Isn't it just great the way feminazi mass hysteria gets the word out?
It's too bad you can't even quote each other accurately, though. You need
to work on that.
John Knight
ps--what is it about you feminazis and jews that you can demand that Muslims
be tortured, maimed, killed, decapitated, bombed, and fried, but mention
shipping you scumbags out of the country, and you go postal? Why the double
standard? Don't you realize that Muslims are about a billion times more
desirable in every way, to almost every other citizen on the planet, than
jews?
"Insomniac" <insomniac at winterslight.org> wrote in message
news:ajq14c$1cu65a$1 at ID-150265.news.dfncis.de...
> And...for those of you wondering where the Aryan Nation is hiding
> themselves....here is their homepage: http://www.natvan.com/.>> THIS is what John is basing his information on. THIS is why John thinks
his
> horrible agenda will become reality.
>> THIS is what his "Christian Party" stands for.
>> Welcome to the new way to hide and promote racial hatred, folks.
>> "Insomniac" <insomniac at winterslight.org> wrote in message
> news:ajq0rl$1db24n$1 at ID-150265.news.dfncis.de...> > Oh Yes, John Knight, your thorough and complete hypocrisy is now
revealed.
> >
> > You follow the ''Church of Jesus Christ Christian'' led by Richard
Butler,
> > don't you? Or are you, in fact, Richard Butler himself?
> >
> > That is where you get your bullshit about "true Israelites" versus
"Jews".
> > That is where you get your deep hatred for those who aren't "Aryan"
from.
> >
> > Obviously you've gotten in trouble before, because now you hide behind
> your
> > "Father's Manifesto" and "Christian Party"...but the true funding and
> > support comes from this "Aryan Nation" - doesn't it, John?
> >
> > Now, I do believe the rest of us can safely ignore you. Nobody of your
> ilk
> > will ever succeed in obtaining your objectives, as long as we have our
> > American Consitution...and don't try another country, either. *They*
will
> > put up with it even less than the U.S. does...there, they'll just toss
you
> > behind bars.
> >
> > "Shadow Dancer" <insomniac at winterslight.org> wrote in message
> > news:ajq0cu$1df7vu$1 at ID-150265.news.dfncis.de...> > > bionet.neuroscience removed.
> > >
> > > This should be regarded as a **new thread**, a tangent off of the one
> > > referenced in the quote at the very bottom. Please keep the new
subject
> > > intact when replying.
> > >
> > > There are countless Internet resources which abundantly discuss the
Nazi
> > > Party's "Final Solution", and not all of them are Jewish-based. Below
> is
> > > but a handful of the links I managed to dig up on a Google search:
> > >
> > > http://www.ushmm.org/outreach/fsol.htm> > > http://www.mtsu.edu/~baustin/finlsol.html> > > http://www.remember.org/guide/Facts.root.final.html> > > http://history.acusd.edu/gen/WW2Timeline/Final_Solution.html> > > http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/holocaust/h-wannsee.htm> > > http://www.wsg-hist.uni-linz.ac.at/Auschwitz/HTML/Endloesung.html> > > http://www.sunderland.ac.uk/~os0tmc/occupied/final.htm> > >
> > > There is documentation, living eyewitness testimony, the death camps
and
> > the
> > > mass graves themselves to prove that Hitler's "Final Solution" was not
> > > deportation, but mass genocide.
> > >
> > > If John Knight and his friends continue to insist that Hitler's
> > > extermination of all those with as little as 1/4 Jewish heritage (how
do
> I
> > > know this? Why gee, some of my own *family* vanished because they had
> but
> > a
> > > portion of Jewish heritage, that's why!) never happened then I guess
the
> > > American, British, French, Russian, (and several other) governments
also
> > > found themselves participating in some sort of fantastic
> > > mass-hallucination - especially the American, British and Russian
G.I.'s
> > who
> > > rescued the survivors of the death camps, and found many an open mass
> > grave,
> > > barely salted with lime, prepared to be buried via bulldozer, found
the
> > > plans, the pictures, all the horrific details that more than
adequately
> > > documented this "final solution".
> > >
> > > I also see that you seem to consider the WTC disaster to also be some
> sort
> > > of a nice, handy way to exterminate yet more innocent people with
> anything
> > > from a fraction to full-blooded Jewish heritage (regardless of whether
> > they
> > > practiced Judaism or not; regardless of whether they were staunch
> > adherents
> > > to Christianity or not).
> > >
> > > And you wonder why we say you sound just like a neo Nazi? Don't go to
> > > Germany and preach your agenda:
> > http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9608/22/neo.nazi/.> > > They'd put you right where you belong; behind bars.
> > >
> > > Let me guess: *These* guys are where your religion comes from:
> > > http://www.gospelcom.net/apologeticsindex/a83.html. The one Yahoo
group
> > you
> > > belong to is called "Christian Identity". It's the same group, innit,
> > John
> > > Knight?
> > >
> > > ~~~
> > >
> > > Stop aiding and abetting the terrorism yourself, John Knight.
> Advocating
> > > the wholesale deportation and/or slaughter of individuals based solely
> on
> > > their birth heritage is no different than what the Nazi party did in
> > > Germany - and what the neo-Nazi party advocates today.
> > >
> > > It definitely qualifies as domestic terrorism. Take your "terror" to
> some
> > > private island somewhere. The majority of us do not need your type.
> The
> > > majority of us do not WANT your type.
> > >
> > > The Shadow Dancer
> > > A Proud American
> > > 1/8 Jewish Heritage
> > > Decorated USAF disabled veteran
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote in message
> > > news:svp0mu0d7l7nec7elbnn4u19gm8fkdpsh0 at 4ax.com...> > > > "John Knight" <johnknight at usa.com> wrote:
> > > > >What you can't seem to comprehend, mainly because you've been
> > brainwashed
> > > by
> > > > >all the jewish media mania (or perhaps because you ARE a jew), is
> that
> > > > >"booting the jews out" meant, and still does mean, "booting the
jews
> > > out".
> > > > >
> > > > >As the population of jews in Germany decreased by 600,000, the
> > population
> > > of
> > > > >jews in the US increased by 600,000. But the worldwide population
of
> > > jews
> > > > >also increased by 4% by the end of WWII, which is another 550,000
> (from
> > > 15.2
> > > > >million in 1941 to 15.75 million in 1948). The jews were popping
up
> > all
> > > > >over the place. The population of jews in South America increased
by
> > > > >200,000 (from 30,000 to 230,000). There were so many more jews at
> the
> > > end
> > > > >of WWII than there were before that there was no place for Slimey
> > > > >Wiesenthal, et. al., to hide them all, so they made up the
holocaust
> > LIES
> > > to
> > > > >distract your attention from the fact that the jew Hitler and his
jew
> > > Nazis
> > > > >KILLED 48 million Christians while they protected the jews.
> > > > >
> > > > >It's really hard to feel sorry for LIARS who LIED when they claimed
> > that
> > > "6
> > > > >million jews died in the holocaust", when the REAL holocaust was
the
> 48
> > > > >million fellow Christians who died far more horrible deaths in
> > > firebombings
> > > > >than the vast majority of jews who were sitting in comfy
> concentration
> > > camps
> > > > >ever witnessed.
> > > > >
> > > > >The "Final Solution" wasn't to kill the jews--it was to exile them.
> > And
> > > > >most of them WERE exiled. The jews who DID die in concentration
> camps
> > > died
> > > > >at the end of WWII when WE intentionally bombed the German supply
> lines
> > > > >which brought food and medicine to the concentration camps. Why
did
> we
> > > do
> > > > >that? Because the inmates were making war materiel used to fight
the
> > > > >Allies. Why would the Germans want to kill the very people who
were
> > > > >supplying war materiel for them in the midst of a losing war? This
> > would
> > > be
> > > > >like cutting your own throat (not that jews could have produced
very
> > > much,
> > > > >but every drop would have counted at that point).
> > > >
> > > > I think I'll take the British Court system as being decisive over
your
> > > > silly opinion. They ruled against a Holocaust denier, David Irving
> > > > who sued for libel in 2000.
> > > >
> > > > http://www.holocaustdenialontrial.org/nsindex.html> > > >
> > > > >David Irving, a British Holocaust denier, sued American professor
> > > > > Deborah Lipstadt and her British publisher, Penguin Books, for
libel
> > > > > in a 2000 London trial that made headlines around the world.
> > > > >
> > > > >Despite England's draconian libel laws, Lipstadt and Penguin not
only
> > > > > won resoundingly, but also exposed the inner workings of the
> deniers,
> > > > > who distort 20th century history in order to promote 21st century
> > > > > antisemitism and white supremacy.
> > > > >
> > > > >This site is built around the defense's groundbreaking research,
the
> > > > > riveting trial-room testimony, and the judge's historic opinion
> which
> > > > > found Irving to be a "right-wing pro-Nazi polemicist" who
> > > > > "deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence."
> > > >
> > > > From the evidence section:
> > > > Expert Opinion , written by Christopher R. Browning
> > > > ...
> > > > >3. Implementation of the Final Solution
> > > >
> > > > >3.1 The Nazi regime implemented the Final Solution or mass murder
of
> > > > > the European Jews caught within its empire primarily by two
> > > > > methods--shooting and gassing. In the territories occupied by
> Germany
> > > > > after June 22, 1941 (with the exception of the district of
Bialystok
> > > > > and partial exception of the district of Galicia), shooting was
the
> > > > > most common method employed to kill Jews. The Jews of central and
> > > > > western Poland i.e. the Polish territory held by Germany since
> > > > > September 1939, and those deported from all over Europe to Poland
> > > > > during the war for the most part perished in the gas chambers of
> > > > > Auschwitz-Birkenau, Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka, and the gas
vans
> > > > > of Chelmno.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >3.2 The evidence for these killing operations is of four types
used
> > > > > commonly by scholars in the writing of history and judicial
> > > > > authorities in the conducting of trials: (1) contemporary
> > > > > documentation; (2) witness testimony recorded later (from
survivors,
> > > > > perpetrators, and bystanders); (3) material evidence; and (4)
> > > > > circumstantial evidence. Because the Nazi regime sought to destroy
> > > > > not only the Jews of Europe but also the documentary evidence and
> > > > > material evidence (i.e. the mass graves and death camps), the
> > > > > evidence with which scholars and judicial authorities can work is
> > > > > both less than complete and not symmetrical for the two killing
> > > > > methods. In particular, the documentation of mass killing by
> shooting
> > > > > in the territories occupied by Germany after June 1941 is quite
> > > > > extensive, while documents relating to gassing in Poland is scant.
> > > > > For gassing, therefore, witness testimony and circumstantial
> evidence
> > > > > play a much larger role.
> > > >
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > >4.1.3 These cumulative totals do not distinguish between Jewish
and
> > > > > non-Jewish victims. The Jäger Report (summarizing the activities
of
> > > > > Einsatzkommando 3 in Lithuania up to December 1941), however, does
> > > > > identify all its victims, of which only 2,042 or barely 1.5% were
> > > > > non-Jewish (mostly identified as communist functionaries or
> > > > > mentally-ill). Einsatzgruppe D did not make this distinction in
its
> > > > > cumulative totals, but it often did in its bi-weekly reports. For
> > > > > instance, on November 5, 1941, it reported killing 11,037 Jews and
> 31
> > > > > communist officials in the previous two weeks. For the period
> > > > > November 16-December 15, 1941, it reported executing 17,645 Jews,
> > > > > 2,504 Krimchaks (categorized racially as Jews), 824 Gypsies, and
212
> > > > > communists.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > From the judgment:
> > > > >Irving's concessions
> > > > >13.152 It was a striking feature of the case that in the course of
it
> > > > > Irving made, or appeared to make, concessions about major issues.
In
> > > > > doing so he resiled from the stance adopted by him in relation to
> > > > > those issues before trial. Such concessions were made by Irving in
> > > > > relation to the shooting of Jews in the East; the use of gas vans
at
> > > > > Chelmno and in Yugoslavia; the gassing of Jews at the Action
> Reinhard
> > > > > camps; the existence and genocidal use of gas chambers at
Auschwitz
> > > > > and the Leuchter report.
> > > > >
> > > > >13.153 Thus the Defendants contend that, having previously asserted
> > > > > that the shooting of Jews in the East was generally unauthorised
and
> > > > > carried out by small bands of criminals with Hitler's partial
> > > > > knowledge but without any order from him, Irving accepted at trial
> > > > > that perhaps as many as 1.5 million Jews were killed on the
> authority
> > > > > of Heydrich and on a systematic basis. He conceded also that
Hitler
> > > > > not only knew of the shooting of the Jews in the East but also
> > > > > sanctioned their murder. He agreed that Hitler had taken the
> > > > > initiative in ridding the Altreich of Jews. Irving's concessions
on
> > > > > these issues were in stark contrast to his case as it stood before
> > > > > trial.
> > > > >
> > > > >13. 154 At a later stage in the trial, however, Irving retracted,
as
> > > > > least in part, the concessions he had made. He partially withdrew
> his
> > > > > acceptance of Hitler's responsibility for the shooting. In a
written
> > > > > submission Irving argued that the treatment of deported Jews
> > > > > suggested a lack of system and co-ordination and that there was no
> > > > > clear and unambiguous evidence of Hitler's awareness of the mass
> > > > > murder in the East of European Jews. Irving claimed that he had
> > > > > adopted the position before trial that the killing of the Jews in
> the
> > > > > East had been largely systematic and much of it had been carried
out
> > > > > under orders. He claimed that there was no significant shift of
> > > > > position on his part. But it appears to me that Irving did shift
his
> > > > > ground in a significant way in the course of the trial, especially
> in
> > > > > regard to Hitler's authorisation of the killing.
> > > > >
> > > > >13.155 In regard to the use of gas vans, Irving was prepared before
> > > > > trial to accept no more than that there had been an "alleged
> > > > > liquidation" of 152,000 Jews at Chelmno and that gas vans had been
> > > > > used on an experimental basis and on very limited scale. At trial
he
> > > > > accepted that there had been a systematic use of gas vans at the
> > > > > camp; that in one relatively short period 97,000 Jews had been
> > > > > murdered there and that he had been wrong to say that the use of
the
> > > > > vans was experimental. He also accepted that the Nazis used gas
vans
> > > > > to kill Jews in Yugoslavia instead of shooting them. Irving's
> > > > > explanation for these changes in his case was that he was making
> > > > > admissions in order to deal with the issues expeditiously.
> > > > >
> > > > >13.156 In relation to the Reinhard camps, having claimed before the
> > > > > trial that there were no gas chambers at Treblinka, Sobibor or
> > > > > Belzec, Irving accepted at trial that he could not challenge the
> > > > > accepted figures for the numbers of Jews killed at those camps
which
> > > > > were 700-950,000,200,000 and 550,000 respectively. He again later
> > > > > explained his concessions as having been made "formally" in order
to
> > > > > speed the trial along, adding later that he had seen no
documentary
> > > > > evidence to support the figures for those killed. I have already
> > > > > given my reaction to that response.
> > > > >
> > > > >13.157 I have earlier summarised the manner in which Irving altered
> > > > > his position in relation to the number of Jews killed there by gas
> > > > > but also to the existence of homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz.
On
> > > > > both these issues there was in my view a radical shift of ground.
> > > > > Irving says that he has always accepted that many Jews were killed
> at
> > > > > Auschwitz. So he has, but not by gassing.
> > > > >
> > > > >13.158 I have also described Irving's concessions in relation to
the
> > > > > Leuchter report: see paragraph 7.89. Irving had previously
expressed
> > > > > the view that the conclusions of the report were irrefutable. At
> > > > > trial, as has been seen, he agreed without any great protest that
> the
> > > > > vast majority of Leuchter's findings were wrong and the report was
> > > > > fundamentally flawed.
> > > > >
> > > > >13.159 What is the significance of these alterations in Irving's in
> > > > > realtion to the issue with which I am at present concerned with,
> > > > > namely Irving's motivation? It seems to me that the Defendants are
> > > > > justified in their contention that Irving's readiness to resile
from
> > > > > positions he had adopted in what he has written and said about
> > > > > important aspects of the Holocaust demonstrates his willingness to
> > > > > make assertions about the Nazi era which, as he must appreciate,
are
> > > > > irreconcilable with the available evidence. I also consider that
> > > > > there is force in the Defendants' contention that Irving's
> retraction
> > > > > of some of his concessions, made when he was confronted with the
> > > > > evidence relied on by the Defendants, manifests a determination to
> > > > > adhere to his preferred version of history, even if the evidence
> does
> > > > > not support it.
> > > >
> > > > Sounds like the nincompoop, doesn't it.
> > > >
> > > > lojbab
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>>
