear.
> 
> You don't seem terribly keen on the right of a white woman to stroll
> along the San Francisco dock with her father without being capriciously
> and whimsically murdered for being white.
> 
> I see a whole lot of Silicon Valley's best people fleeing the Bay Area
> because of political repression and tribal violence.  Is this not a
> restriction on personal liberty and freedom of travel?
> 
> Silicon Valley, like East Germany before the communists built the Berlin
> wall, is suffering massive loss of its best people - for much the same

Whining, whimpering, sniveling cowards are gonna whine, whimper and
snivel regardless:  Because I Feared For My Life is their license to
kill niggers and other Inferior Others (or hire it done via municipal
police forces) "on a whim."  They /cultivate/ fear and contempt for
their imagined racial inferiors, because every person who gets stomped
down for not being "white like me" is one less economic and social
competitor.

There's nothing wrong with folks like "jamesd" that adult supervision
from alert neighbors - and arming their potential victims just in case -
can't keep under control.  The whining, whimpering, sniveling
"professional victims" never use violence under circumstances where
there is a chance that they will face effective resistance, or
retaliation in kind.  They want helpless victims only.











signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[juan]

On Sat, 6 Jan 2018 05:09:17 +1000
jam...@echeque.com wrote:

> On 1/6/2018 3:49 AM, juan wrote:
> > And I then note that your bullshit about blacks and crime is
> > both incredibly dishonest and incredibly stupid because a
> > casual look at 'race' and crime shows that whites got the
> > world record on crime.
> 
> You definition of "crime" is a rationalization for liquidating the
> kulaks


my definition of crime is the libertarian one 

"The Size of the Bank Bailout: $29 Trillion " 
https://www.cnbc.com/id/45674390


let me know when petty thieves steal 29 trillions.





> 
> You imply an intention to murder all whites, but not racist grounds,
> oh no, no, on anti racist grounds.
> 
> But people who murder outgroups on such grounds, wind up murdering 
> ingroups on such grounds, as the Khmer Rouge wound up not only three 
> million Khmer, but also most of the Khmer Rouge.
> 

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/6/2018 3:49 AM, juan wrote:

And I then note that your bullshit about blacks and crime is
both incredibly dishonest and incredibly stupid because a
casual look at 'race' and crime shows that whites got the
world record on crime.


You definition of "crime" is a rationalization for liquidating the kulaks

You imply an intention to murder all whites, but not racist grounds, oh 
no, no, on anti racist grounds.


But people who murder outgroups on such grounds, wind up murdering 
ingroups on such grounds, as the Khmer Rouge wound up not only three 
million Khmer, but also most of the Khmer Rouge.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[juan]

On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 15:45:04 +1000
jam...@echeque.com wrote:

> On 1/5/2018 1:15 PM, juan wrote:
> > What I am getting at, is that the biggest thieves on the
> > planet are 'white'. 
> 
> Only if you declare all capitalists and all kulaks are thieves. 


For the purpose of this exercise I declare all
scum on wall street to be thieves.

I further note that  wall street scum is mostly
anglo-white-jewish. There are no blacks on wall street, you
know...

And I then note that your bullshit about blacks and crime is
both incredibly dishonest and incredibly stupid because a
casual look at 'race' and crime shows that whites got the
world record on crime.

Overall I notice that  your rants about people not
respecting property rights are laughably biased. You seem to
whine about street muggers and SOME statists while being
completly blind to what the biggest statist thieves on the
planet do. 

In other words, you don't have a leg to stand on and just
parrot right wing propaganda of the white supremacist kind.

Oh and by the way, wall street's motto is "private gains,
socialized losses" - guess which other political mafia has that
modus operandi? your beloved commies. 



> if
> one thinks that wealth earned from property and enterprise is
> legitimate, non Jewish white thieves are absolutely insignificant
> compared to thieves of every other major race.

nonsense - make the list of white banks - I bet they are bigger
than the joo banks

as to other non-banking, mercantilistic criminal organizations,
of course lots of them are run and owned by white criminals.

This is the ABC of LIBERTARIAN economics, which correctly
sees privileged businesses as thieves who steal from
consumers. 




> 
> And even if you declare that all capitalists are thieves, looks like
> the number and wealth of East Asian capitalists and kulaks is
> approximately equal to the number and wealth of non Jewish
> capitalists and kulaks.
> 
> > hispanic? do you mean that the CEOs of american banks were
> > 'hispanic'(whatever the fuck 'hispanic') means?
> 
> 
> "Hispanic" means that Angelo Mozilo got charge of a bank by
> affirmative action, and got other banks handed to his control by
> affirmative action.


oh you got one 'hispanic' in the whole history of american
banking? 

anyway, my point remains, there are lots of white, non joo
banks. 



> 
> Initially a white anglo guy had the real control, and Angelo Mozillo
> was just there for the bank to get favorable treatment by the
> regulators, the token minority with the big desk in the big office,
> but no meaningful stuff in his in tray, but then his sponsor retired,
> Angelo Mozilo got real charge of the bank, and totally screwed
> everything up.
> 
> And then he got real charge of a bunch of other banks, thanks to 
> escalating favorable treatment by the regulators.
> 
> And then proceeded to run his bank, and the entire banking system,
> into the ground in the great Minority Mortgage Meltdown.
> Subsequently he faced a bunch of criminal charges for numerous
> fraudulent activities, bribery, and corruption.  Hard to say if he
> was actually criminal and fraudulent, or just too hopelessly
> incompetent to do banking regulatory paperwork correctly and keep
> proper track of bank assets. (Which assets tended to disappear into
> his pockets and the pockets of the regulators, which tendency
> definitely hints at crime, fraud, and corruption, or at least a
> curious level of forgetfulness on his part and the part of the
> regulators.   Search for "Friends of Angelo" to get more details.)
> 
> > 
> > again, no, I'd assume the CEOs of citibank, morgan stanley,
> > BoA etc etc are mostly 'white'.
> 
> You would be wrong:  CEO Citigroup who fucked up during the great 
> mortgage minority meltdown and stole everything not nailed down, was 
> Vikram Shankar Pandit, South Asian.
> 
> South Asians are massively over-represented when financial crime goes 
> down, even more overrepresented than Jews.  Not that there are not 
> plenty of Jews at Citigroup, but it seems that at Citigroup, the
> great Minority Mortgage Meltdown was a South Asian caper, not a
> Jewish caper.
> 
> Morgan Chase has a Jewish CRO, who is notoriously hostile to hasidic 
> Jews, and notoriously ethnic nepotist towards reform Jews, but does
> not seem to be associated with anything obviously dishonest.  In
> particular, did not get his hands all that dirty during the great
> Minority Mortgage Meltdown, unlike his co-religionist, Jordan R.
> Belfort, also known as "the wolf of wall street"
> 
> Bank of America, yes, run by non Jewish white people last I heard. 
> Also, last I heard, not involved in anything obviously dishonest.
> 

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[rooty]

james - please relax your mind and soul. Yoga, a toke or a nice peace of ass is 
always nice.

 Original Message 
On Jan 4, 2018, 9:45 PM, wrote:

> On 1/5/2018 1:15 PM, juan wrote: > What I am getting at, is that the biggest 
> thieves on the planet > are 'white'. Only if you declare all capitalists and 
> all kulaks are thieves. If one thinks that wealth earned from property and 
> enterprise is legitimate, non Jewish white thieves are absolutely 
> insignificant compared to thieves of every other major race. And even if you 
> declare that all capitalists are thieves, looks like the number and wealth of 
> East Asian capitalists and kulaks is approximately equal to the number and 
> wealth of non Jewish capitalists and kulaks. > hispanic? do you mean that the 
> CEOs of american banks were > 'hispanic'(whatever the fuck 'hispanic') means? 
> "Hispanic" means that Angelo Mozilo got charge of a bank by affirmative 
> action, and got other banks handed to his control by affirmative action. 
> Initially a white anglo guy had the real control, and Angelo Mozillo was just 
> there for the bank to get favorable treatment by the regulators, the token 
> minority with the big desk in the big office, but no meaningful stuff in his 
> in tray, but then his sponsor retired, Angelo Mozilo got real charge of the 
> bank, and totally screwed everything up. And then he got real charge of a 
> bunch of other banks, thanks to escalating favorable treatment by the 
> regulators. And then proceeded to run his bank, and the entire banking 
> system, into the ground in the great Minority Mortgage Meltdown. Subsequently 
> he faced a bunch of criminal charges for numerous fraudulent activities, 
> bribery, and corruption. Hard to say if he was actually criminal and 
> fraudulent, or just too hopelessly incompetent to do banking regulatory 
> paperwork correctly and keep proper track of bank assets. (Which assets 
> tended to disappear into his pockets and the pockets of the regulators, which 
> tendency definitely hints at crime, fraud, and corruption, or at least a 
> curious level of forgetfulness on his part and the part of the regulators. 
> Search for "Friends of Angelo" to get more details.) > > again, no, I'd 
> assume the CEOs of citibank, morgan stanley, BoA > etc etc are mostly 
> 'white'. You would be wrong: CEO Citigroup who fucked up during the great 
> mortgage minority meltdown and stole everything not nailed down, was Vikram 
> Shankar Pandit, South Asian. South Asians are massively over-represented when 
> financial crime goes down, even more overrepresented than Jews. Not that 
> there are not plenty of Jews at Citigroup, but it seems that at Citigroup, 
> the great Minority Mortgage Meltdown was a South Asian caper, not a Jewish 
> caper. Morgan Chase has a Jewish CRO, who is notoriously hostile to hasidic 
> Jews, and notoriously ethnic nepotist towards reform Jews, but does not seem 
> to be associated with anything obviously dishonest. In particular, did not 
> get his hands all that dirty during the great Minority Mortgage Meltdown, 
> unlike his co-religionist, Jordan R. Belfort, also known as "the wolf of wall 
> street" Bank of America, yes, run by non Jewish white people last I heard. 
> Also, last I heard, not involved in anything obviously dishonest.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 09:50:31AM +1000, jam...@echeque.com wrote:
> On 1/5/2018 8:54 AM, Marina Brown wrote:
> > I knew the woman in Reston who was killed by the nazi kid.
> 
> The "Nazi kid" was driving a car that came under attack by antifa
> thugs. The windows were smashed in.  Trying to get away, he crashed
> at high speed into another car, which was pushed into another car,
> which was pushed into a several people, among them the fat woman,
> who was injured, along with several other people. Her injuries were
> not particularly serious, but she had a heart attack as a result of
> this incident.

Oh wow! That is quite a different story than came out in the Glorious
Main Stream Media back when it happened.

You know, from those honourable, upstanding and completely
agenda-free Jews who own, control and run almost every aspect of all
the world's major media outlets (and the banks, and Hollywood, and
much of the Western world's corporations, most of Silicon Valley, and
...).


> "The Nazi kid" did not intentionally kill anyone.  There is no
> persuasive evidence he intended to harm anyone.  At most he
> recklessly caused collateral damage during his efforts to get away
> from antifa.
> 
> If he had been trying to harm people, it would have been _his_ car
> that hit her.

Indeed.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 08:47:51AM +, jim bell wrote:
> >Yep The far right libertarians like Hoppe
> 
> Uh, pardon me, but how can you refer to people as "far right
> libertarians"?  Do you know nothing of the Nolan
> Chart, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Chart  and the World's
> Smallest Political Quiz: 
>  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Chart  .
>
> "Far right libertarians" is dangerously close to being an
> oxymoron.   "Rightward libertarians" is plausible.  
>
> However, I laugh equally at "far-left Anarchists".  If being an
> "Anarchist" means that you want no government, then how does that
> square with "far left"?  "Far left" people seem generally to want
> to enforce their "far left" ideas with a "far left" government.  To
> that, I'd say that you can either have "Anarchist" or "far left",
> not both.  A truly "far-left Anarchist" would not only be very
> confused, but also very frustrated:  He can't form the government
> that enforces his "far left" feelings dictate.  

:D :D

Gold!  Thank you Jim, made my day :)


Perhaps some of us should ask something like "how much of our world
view, our beliefs, and indeed our thinking and conceptual processes
themselves, are mere conditioning of those who own, control and run
the Marvellous Main Stream Media truth organisations, banks and
university intake departments?

For the word challenged: how conditioned are we by our financial
overlords?

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/5/2018 1:15 PM, juan wrote:

What I am getting at, is that the biggest thieves on the planet
	are 'white'. 


Only if you declare all capitalists and all kulaks are thieves.  If one 
thinks that wealth earned from property and enterprise is legitimate, 
non Jewish white thieves are absolutely insignificant compared to 
thieves of every other major race.


And even if you declare that all capitalists are thieves, looks like the 
number and wealth of East Asian capitalists and kulaks is approximately 
equal to the number and wealth of non Jewish capitalists and kulaks.



hispanic? do you mean that the CEOs of american banks were
'hispanic'(whatever the fuck 'hispanic') means?



"Hispanic" means that Angelo Mozilo got charge of a bank by affirmative 
action, and got other banks handed to his control by affirmative action.


Initially a white anglo guy had the real control, and Angelo Mozillo was 
just there for the bank to get favorable treatment by the regulators, 
the token minority with the big desk in the big office, but no 
meaningful stuff in his in tray, but then his sponsor retired, Angelo 
Mozilo got real charge of the bank, and totally screwed everything up.


And then he got real charge of a bunch of other banks, thanks to 
escalating favorable treatment by the regulators.


And then proceeded to run his bank, and the entire banking system, into 
the ground in the great Minority Mortgage Meltdown.  Subsequently he 
faced a bunch of criminal charges for numerous fraudulent activities, 
bribery, and corruption.  Hard to say if he was actually criminal and 
fraudulent, or just too hopelessly incompetent to do banking regulatory 
paperwork correctly and keep proper track of bank assets. (Which assets 
tended to disappear into his pockets and the pockets of the regulators, 
which tendency definitely hints at crime, fraud, and corruption, or at 
least a curious level of forgetfulness on his part and the part of the 
regulators.   Search for "Friends of Angelo" to get more details.)




again, no, I'd assume the CEOs of citibank, morgan stanley, BoA
etc etc are mostly 'white'.


You would be wrong:  CEO Citigroup who fucked up during the great 
mortgage minority meltdown and stole everything not nailed down, was 
Vikram Shankar Pandit, South Asian.


South Asians are massively over-represented when financial crime goes 
down, even more overrepresented than Jews.  Not that there are not 
plenty of Jews at Citigroup, but it seems that at Citigroup, the great 
Minority Mortgage Meltdown was a South Asian caper, not a Jewish caper.


Morgan Chase has a Jewish CRO, who is notoriously hostile to hasidic 
Jews, and notoriously ethnic nepotist towards reform Jews, but does not 
seem to be associated with anything obviously dishonest.  In particular, 
did not get his hands all that dirty during the great Minority Mortgage 
Meltdown, unlike his co-religionist, Jordan R. Belfort, also known as 
"the wolf of wall street"


Bank of America, yes, run by non Jewish white people last I heard. 
Also, last I heard, not involved in anything obviously dishonest.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[juan]

On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 11:22:30 +1000
jam...@echeque.com wrote:

> On 1/5/2018 7:29 AM, juan wrote:
> > Now  what about you applying your racial science to the
> > thieves in wall street? 
> 
> That the thieves on wall street are predominantly Jewish, most 
> notoriously Bernie Madoff, former Chairman of the NASDAQ stock
> market, is well known.
> 
> And of the thieves on wall street that are not Jewish, the remainder
> are for the most part middle easterners or South Asians.


that's not correct. 



> 
> Though I suspect that you classify *everyone* on wall street as a
> thief, in which case you will come to a different conclusion. 

that is correct 

> If you
> classify them all as thieves, Jews are still disproportionately over
> represented, but not by nearly as much.

right, so the majority of wallstreet thieves are, gasp, white
christians. Or 'jewish'(who are a mix of white and arab at
best) 


> 
> Also, the second most notorious thief on Wall Street is Jon Corzine,
> who is undeniably white anglo saxon protestant, so Jews are not in 
> themselves the problem.

oh, I wasn't implying, at all, that the financial mafia is just
jews. I know that's not the case. 

What I am getting at, is that the biggest thieves on the planet
are 'white'. But that FACT doesn't agree with your 'racial
theories' does it? Because you seem to believe that white
people are genetically honest and black people are genetically
thieves? 



> If we had adequate enforcement, Jews would cut out their predatory 
> misconduct.  

not really the point...


> The problem is not Jews, it is inadequate enforcement.
> But just as if you allow people to commit burglary, you will find
> that most of your burglars look remarkably like Trayvon Martin, if
> you allow people to defraud investors, you will find that most of
> your fraudsters look remarkably like Bernie Madoff.
> 
> Similarly trading in "Binary Options".  That scam is as Jewish as a
> Bar Mitzvah.  Maybe other scams are not so one sidely Jewish -
> obviously Jon Corzine's operation in European debt were not
> especially Jewish, and the great Mortgage meltdown was primarily
> "white hispanic" rather than Jewish.


hispanic? do you mean that the CEOs of american banks were
'hispanic'(whatever the fuck 'hispanic') means? 

again, no, I'd assume the CEOs of citibank, morgan stanley, BoA
etc etc are mostly 'white'. 



>  (Goldman Sachs had its fingers
> in that pie, but Israeli banks would not touch it with a ten foot
> pole)

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/5/2018 7:29 AM, juan wrote:

Now  what about you applying your racial science to the thieves
	in wall street? 


That the thieves on wall street are predominantly Jewish, most 
notoriously Bernie Madoff, former Chairman of the NASDAQ stock market, 
is well known.


And of the thieves on wall street that are not Jewish, the remainder are 
for the most part middle easterners or South Asians.


Though I suspect that you classify *everyone* on wall street as a thief, 
in which case you will come to a different conclusion.  If you classify 
them all as thieves, Jews are still disproportionately over represented, 
but not by nearly as much.


Also, the second most notorious thief on Wall Street is Jon Corzine, who 
is undeniably white anglo saxon protestant, so Jews are not in 
themselves the problem.


If we had adequate enforcement, Jews would cut out their predatory 
misconduct.  The problem is not Jews, it is inadequate enforcement.  But 
just as if you allow people to commit burglary, you will find that most 
of your burglars look remarkably like Trayvon Martin, if you allow 
people to defraud investors, you will find that most of your fraudsters 
look remarkably like Bernie Madoff.


Similarly trading in "Binary Options".  That scam is as Jewish as a Bar 
Mitzvah.  Maybe other scams are not so one sidely Jewish - obviously Jon 
Corzine's operation in European debt were not especially Jewish, and the 
great Mortgage meltdown was primarily "white hispanic" rather than 
Jewish.  (Goldman Sachs had its fingers in that pie, but Israeli banks 
would not touch it with a ten foot pole)

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/5/2018 7:14 AM, Marina Brown wrote:

Even if fascism has been less deadly than communism, i don't find that
an argument that would make me adopt fascism.


If you are a fascist, and a fascist government takes power, it is highly 
unlikely to kill you.


If you are a communist, and a communist government takes power, it is 
highly likely to kill you.


Communists hate everyone, and they hate those closest to themselves the 
most.


Fascists are, at worst, untroubled by the deaths of those far from 
themselves, and those very different from themselves.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/5/2018 7:29 AM, juan wrote:

I said and repeat, your comments on commie killings are \
right wing propaganda


If you talk to any Cambodian, (a lot of donut shops seem to be operated 
by Cambodians) you will learn that several members of his family were 
murdered regardless of their real or imagined politics.


Which indicates total killings of several millions, approximately 
consistent with the new government's house to house survey and their 
exhumation of the killing fields.  The testimony of any one Cambodian 
proves that the new government's estimates are plausible, are in the 
right ballpark.


If you visit the Khmer Rouge killing fields, you will be shown evidence 
that guards who could read numbers were replaced by innumerate guards, 
indicating that the former guards were killed by the same apparatus of 
mass murder that they themselves operated, consistent with reports that 
towards the end of 1978, few Khmer Rouge remained, as a result of Khmer 
Rouge torturing other Khmer Rouge to death.


And if you yourself did not intend to torture tens of millions of 
Americans to death, you would have no inclination to deny the obvious 
and undeniable truth about the Khmer Rouge - and every radical left 
regime starting with the French Revolution.


Leftists hate everyone, and they hate those nearest to themselves more, 
and they hate themselves the most.  This is obvious every time they open 
their mouths, and proven by the historical record.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[g2s]

Marina wrote:
"Nowadays my emotional reaction to TSA and the like is about the same as it was 
as a kid passing through E. Germany. PAPERS PLEASE !"
John Kay of the band Steppenwolf is the son of East German immigrants. He came 
to the states young, but he had a vicious take on it... or was the song The 
Ostrich about America, even in the 1960s?
 "We'll call you when you're six years oldAnd drag you to the factory
To train your brain for eighteen years
With promise of security
But then you're free
And forty years you waste to chase the dollar sign
So you may die in Florida
At the pleasant age of sixty nine

The water's getting hard to drink
We've mangled up the country side
The air will choke you when you breathe
We're all committing suicide

But it's alright
It's progress folks keep pushin' till your body rots
We'll strip the earth of all it's green
And then divide her into parking lots

But there's nothing you and I can do
You and I are only two
What's right and wrong is hard to say
Forget about it for today
We'll stick our heads into the sand
Just pretend that all is grand
Then hope that everything turns out ok

You're free to speak your mind my friend
As long as you agree with me
Don't criticize the father land
Or those who shape your destiny
'Cause if you do
You'll lose your job your mind and all the friends you knew
We'll send out all our boys in blue
They'll find a way to silence you

But there's nothing you and I can do
You and I are only two
What's right and wrong is hard to say
Forget about it for today
We'll stick our heads into the sand
Just pretend that all is grand
Then hope that everything turns out ok
It sounds like... https://youtube.com/watch?v=8SeUqDjPeP0
Also see Monster/Suicide/America
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U-vGxe1eMmQ
Randalls Island Live edition. Black activists had taken over the small soccer 
stadium off harlem NY where the 3 day concert took place with the help of a 
number of white ny radicals and made it a free concert.
The song opens with their road manager explaining to some surly looking BPPs 
how they had to negotiate a pay cut with another venue they were booked at 
because they wanted to be THERE, and how much the band liked playing NY... 
Madison Square Garden... 
One of them says "This isnt Madison Square Garden its a political protest." 
He responds:
"If you'll allow me...  You'll find out thats EXACTLY what we're going to do.
Ps. The footage of the war and protests shown in the video are not added. It 
was the light show projected on the stage backdrop.
Later, when Leslie West and Mountain played, someone had accessed the score and 
announcing booth and raised the NLF flag over the stadium, and a good time was 
had by all.
Rr







null

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/5/2018 8:54 AM, Marina Brown wrote:

I knew the woman in Reston who was killed by the nazi kid.


The "Nazi kid" was driving a car that came under attack by antifa thugs. 
The windows were smashed in.  Trying to get away, he crashed at high 
speed into another car, which was pushed into another car, which was 
pushed into a several people, among them the fat woman, who was injured, 
along with several other people. Her injuries were not particularly 
serious, but she had a heart attack as a result of this incident.


"The Nazi kid" did not intentionally kill anyone.  There is no 
persuasive evidence he intended to harm anyone.  At most he recklessly 
caused collateral damage during his efforts to get away from antifa.


If he had been trying to harm people, it would have been _his_ car that 
hit her.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/5/2018 8:03 AM, jim bell wrote:
Actually, most forms of totalitarian governments advocate killing 
people, including their own citizenry.  Why narrow down your objections, 
artificially, to "fascism"?


Fascist governments most certainly do not advocate killing their own 
citizenry, but are apt to define "citizen" in an alarmingly narrow 
fashion. From her name, I would suspect that Marina might not 
necessarily be defined as a citizen were a fascist government take power 
in America.


Left wing governments generally advocate killing class enemies, or 
royalists, or aristocrats, and this time around will probably advocate 
killing "racists" and "sexists"


At the time that they start killing people belonging to this category, 
no one remains who believes that they belong to this category, but 
pretty soon, very large numbers of people belonging to this category are 
discovered.


And soon after that, even larger numbers of such wicked people.

And not long after that, even more.

Right wing dictatorships generally forbid interest in politics.  As 
Charles the first told us, politics is the King's business and no one 
elses.  Thus right wing political killings are necessarily self 
limiting.  If you start killing large numbers of people for taking 
excessive interest in politics, people lose interest in politics.


Left wing dictatorships generally insist on interest in politics.  The 
personal is political.  Which rapidly becomes terrifying, and soon after 
that, increasingly terrifying.  Thus left wing political repression, 
unlike right wing political repression, is not self limiting.


Reflect on the infamous "Dear Colleague" letter from the Obama 
administration, recently rescinded by the Trump administration.


The practical effect of the letter is that if a third party deems some 
woman has been raped the evil rapists life must be very publicly 
destroyed without bothering with any inconveniences like charges, 
investigation, or evidence.


The circumstances leading to this letter was that we established the 
principle that women always tell the truth about rape, sexual assault, 
and sexual harassment.


Well, actually we established the principle that women always lie when 
they deny rape, sexual assault, and sexual harassment, but if a woman 
arguably changes her story during a struggle session after three big fat 
hairy lesbians have been screaming in her face for two hours straight, 
*then* she is telling the truth.


Hence the significance of the reference to "third parties" in the Dear 
Colleague letter. Note that the accused cannot cross examine the 
complainant, or even learn who the complainant is.


Recollect that when Crystal Mangum was detained by police for drunken 
violence after a night of industrious whoring, she gave numerous 
different stories, only one of which accused the Duke University sports 
team of rape, but the authorities insisted on going with the story that 
accused the sports team.  She could easily have been steered towards a 
less dramatic story, or steered to claiming flying saucer abduction, or 
best of all, steered to confessing to drunken violence after a night of 
industrious whoring.  But hey, if sexual violence is on the table, women 
are always the victims, and men always the aggressors, even if it needs 
two cops to restrain the "victim".


So if police catch a drunk woman in a criminal act, she just has to say 
"sexual assault, domestic abuse, domestic violence", and she is golden. 
Just as restraining illegal immigrants who murder white people for 
racial reasons might deter illegal immigrants from exercising their 
rights, restraining drunken violent women from criminal acts might deter 
them from complaining about sexual harassment and sexual violence.  And 
we cannot have that, can we?


We also saw this principle in operation in the safe space conflict.  If 
someone said something that might make a member of the umpteenth gender 
uncomfortable, no actual complainant of the umpteenth gender need to be 
produced, nor any evidence that a single member of the umpteenth gender 
exists anywhere near the incident. And what with "microaggression" the 
possibility of making someone of an ever increasing number of ever 
smaller categories uncomfortable expands without limit.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[Marina Brown]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 01/04/2018 05:03 PM, jim bell wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thursday, January 4, 2018, 1:13:27 PM PST, Marina Brown 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256
> 
> On 01/04/2018 03:21 PM, jim bell wrote:
> 
>> I don't find that calling it "mccarthyist propaganda" is 
>> particularly persuasive.  We may hate Joseph McCarthy for his 
>> tactics, but there WERE many valid reasons to object to
>> Communism and Socialism in the early 1950's.
>> 
>> 
>>> As for the "completely made up numbers", which numbers do you 
>>> believe to be valid?  I frequently say that in the 20th
>>> Century, about 250 million people were killed by government,
>>> including in wars.  Far more of those deaths seem to be caused
>>> by Communist/Socialist governments than by Fascist governments.
>>> And, as you might recall, I was reminded nearly two years ago
>>> (from the Wikipedia article on Benito Mussolini) that "Fascism"
>>> is essentially Socialism, and probably doesn't deserve to be
>>> called "right wing" as many people seem to do at this point.
>> 
>>> Jim Bell
> 
> 
> 
>> Governments seem to be one of the most effective forces in
>> getting
> people to abandon their objections to killing. Nationalism and
> racism are common tools they use to convince people to kill.
> 
> 
> 
> No doubt of that.  Which is why I was a minarchist libertarian
> before 1995, and an anarchist libertarian 1995 and afterwards.
> 
> 
> 
>> Even if fascism has been less deadly than communism, i don't find
>> that
> an argument that would make me adopt fascism.
> 
> 
> Are you implying that I was suggesting that you adopt fascism?
> Sounds like a strawman argument from here.
> 

I'm not arguing with you. Just discussing things. I know you don't
push fascism.

> 
> 
>> After all most forms of fascism on the planet advocate killing
>> me.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, most forms of totalitarian governments advocate killing 
> people, including their own citizenry.  Why narrow down your
> objections, artificially, to "fascism"?
> 

Good point. I've experienced autoritarian/totalitarian governments in
my life. They all sucked, though the scariest moment before this year
was passing through E Germany in 1973.

Nowadays my emotional reaction to TSA and the like is about the same
as it was as a kid passing through E. Germany. PAPERS PLEASE !

> 
> 
>> Honestly i see the ramping up of white nationalism and things
>> like that
> as a prelude to genocide. - --- Marina
> 
> 
> 
> Whereas, I view such worry as ALMOST ENTIRELY propaganda.  (Not
> that I'm somehow defending "white nationalism")
> 

There are quite a few dead bodies to go along with that propaganda now.

> And I think I can prove it.   "white nationalism", as a term, has 
> existed for years.  But, use the Google program, "Google Trends".
> 
> 

Yes - of course. I've been watching it grow from a joke back in the
80's and 90's to a mainstream movement now.

> 
> https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y=white%20na
tionalism
>
> 
> 
> Set the viewed timeline to around 2 years.  You can easily see
> that "white nationalism" wasn't a "thing" until the week AFTER the
> 2016 elections!  There was very little coverage the week of the
> election, or any prior week.   (Except that back in March 2006,
> there was a peak.  Dunno why...)
> 
> What does this tell me?  The way "white nationalism" has been
> used, within the last 14 months, as been essentially A HOAX.  A
> FRAUD.  A SHAM.  A CONCOCTED DISPUTE.  A NON-ISSUE.
> 

Tell that to people who get harrassed by white nationalists for just
existing.

> SUDDENLY, only after the results of the election came in, SOMEBODY
> in a powerful position of authority decided to make "white
> nationalism" a "thing".  I suspect Hillary Clinton, or maybe the
> Democrats, or maybe Obama.  Or a combination of them.
> 
> If "white nationalism" had been an important, genuine issue, it
> would have at least have been an important campaign issue, or have
> been heavily discussed for years prior to 2016.  It obviously
> wasn't.It's virtually all propaganda.
> 

I wish i was as optimistic as you, but i have had to deal with the
very real aftermath of people incited by white nationalism.

I knew the woman in Reston who was killed by the nazi kid. I advise a
person on electronic security who gets constantly harrassed by white
nationalists - for some reason they stick to her like ticks and rarely
a month goes by without her having to deal with them.

Which brings us back to electronic security. I have advised my friend to
use ricochet.im to communicate where possible. It keeps location more
secure and does reasonable encryption. She is very leery of signal
running on android as she does not trust the platform - i agree.

- --- Marina

> Jim Bell
> 
> 
> 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

iQGzBAEBCAAdFiEEo8txa89xQ0v6g7ID+f9jkVc9tEIFAlpOsJcACgkQ+f9jkVc9

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jim bell]

 

On Thursday, January 4, 2018, 1:13:27 PM PST, Marina Brown 
 wrote:  
 
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 01/04/2018 03:21 PM, jim bell wrote:

> I don't find that calling it "mccarthyist propaganda" is
> particularly persuasive.  We may hate Joseph McCarthy for his
> tactics, but there WERE many valid reasons to object to Communism
> and Socialism in the early 1950's.
> 
> 
>> As for the "completely made up numbers", which numbers do you
>> believe to be valid?  I frequently say that in the 20th Century,
>> about 250 million people were killed by government, including in
>> wars.  Far more of those deaths seem to be caused by
>> Communist/Socialist governments than by Fascist governments.  And,
>> as you might recall, I was reminded nearly two years ago (from the
>> Wikipedia article on Benito Mussolini) that "Fascism" is
>> essentially Socialism, and probably doesn't deserve to be called
>> "right wing" as many people seem to do at this point.
> 
>> Jim Bell



>Governments seem to be one of the most effective forces in getting
people to abandon their objections to killing. Nationalism and racism
are common tools they use to convince people to kill.


No doubt of that.  Which is why I was a minarchist libertarian before 1995, and 
an anarchist libertarian 1995 and afterwards.


>Even if fascism has been less deadly than communism, i don't find that
an argument that would make me adopt fascism. 

Are you implying that I was suggesting that you adopt fascism?  Sounds like a 
strawman argument from here.  


>After all most forms of fascism on the planet advocate killing me.


Actually, most forms of totalitarian governments advocate killing people, 
including their own citizenry.  Why narrow down your objections, artificially, 
to "fascism"?


>Honestly i see the ramping up of white nationalism and things like that
as a prelude to genocide.
- --- Marina


Whereas, I view such worry as ALMOST ENTIRELY propaganda.  (Not that I'm 
somehow defending "white nationalism")
And I think I can prove it.   "white nationalism", as a term, has existed for 
years.  But, use the Google program, "Google Trends".  

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y=white%20nationalism

Set the viewed timeline to around 2 years.  You can easily see that "white 
nationalism" wasn't a "thing" until the week AFTER the 2016 elections!  There 
was very little coverage the week of the election, or any prior week.       
(Except that back in March 2006, there was a peak.  Dunno why...)
What does this tell me?  The way "white nationalism" has been used, within the 
last 14 months, as been essentially A HOAX.  A FRAUD.  A SHAM.  A CONCOCTED 
DISPUTE.  A NON-ISSUE.  
SUDDENLY, only after the results of the election came in, SOMEBODY in a 
powerful position of authority decided to make "white nationalism" a "thing".  
I suspect Hillary Clinton, or maybe the Democrats, or maybe Obama.  Or a 
combination of them.
If "white nationalism" had been an important, genuine issue, it would have at 
least have been an important campaign issue, or have been heavily discussed for 
years prior to 2016.  It obviously wasn't.    It's virtually all propaganda.  
                      Jim Bell



  

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/5/2018 6:21 AM, jim bell wrote:
As for the "completely made up numbers", which numbers do you believe to 
be valid?  I frequently say that in the 20th Century, about 250 million 
people were killed by government, including in wars.  Far more of those 
deaths seem to be caused by Communist/Socialist governments than by 
Fascist governments.


In context, Juan is probably referring to the claim that the Khmer Rouge 
murdered one hell of a lot Cambodians, and especially murdered the Khmer 
Rouge themselves.


The new government (nominally communist) did a house to house survey, 
asking people about disappearances.  Found about three million missing.


Which is consistent with what individual Cambodians I have met tell me, 
were telling people well before 1978 December.


Defenders of the Khmer Rouge regime claimed that was just commies 
defaming other commies.


The new government proceeded to dig up the killing fields.  Found a bit 
over two million people dumped in mass graves.


So, not entirely made up.

Supporters of terror, torture, and mass murder, will condemn such 
numbers, but will never propose any substantially lower alternate numbers.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[juan]

On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 07:13:08 +1000
jam...@echeque.com wrote:

> jam...@echeque.com wrote:
> >> So give me a link to a tenured academic who criticized the Khmer
> >> Rouge before December 1978.
> 
> On 1/5/2018 5:58 AM, juan wrote:
> > I don't know what 'tenured academics' said.
> 
> Well I quite certainly do know what they said.
> 
> And if you do not know what they said, then you are in no position to 
> contradict me.


except I was not talking about what 'academics' said regarding
some particular historical fact - I said and repeat, your
comments on commie killings are right wing propaganda. Pretty
sure lefty parasites in universities lied about crimes commited
by commies. But that doesn't mean your right wing version of
the story is true either. 
 

Now  what about you applying your racial science to the thieves
in wall street? What, you don't have the BALLS to do
that? You must be a member of the fair sex after all...

But really, a scientific racial analysis of the wall street
thieves and other corporatist thieves should be enlightening.
Why would such a champion of 'property rights' like you avoid
the topic? 

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

jam...@echeque.com wrote:

So give me a link to a tenured academic who criticized the Khmer
Rouge before December 1978.


On 1/5/2018 5:58 AM, juan wrote:

I don't know what 'tenured academics' said.


Well I quite certainly do know what they said.

And if you do not know what they said, then you are in no position to 
contradict me.


If I say "no flying saucers exist", it is the job of those who doubt me 
to produce evidence of flying saucers


And saying "My mother used to ride a flying saucer to Mars every morning 
on Sunday" is unconvincing. If your mother rode a flying saucer to Mars 
every morning on Sunday, drama would have ensued resulting in 
photographs of her boarding a flying saucer.


And similarly, if a tenured academic criticized the Khmer Rouge before 
1978 December, even behind closed doors with the curtains drawn and his 
voice lowered, someone would have ratted him out, and drama would have 
ensued, some of it in writing.


And if you say, "Oh criticism of the Khmer Rouge was so common and 
routine that no drama would have ensued", then a tenured academic would 
have existed who criticized the Khmer Rouge *in* *writing* before 1978 
December.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[Marina Brown]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 01/04/2018 03:21 PM, jim bell wrote:
> On Thursday, January 4, 2018, 10:04:44 AM PST, juan
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 08:54:35 + (UTC) jim bell
> > wrote:
> 
>> On Wednesday, January 3, 2018, 7:53:38 PM PST,
>>  >
>> wrote:
>> 
 A tiny handful of leftists did criticize the Khmer Rouge
 before 1978
>> December, and got called fascists, nazis, and admirers of Adolf 
>> Hitler.
>> 
>> 
>>> But no one academic in the entire western world, not a single
>>> one,
>> risked his tenure by criticizing the Khmer Rouge until authorized
>> to do so in December 1978.
>> 
>>> I'm waiting to see if someone tries to contradict you!
> 
> 
>> No doubt commies suck but what arch fascist donald is saying
> about commies is 100% mccarthyst propaganda. It is just typical
> americunt war propaganda with completely made up numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't find that calling it "mccarthyist propaganda" is
> particularly persuasive.  We may hate Joseph McCarthy for his
> tactics, but there WERE many valid reasons to object to Communism
> and Socialism in the early 1950's.
> 
> 
> As for the "completely made up numbers", which numbers do you
> believe to be valid?  I frequently say that in the 20th Century,
> about 250 million people were killed by government, including in
> wars.  Far more of those deaths seem to be caused by
> Communist/Socialist governments than by Fascist governments.  And,
> as you might recall, I was reminded nearly two years ago (from the
> Wikipedia article on Benito Mussolini) that "Fascism" is
> essentially Socialism, and probably doesn't deserve to be called
> "right wing" as many people seem to do at this point.
> 
> Jim Bell
> 

Governments seem to be one of the most effective forces in getting
people to abandon their objections to killing. Nationalism and racism
are common tools they use to convince people to kill.

Even if fascism has been less deadly than communism, i don't find that
an argument that would make me adopt fascism. After all most forms of
fascism on the planet advocate killing me.

Honestly i see the ramping up of white nationalism and things like that
as a prelude to genocide.

- --- Marina


> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> Jim Bell
>> 
>> 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
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=xVV1
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/5/2018 3:49 AM, Marina Brown wrote:

The phenomenon i am talking about are "libertarians" who don't care
about personal liberty, freedom to travel, and other stuff most of us
on this list hold dear.


You don't seem terribly keen on the right of a white woman to stroll 
along the San Francisco dock with her father without being capriciously 
and whimsically murdered for being white.


I see a whole lot of Silicon Valley's best people fleeing the Bay Area 
because of political repression and tribal violence.  Is this not a 
restriction on personal liberty and freedom of travel?


Silicon Valley, like East Germany before the communists built the Berlin 
wall, is suffering massive loss of its best people - for much the same 
reasons as East Germany did.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/5/2018 3:53 AM, Marina Brown wrote:

LoL ! My mother was an academic in '78 and she criticised the Khmer
Rouge all the time. 


If your mother criticized the Khmer Rouge out loud before December 1978, 
there would be one academic in the entire western world who criticized 
them *in* *writing* before December 1978


Link to that Academic writing.

If your mother criticized the Khmer Rouge out loud before December 1978, 
there would have been a thousand indignant demands that she should be 
stripped of tenure, many of them in writing.


Link to those written demands.

You are a liar, your mother was a fan of one group of torturers and mass 
murderers when it was politically correct to support them, and, like the 
mob in Orwell's "1984" during hate week, in December 1978 or early 
January 1979 abruptly switched in mid slogan to condemning them and 
supporting an entirely different group of torturers and mass murderers.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

> On Wednesday, January 3, 2018, 7:53:38 PM PST,  wrote:
> > A tiny handful of leftists did criticize the Khmer Rouge before
> > 1978 December, and got called fascists, nazis, and admirers of
> > Adolf Hitler.
> > 
> > 
> > But not one academic in the entire western world, not a single

> > one,
> > risked his tenure by criticizing the Khmer Rouge until authorized
> > to do so in December 1978.


On 1/5/2018 3:53 AM, Marina Brown wrote:

LoL ! My mother was an academic in '78 and she criticised the Khmer
Rouge all the time.


Liar

If she criticized the Khmer Rouge before December 1978, give us a link, 
either to her criticisms, or to her receiving the shitstorm of venemous 
and vicious condemnation that invariably followed such premature criticism.


The fact that she did not lose tenure on the grounds of fascism and 
nazism shows she did not criticize the Khmer Rouge in public before 
December 1978


To claim that an academic criticized the Khmer Rouge before December 
1978 is like claiming that a Silicon Valley company in 2018 has a job 
notice saying "No n*s need apply".


If such a thing had happened there would be such drama as to create 
evidence that it happened.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jim bell]

 On Thursday, January 4, 2018, 10:04:44 AM PST, juan  wrote:
 
 
 On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 08:54:35 + (UTC)
jim bell  wrote:

>  On Wednesday, January 3, 2018, 7:53:38 PM PST, 
> wrote: 
>  
>>  >A tiny handful of leftists did criticize the Khmer Rouge before
>>  >1978 
> December, and got called fascists, nazis, and admirers of Adolf
> Hitler.
> 
> 
> >But no one academic in the entire western world, not a single one, 
> risked his tenure by criticizing the Khmer Rouge until authorized to
> do so in December 1978.
> 
>> I'm waiting to see if someone tries to contradict you!


 >   No doubt commies suck but what arch fascist donald is saying
    about commies is 100% mccarthyst propaganda. It is just 
    typical americunt war propaganda with completely made up
    numbers.


I don't find that calling it "mccarthyist propaganda" is particularly 
persuasive.  We may hate Joseph McCarthy for his tactics, but there WERE many 
valid reasons to object to Communism and Socialism in the early 1950's.  

As for the "completely made up numbers", which numbers do you believe to be 
valid?  I frequently say that in the 20th Century, about 250 million people 
were killed by government, including in wars.  Far more of those deaths seem to 
be caused by Communist/Socialist governments than by Fascist governments.  And, 
as you might recall, I was reminded nearly two years ago (from the Wikipedia 
article on Benito Mussolini) that "Fascism" is essentially Socialism, and 
probably doesn't deserve to be called "right wing" as many people seem to do at 
this point.
                Jim Bell
  

    







    





> 
>                     Jim Bell
> 
>  
  

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[juan]

On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 05:38:47 +1000
jam...@echeque.com wrote:

> > >   On Wednesday, January 3, 2018, 7:53:38 PM PST,
> > >  wrote:
> > > > A tiny handful of leftists did criticize the Khmer Rouge before
> > > > 1978 December, and got called fascists, nazis, and admirers of
> > > > Adolf Hitler.
> > > >
> > > > But not one academic in the entire western world, not a single
> > > > one, risked his tenure by criticizing the Khmer Rouge until
> > > > authorized to do so in December 1978.
> 
>  > jim bell  wrote:
> > > I'm waiting to see if someone tries to contradict you!
> 
> On 1/5/2018 4:03 AM, juan wrote:> No doubt commies suck but
> what arch fascist donald is saying
> > about commies is 100% mccarthyst propaganda. It is just
> > typical americunt war propaganda with completely made up
> > numbers.
> 
> So give me a link to a tenured academic who criticized the Khmer
> Rouge before December 1978.
> 

I don't know what 'tenured academics' said nor I give a fuck.
I'd of course point out that you right wing statists are fully
responsible for the existence of 'tenured academics' anyway. 

What i said is that the numbers about commie killings are
fake. 

Now, if you are so kind, enlighten me about the 'race' of the
corpotarist scum that rules the western world. (and good
portions  of the non western world). 

Also, enlighten me about your stance regarding property rights
and the corporatist, anti libertarian, anti free market scum
who rules the western worlds. 

In other words stop pretending that you care about property
rights or freedom, except to destroyt it. You are the very
same anti libertarian scum that commies are. 

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

>   On Wednesday, January 3, 2018, 7:53:38 PM PST,  wrote:
> > A tiny handful of leftists did criticize the Khmer Rouge before
> > 1978 December, and got called fascists, nazis, and admirers of Adolf
> > Hitler.
> >
> > But not one academic in the entire western world, not a single one,
> > risked his tenure by criticizing the Khmer Rouge until authorized to
> > do so in December 1978.


> jim bell  wrote:

> I'm waiting to see if someone tries to contradict you!


On 1/5/2018 4:03 AM, juan wrote:> 	No doubt commies suck but what arch 
fascist donald is saying

about commies is 100% mccarthyst propaganda. It is just
typical americunt war propaganda with completely made up
numbers.


So give me a link to a tenured academic who criticized the Khmer Rouge 
before December 1978.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[juan]

On Thu, 4 Jan 2018 08:54:35 + (UTC)
jim bell  wrote:

>  On Wednesday, January 3, 2018, 7:53:38 PM PST, 
> wrote: 
>  
>  >A tiny handful of leftists did criticize the Khmer Rouge before
>  >1978 
> December, and got called fascists, nazis, and admirers of Adolf
> Hitler.
> 
> 
> >But no one academic in the entire western world, not a single one, 
> risked his tenure by criticizing the Khmer Rouge until authorized to
> do so in December 1978.
> 
> I'm waiting to see if someone tries to contradict you!


No doubt commies suck but what arch fascist donald is saying
about commies is 100% mccarthyst propaganda. It is just 
typical americunt war propaganda with completely made up
numbers. 















> 
>                     Jim Bell
> 
>   

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[Marina Brown]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 01/04/2018 03:54 AM, jim bell wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 3, 2018, 7:53:38 PM PST, 
> wrote:
> 
> 
>> A tiny handful of leftists did criticize the Khmer Rouge before
>> 1978
> December, and got called fascists, nazis, and admirers of Adolf
> Hitler.
> 
> 
>> But no one academic in the entire western world, not a single
>> one,
> risked his tenure by criticizing the Khmer Rouge until authorized
> to do so in December 1978.
> 
> 
> I'm waiting to see if someone tries to contradict you!
> 

LoL ! My mother was an academic in '78 and she criticised the Khmer
Rouge all the time. She was basically a leftist gone liberal.

We had a cat - felix who would kill litterally hundreds of moles, mice
and ground squirrels. His nickname was "Pol Pot".

I guess Jim does not hail from academia. Of all the professors i have
known i actually can't think of any of them that supported the Khmer
Rouge and i can't think of any that would have hesitated to criticize
them. After all they did massacre intellectuals - so it was a bit
personal.


- --- Marina

> 
> Jim Bell
> 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
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=KlPq
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[Marina Brown]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 01/04/2018 03:47 AM, jim bell wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wednesday, January 3, 2018, 9:51:25 PM PST, Marina Brown 
>  wrote:
> 
> On 01/03/2018 02:35 PM, g2s wrote:
>> 
>> Marina Brown wrote:
>> 
>>> I stand with Ceci.
>> 
>> I'll take her light hearted fun stuff over the far right
>> babblings that have pushed decent discussion off this list for
>> the most part.
>> 
>> How did we get to this point ?
>> 
>> --- Marina
>> 
>> 
>> AnarchoCap/So-called "libertarian" infestation. They attract 
>> fascists and nazis because they share an underlying ideology, 
>> despite their bleatings to the contrary.
>> 
>> Rr
> 
>> Yep The far right libertarians like Hoppe
> 
> 
> 
> Uh, pardon me, but how can you refer to people as "far right 
> libertarians"?  Do you know nothing of the Nolan Chart,
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Chart 
>   and the World's
> Smallest Political Quiz:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Chart  .
> 
> "Far right libertarians" is dangerously close to being an oxymoron.
>  "Rightward libertarians" is plausible.
> 

OK - i forgot the scare quotes. I was thinking of Hoppe and his former
fan Cantwell.

The phenomenon i am talking about are "libertarians" who don't care
about personal liberty, freedom to travel, and other stuff most of us
on this list hold dear. The folks i mean care only for private
property and don't seem to care if a restrictive dystopia results.

- From now on i will use scare quotes.

- --- Marin

> However, I laugh equally at "far-left Anarchists".  If being an 
> "Anarchist" means that you want no government, then how does that
> square with "far left"?  "Far left" people seem generally to want
> to enforce their "far left" ideas with a "far left" government.  To
> that, I'd say that you can either have "Anarchist" or "far left",
> not both.  A truly "far-left Anarchist" would not only be very
> confused, but also very frustrated:  He can't form the government
> that enforces his "far left" feelings dictate.
> 
> Jim Bell
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
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=RevZ
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/4/2018 6:47 PM, jim bell wrote:
Do you know nothing of the Nolan Chart, 


Nolan chart has been rendered irrelevant by the fact that the left is no 
longer stirring up anger, violence, and disorder on the basis of theft 
and covetousness, and no longer trying to tribalize people by their 
relationship to the means of production, but is instead stirring up 
anger, violence, and disorder directly on the basis of tribalism, and 
attempting to ginger up every tribal conflict it can find.


And, human nature being what it is, it can find plenty.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jim bell]

 On Wednesday, January 3, 2018, 7:53:38 PM PST,  wrote:
 
 
 >A tiny handful of leftists did criticize the Khmer Rouge before 1978 
December, and got called fascists, nazis, and admirers of Adolf Hitler.


>But no one academic in the entire western world, not a single one, 
risked his tenure by criticizing the Khmer Rouge until authorized to do 
so in December 1978.

I'm waiting to see if someone tries to contradict you!

                    Jim Bell

  

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jim bell]

 

On Wednesday, January 3, 2018, 9:51:25 PM PST, Marina Brown 
 wrote:
On 01/03/2018 02:35 PM, g2s wrote:
> 
> Marina Brown wrote:
> 
>> I stand with Ceci.
> 
> I'll take her light hearted fun stuff over the far right babblings
> that have pushed decent discussion off this list for the most
> part.
> 
> How did we get to this point ?
> 
> --- Marina
> 
> 
> AnarchoCap/So-called "libertarian" infestation. They attract
> fascists and nazis because they share an underlying ideology,
> despite their bleatings to the contrary.
> 
> Rr

>Yep The far right libertarians like Hoppe


Uh, pardon me, but how can you refer to people as "far right libertarians"?  Do 
you know nothing of the Nolan Chart, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Chart  
and the World's Smallest Political Quiz:   
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Chart  .
"Far right libertarians" is dangerously close to being an oxymoron.   
"Rightward libertarians" is plausible.  
However, I laugh equally at "far-left Anarchists".  If being an "Anarchist" 
means that you want no government, then how does that square with "far left"?  
"Far left" people seem generally to want to enforce their "far left" ideas with 
a "far left" government.  To that, I'd say that you can either have "Anarchist" 
or "far left", not both.  A truly "far-left Anarchist" would not only be very 
confused, but also very frustrated:  He can't form the government that enforces 
his "far left" feelings dictate.  
                 Jim Bell






  

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[Marina Brown]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 01/03/2018 02:35 PM, g2s wrote:
> 
> Marina Brown wrote:
> 
>> I stand with Ceci.
> 
> I'll take her light hearted fun stuff over the far right babblings
> that have pushed decent discussion off this list for the most
> part.
> 
> How did we get to this point ?
> 
> --- Marina
> 
> 
> AnarchoCap/So-called "libertarian" infestation. They attract
> fascists and nazis because they share an underlying ideology,
> despite their bleatings to the contrary.
> 
> Rr

Yep The far right libertarians like Hoppe don't even care about
personal freedom, just property. He is the bridge that has carried a
lot of libertarians into fascism.

...And the monarchists, WTF ??!!! They might do well under a good king
but the possibility of harm with a tyrant is unimaginable with modern
surveillance and police tactics.

- --- Marina
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
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=3Axt
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/4/2018 1:17 PM, jam...@echeque.com wrote:
On 1/4/2018 11:08 AM, g2s wrote:

 From each according to their ability; to each according to their need...


: Thou shalt not steal.

: Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

	: Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy 
neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, 
nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.


And when you break these commandments, you wind up setting the kulak's 
children on fire in order to force the kulak to reveal where he buried 
the seed corn.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/4/2018 11:08 AM, g2s wrote:
> The revolutionary is guided by great feelings of love, motherfucker.

Let us recollect the Khmer Rouge.

Before 1973 the Khmer Rouge were brutal totalitarian terrorists who 
infamous for sometimes practicing one way portage.


You need to transport supplies from A to B, so you round up some 
peasants at A and have them carry your stuff to B.  You don't feed them, 
but you tell them there will be food and water at B.  When you arrive at 
B, you kill them.


And of course, most tenured academics in the western world thought they 
were great guys, and if any tenured academic doubted it, he remained 
silent.  If there was a single tenured academic in the entire western 
world who doubted their goodness and greatness, he remained silent.


After 1973, the Khmer Rouge were brutal totalitarian terrorists who 
engaged in red terror, endlessly searching for imaginary capitalists, 
kulaks, capitalist roaders, elitists, and CIA agents.


And of course, most tenured academics in the western world thought they 
were great guys, and if any tenured academic doubted it, he remained 
silent.  If there was a single tenured academic in the entire western 
world who doubted their goodness and greatness, he remained silent.


Around 1978 or so, the Khmer Rouge went far out rabid space bat crazy, 
torturing to death everyone who fell short of the immeasurable goodness 
and greatness of the Khmer Rouge, including, indeed especially, their 
fellow Khmer Rouge.


And of course, most tenured academics in the western world thought they 
were great guys, and if any tenured academic doubted it, he remained 
silent.  If there was a single tenured academic in the entire western 
world who doubted their goodness and greatness, he remained silent.


Towards the end of 1978 the Khmer Rouge were running seriously short of 
Khmer Rouge, and those few who remained were generally under sentence of 
death by torture.


And of course, most tenured academics in the western world thought they 
were great guys, and if any tenured academic doubted it, he remained 
silent.  If there was a single tenured academic in the entire western 
world who doubted their goodness and greatness, he remained silent.


Towards the end of December 1978, or early in January 1979, the Khmer 
Rouge, those of them still alive, lost power.   And then every academic 
everywhere felt free to criticize the Khmer Rouge.


Which they did by claiming that the Khmer Rouge had been installed in 
power by Ronald Reagan and the CIA.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

A tiny handful of leftists did criticize the Khmer Rouge before 1978 
December, and got called fascists, nazis, and admirers of Adolf Hitler.


But no one academic in the entire western world, not a single one, 
risked his tenure by criticizing the Khmer Rouge until authorized to do 
so in December 1978.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/4/2018 11:08 AM, g2s wrote:

Ps. The revolutionary is guided by great feelings of love, motherfucker.


Let us always remember that until 1932, every leftist everywhere, 
including the New York Times, supported the liquidation of the kulaks,


And that until 1978 December, every leftist everywhere supported the 
Cambodian autogenocide.  (And if any leftist failed to do so, he was 
deemed a nazi)

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/4/2018 11:08 AM, g2s wrote:

Leftists hate everyone, troll?

 From each according to their ability; to each according to their need...

Sure sounds hateful.


Who decides "need"?

g2s gets to decide need, and the kulak who thinks he needs his seed corn 
does not get to decide need.


And pretty soon g2s is pouring petrol over the kulak's children and 
setting them on fire to force their father to reveal where the seed corn 
is buried, while the New York Times cheers him enthusiastically, and 
Walter Duranty gets a Pulitzer prize for sodomizing little boys while 
staying an a luxury Moscow hotel formerly used by royalty while 
enthusiastically supporting the men who set kulak children on fire/

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[g2s]

Leftists hate everyone, troll?
From each according to their ability; to each according to their need...
Sure sounds hateful.
Rr
Ps. The revolutionary is guided by great feelings of love, motherfucker.
A certain Cuban said that, scumbag. To the Junkfile with you
null

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

"Shawn K. Quinn" wrote:
...and those of us who actually stand up for decency and order get 
labeled as the nazis and fascists. Can you say "projection?"


On 1/4/2018 6:25 AM, g2s wrote:
Decency and order in Capitalist societies are relative and oppress 
someone somewhere. 


And where is your wonderful anti capitalist society that did not murder 
a large proportion of the population, including a very large proportion 
of the leftists that imposed it?


Leftists hate everyone, and they hate those closer to themselves more 
than they hate those further from themselves.  They hate their friends, 
they hate their kin, they hate their family, they hate their children, 
and most of all, they hate themselves.   See, for example "10:10 No 
Pressure".


They reject Christian particularism, that God commanded you look after 
family first, then neighbors, that at Babel, the semi mythical first 
city, first Kingdom, and first empire, located in the area that 
archaeology tells us first practiced farming,  (which is logically where 
one would expect the first Kingdom and first empire to first appear, 
irrespective of whether it was actually called Babel and actually 
founded by Nimrod) God ordained the existence of tribes and nationalities.


And if God did not ordain them, Darwin tells us that Gnon did.  And 
chances are that the will of Gnon was demonstrated where farming 
started, when someone first tried empire.  Irrespective of whether Babel 
actually existed or what happened there, farming would have led to the 
first city, the first city likely became the first Kingdom, the first 
Kingdom likely became the first empire, and then the proverbial would 
have hit the fan.


And then, being holier than thou, leftists demonstrate that holiness by 
rejecting those closest to themselves even more, like the worshippers of 
Moloch, who demonstrated their loyalty to the state faith by casting 
their children into the fire.  For leftists, abortion is a sacrament. 
The logic of leftism starts with "invade the world, invite the world", 
proceeds to the murder of taxpayers and property owners, as in Detroit 
and Ferguson, then proceeds to white genocide, and then proceeds to 
autogenocide.


The final stage of leftism is always the red terror, when leftists 
devour each other for insufficient holiness.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[g2s]

"Shawn K. Quinn" wrote:
On 01/03/2018 01:35 PM, g2s wrote:
> AnarchoCap/So-called "libertarian" infestation. They attract fascists
> and nazis because they share an underlying ideology, despite their
> bleatings to the contrary.

...and those of us who actually stand up for decency and order get labeled as 
the nazis and fascists. Can you say "projection?"

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 


Decency and order in Capitalist societies are relative and oppress someone 
somewhere. That's a defining trait. Someone's on top. Someone's on the bottom 
getting screwed. There is no option to that in capitalist economics. The people 
on top who control the repression apparatus are fascist, and the people who 
otherwise prosper are, to use a well worn phrase, Good Germans.
I had a similar convo on twitter the other day. Here's what I wrote:
"There is no such thing as anarchocapitalism or for that matter 
capitalism-based socialism. The former is libertarianism... narcissistic 
capitalism, the latter Fascism, or if you would, National Socialism."
Currently I'm in TwitterJail for responding to this ViceCanada article...
https://twitter.com/vicecanada/status/948635075272359936 
...about the "Skate Girls of Kabul" with:
"Too bad they dont have clean running water. Fuck YOU for glossing over the 
#Genocide America caused in #Afghanistan... #Scumbags. Ps We're sending 
thousands of troops to Afghanistan in '18 to make SURE Iraqis stay addicted en 
masse to Heroin."
https://twitter.com/AuntieImperial/status/948641912310841344
Capitalism. Someone gets screwed and the Good Germans are happy believing in 
myths and lies.
Rr, cutting the crap, with a machete

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[juan]

On Wed, 3 Jan 2018 14:02:20 -0600
"Shawn K. Quinn"  wrote:

> On 01/03/2018 01:35 PM, g2s wrote:
> > AnarchoCap/So-called "libertarian" infestation. They attract
> > fascists and nazis because they share an underlying ideology,
> > despite their bleatings to the contrary.
> 
> ...and those of us who actually stand up for decency and order get
> labeled as the nazis and fascists. Can you say "projection?"


it's just a matter of looking up what a guy like 'marina',
rayzer and shill quinn have posted. Unsurprisingly the three of
them  are not only americunt statists, but tor-bots. 

but have they ever made a cypherpunk/libertarian point? Never. 


" stand up for decency and order" 

also, asshole quinn  constantly uses that sort of
fascist language. A couple of times I thought he was being
sarcastic, but then I had to conclude the motherfucking asshole
is being serious, and being his own cosmic, involuntary,
self-parody. 

"AMERCICUNT LAW AND ORDER" - that's what this list needs.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 01/03/2018 01:35 PM, g2s wrote:
> AnarchoCap/So-called "libertarian" infestation. They attract fascists
> and nazis because they share an underlying ideology, despite their
> bleatings to the contrary.

...and those of us who actually stand up for decency and order get
labeled as the nazis and fascists. Can you say "projection?"

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[g2s]

Marina Brown wrote: 
> I stand with Ceci.

I'll take her light hearted fun stuff over the far right babblings that have 
pushed decent discussion off this list for the most part.
How did we get to this point ?
--- Marina

AnarchoCap/So-called "libertarian" infestation. They attract fascists and nazis 
because they share an underlying ideology, despite their bleatings to the 
contrary.
Rr

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[Marina Brown]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 01/02/2018 08:53 PM, John Newman wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On January 2, 2018 6:07:37 AM EST, Ben Mezger  wrote:
>> I don't think you actually understood my point (nor did I
>> actually specify it precisely).
>> 
>> I did read __some__ of Jame's messages and I think it's also
>> damn pathetic too. I am not taking any sides here, I just think
>> you are both wrong
> 
> James is way way more wrong, by virtue of being total scum.
> 
> Ack, I just wasted more list bandwidth discussing this shiT 
> stain... wtf is wrong with me !?
> 
>> about personally attacking each other (or it seems like so at
>> least) on a public email list on hacker culture. Wether you take
>> it as a humiliation or not, that's up to you. You should take it
>> as an advice that even if someone lowers their level, you should 
>> not do the same and perhaps sometimes is better to give a time
>> before replying.
>> 
>> Do whatever is healthier for you.
>> 
>> 
>> On 2 January 2018 at 11:49, Cecilia Tanaka
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> On Jan 2, 2018 02:08, "Shawn K. Quinn" 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 01/01/2018 02:45 PM, Ben Mezger wrote:
 since when did cpunk got so personal specially on a public
 list?
>> and
 since when has cpunks become a sexual diary?
>>> 
>>> Personally, I would rather read flagrant personal attacks and
>> outright
>>> pornography from Cecilia than even one-tenth of the flagrant
>>> racist (including white supremacist), anti-semitic, homophobic,
>>> and
>> dishonest
>>> spam that eminates from the like of those who I now call #$%&
>>> and
>> #$%

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[ilsa]

remember when this vigor and voice wrapped around digital stories with a
light on digital freedom..the latest how to's and how where's which is what
was so endearing and attractive.
Smile

Ilsa Bartlett
Institute for Rewiring the System
http://ilsabartlett.wordpress.com
http://www.google.com/profiles/ilsa.bartlett
www.hotlux.com/angel 

"Don't ever get so big or important that you can not hear and listen to
every other person."
-John Coltrane

On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 5:53 PM, John Newman  wrote:

>
>
>
>
>
> On January 2, 2018 6:07:37 AM EST, Ben Mezger  wrote:
> >I don't think you actually understood my point (nor did I actually
> >specify
> >it precisely).
> >
> >I did read __some__ of Jame's messages and I think it's also damn
> >pathetic
> >too. I am not taking any sides here, I just think you are both wrong
>
> James is way way more wrong, by virtue of being total scum.
>
> Ack, I just wasted more list bandwidth discussing this shiT
> stain... wtf is wrong with me !?
>
> >about
> >personally attacking each other (or it seems like so at least) on a
> >public
> >email list on hacker culture.
> >Wether you take it as a humiliation or not, that's up to you. You
> >should
> >take it as an advice that even if someone lowers their level, you
> >should
> >not do the same and perhaps sometimes is better to give a time before
> >replying.
> >
> >Do whatever is healthier for you.
> >
> >
> >On 2 January 2018 at 11:49, Cecilia Tanaka 
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On Jan 2, 2018 02:08, "Shawn K. Quinn"  wrote:
> >>
> >> On 01/01/2018 02:45 PM, Ben Mezger wrote:
> >> > since when did cpunk got so personal specially on a public list?
> >and
> >> > since when has cpunks become a sexual diary?
> >>
> >> Personally, I would rather read flagrant personal attacks and
> >outright
> >> pornography from Cecilia than even one-tenth of the flagrant racist
> >> (including white supremacist), anti-semitic, homophobic, and
> >dishonest
> >> spam that eminates from the like of those who I now call #$%& and
> >#$%

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[John Newman]

On January 2, 2018 6:07:37 AM EST, Ben Mezger  wrote:
>I don't think you actually understood my point (nor did I actually
>specify
>it precisely).
>
>I did read __some__ of Jame's messages and I think it's also damn
>pathetic
>too. I am not taking any sides here, I just think you are both wrong

James is way way more wrong, by virtue of being total scum. 

Ack, I just wasted more list bandwidth discussing this shiT
stain... wtf is wrong with me !? 

>about
>personally attacking each other (or it seems like so at least) on a
>public
>email list on hacker culture.
>Wether you take it as a humiliation or not, that's up to you. You
>should
>take it as an advice that even if someone lowers their level, you
>should
>not do the same and perhaps sometimes is better to give a time before
>replying.
>
>Do whatever is healthier for you.
>
>
>On 2 January 2018 at 11:49, Cecilia Tanaka 
>wrote:
>
>> On Jan 2, 2018 02:08, "Shawn K. Quinn"  wrote:
>>
>> On 01/01/2018 02:45 PM, Ben Mezger wrote:
>> > since when did cpunk got so personal specially on a public list?
>and
>> > since when has cpunks become a sexual diary?
>>
>> Personally, I would rather read flagrant personal attacks and
>outright
>> pornography from Cecilia than even one-tenth of the flagrant racist
>> (including white supremacist), anti-semitic, homophobic, and
>dishonest
>> spam that eminates from the like of those who I now call #$%& and
>#$%

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On 1/2/2018 8:49 PM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote:

 Ben did
probably not read James' messages and his personal attacks to me or 
purposely ignored them


Pretty sure he did read my messages, which only personally attacked you 
by calling your personal attacks on me "projection".  "Social Justice 
Warriors always project."


You asserted that I was alone and unloved, something that people of my 
sex and my political leanings seldom experience, and people of your sex 
and your political leanings regularly experience, in part because our 
ideology tells us that "love your neighbor" means your actual neighbor, 
not hostile angry people in Africa, and that our duty to close kin is 
greater than our duty to friends, and our duty to friends exceeds our 
duty to far away strangers. (1 Timothy 5:16)


And those few of us males that suffer from it are seldom much troubled. 
Women need to be loved much more than men, and women, having a much 
shorter period of sexual attractiveness and fertility than men, 
frequently blow their one short chance.  Men are troubled by not getting 
their dicks wet, by lack of sex, not by lack of love. But if they 
neglect to use a condom, likely to wind up getting stuck with being loved.


For a man, love is in plentiful, indeed excessive, supply, particularly 
if he hates condoms, just as sex is in plentiful supply for women.  If a 
man who feels he needs love, he has plenty of time in which to find it, 
whereas a woman has only a short time in which to find it, and is apt to 
waste her time partying, getting an education, and building a career 
during that terribly brief period when she should be building a family.


Because of the social environment of social justice warriors, and 
because of the sexual misconduct valorized by social justice warriors, 
female social justice warriors regularly and routinely blow their one 
short chance by sleeping with men who do not call them back, and by 
cuckolding any man so foolish as to call them back, until they stop 
getting nine at night booty calls from Jeremy Meeks.

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[jamesd]

On Mon, Jan 01, 2018 at 11:07:57PM -0600, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:

Personally, I would rather read flagrant personal attacks and outright
pornography from Cecilia than even one-tenth of the flagrant racist
(including white supremacist), anti-semitic, homophobic, and dishonest
spam that eminates from the like of those who I now call #$%& and #$%

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Mon, Jan 01, 2018 at 11:07:57PM -0600, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
> On 01/01/2018 02:45 PM, Ben Mezger wrote:
> > since when did cpunk got so personal specially on a public list? and
> > since when has cpunks become a sexual diary?
> 
> Personally, I would rather read flagrant personal attacks and outright
> pornography from Cecilia than even one-tenth of the flagrant racist
> (including white supremacist), anti-semitic, homophobic, and dishonest
> spam that eminates from the like of those who I now call #$%& and 

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[Ben Mezger]

I don't think you actually understood my point (nor did I actually specify
it precisely).

I did read __some__ of Jame's messages and I think it's also damn pathetic
too. I am not taking any sides here, I just think you are both wrong about
personally attacking each other (or it seems like so at least) on a public
email list on hacker culture.
Wether you take it as a humiliation or not, that's up to you. You should
take it as an advice that even if someone lowers their level, you should
not do the same and perhaps sometimes is better to give a time before
replying.

Do whatever is healthier for you.


On 2 January 2018 at 11:49, Cecilia Tanaka  wrote:

> On Jan 2, 2018 02:08, "Shawn K. Quinn"  wrote:
>
> On 01/01/2018 02:45 PM, Ben Mezger wrote:
> > since when did cpunk got so personal specially on a public list? and
> > since when has cpunks become a sexual diary?
>
> Personally, I would rather read flagrant personal attacks and outright
> pornography from Cecilia than even one-tenth of the flagrant racist
> (including white supremacist), anti-semitic, homophobic, and dishonest
> spam that eminates from the like of those who I now call #$%& and #$%

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[Cecilia Tanaka]

On Jan 2, 2018 02:08, "Shawn K. Quinn"  wrote:

On 01/01/2018 02:45 PM, Ben Mezger wrote:
> since when did cpunk got so personal specially on a public list? and
> since when has cpunks become a sexual diary?

Personally, I would rather read flagrant personal attacks and outright
pornography from Cecilia than even one-tenth of the flagrant racist
(including white supremacist), anti-semitic, homophobic, and dishonest
spam that eminates from the like of those who I now call #$%& and #$%

Re: Personal attacks etc (was Re: USA: National Security Strategy...)

[juan]

On Mon, 1 Jan 2018 23:07:57 -0600
"Shawn K. Quinn"  wrote:

> the objections to moderating this list (note: NOT censoring, moderating)

oh shill k quinn is back! Hey mr shill, it would be nice if you
had something like 1% intellectual honesty and  admited that
you are an advocate of CENSORSHIP who doesn't even have the
balls to call it CENSORSHIP and instead uses the hypocritical,
euphemistical and just fraudulent term 'moderation'.

But you see, it doesn't matter if you refer to CENSORSHIP as
'moderation' because it still is CENSORSHIP.

Just like when you americans murder brown children for fun and
profit and call it collateral murder, I mean, damage. 


> there's almost no point to having the list if it's not
> going to stay on a defined topic and if we as a community have no
> power to deal with those who habitually behave as anthropomorphic
> uncaged animals.
> 
> If the "cypherpunks" banner is to mean anything, then we need to take
> it back from those who are using it as an excuse to be racists,
> homophobes, thieves, and liars.

thieves and liars? Are you talking about your pals and tax
parasites  at the tor project? They are feminazis too! Really a
monument to American Virtue.



> As someone who is today a citizen of
> good character, I feel I should be able to call myself a cypherpunk

Tell us oh Great Master Philospher Shill Quinn, how does an
STATIST and CENSOR (like you) become a cypherpunk? 

How do anonimity, free speech and anarchy relate to your love
for CENSORSHIP and GOVERNMENT TYRANNY? 



> and maintain my membership here without risk of associating myself
> with those who engage in such putrid and/or criminal conduct as I
> have enumerated above. I believe a true cypherpunk is of good
> character (including honesty and a respect for basic standards of
> decency) and disown those who use the "cypherpunks" banner and
> mailing list to partake of and further conduct to the contrary.
> 
> I'm no fan of personal attacks, and I can see how overt sexual content
> would be at least nominally off-topic, but those two things rank among
> the very least of our problems.
>