black@pundit.DEC (DON BLACK DTN 261-2739 MS: NIO/N13 LOC: POLE C6) (08/08/85)
By popular request, I am hereby cluttering up the net with the entire
text of a personal exchange between myself and Isaac Dimitrovsi. It's fairly
obvious to me that the meaning of the term "Nazi" has been twisted and
perverted to include anybody who does not swear absolute allegiance to the
State of Israel above all things.
When asked to define what a Nazi is, all they can say is "You're one
because you say...." So what if I don't agree with spending American money
to finance a Sand Dune? So what if I don't like the Antidefamation League
defaming the Christian churches? So what if I object to the Jewish Defense
League burning libraries? So what if I stand up for the rights of a
Revisionist Historian? Tough cookies, Baby! If you don't like it, file
a complaint with the Soviet Embassy.
Text follows:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Isaac--
Normally I don't like to spend too much time answering individual mail,
simply because I have only 8 hours in a day to work and otherwise use the
terminal. But you do deserve some answers.
>I don't understand, Don. I thought you'd be proud to be called a Nazi.
A Nazi is a member of the National German Socialist Party, an admirer
of the Little Corporal. I am neither a German or a socialist or otherwise
a follower of Adolph. I am, however, an American Nationalist, to wit,
one who places America first. I abhor socialism of any flavor.
There are other examples of legitimate national pride. For example,
if I were a Jew, I'm sure I would feel a sense of nationalism toward
Israel. Well, I'm not, I'm an American.
>Another thing I can't understand is why you're so bland about some
>things. You pussyfoot around saying things like [I'm paraphrasing;
>I don't have the quotes handy, so deny if you feel misquoted]
>"Well, as far whether the Germans gassed Jews, there are pros and cons,
>aren't there?" or "There is an Institute in California which has offered
>a $50,000 reward to anyone who could prove the Germans gassed Jews; so far
>noone has been able to make them pay."
I'm trying to spare the net of a (pardon the expression) pissing
contest. One would develop very quickly if such subjects were placed in
open discussion. If the net wants to discuss it, fine. I'm game.
As for the quotes, yeah, OK, close enough.
You probably realize that there is a controversy raging about the
veracity of the Holocaust story. I want to find out the truth and nothing
more. If it happened, fine. If it didn't, what did happen? Were six
million killed? If so, how did they die? If not, how many did die and
by what means? Who really did control the camps? Who were their superiors?
Are there people still alive and unnamed who might be prosecuted? That's
all I want to know.
But to do that, I must have the right to dig out the information that I
need.
I feel that the whole issue is one of free speech and expression. There
are people who claim that nothing happened. They offer evidence that the
Camps were not in fact Death Camps. In this country, we have the right
to freedom of the press, expression, association, and speech. Which means
that you may say as you please, and I have the right to rebut it. It
doesn't matter who is right and who is wrong, the fact is we both have
the right to tell our sides. Period.
I would think that the Jewish community would welcome a forensic
investigation of the Camp sites, and an open discussion of the material.
But in the Ernst Zundel trial, the Jewish community (the ADL, I believe),
asked the Canadian Prosecutor to drop the case, to avoid the publicity.
And in the recent Mel Mermelstein lawsuit, the judge threw out most
of the complaint and forced the plaintiff to settle out of court.
So now I have to ask "What are they trying to hide?"
>Why not just say what you think? i.e. "I don't think the Germans
>gassed Jews; the Holocaust is a hoax."
I did, on net.religion. Ask Rich Rosen, he'll tell you.
Obviously, SOMETHING did happen. Camps did exist, people did die.
It's not a popular position to claim otherwise.
>Come to think of it, why haven't
>you ever said exactly what *you* want to do about the Jews?
Because I have never really thought about it. My basic philosophy is
to live and let live. Just because I don't particularly like a group of
people doesn't necessarily mean that I want to "do something about them."
I don't begrudge anybody a home, a family, a job, or a front seat on the
bus. But that doesn't say that I have to socialize with them, allow
them in my house, or let my daughter marry one.
(Besides, who would believe a "Nazi" anyways?)
>The closest
>thing I can remember is when someone asked if Jews were the Antichrist
>and you answered "Well, if the shoe fits ..." Come on, Don, you can do
>better than that.
I did. You apparently missed it. I had a whole series on net.religion
on Christian Identity. Unfortunately, the discussion got out of hand. The
Ad Hominems were so bad that my terminal melted. And I'll give you one
guess which group was the worst.
That particular individual and I had a long, private exchange of MAIL.
We found that we basically agreed on many subjects.
>What should be done about the Antichrist?
I don't have to worry about that. It'll all get done in due time.
The harlot Mystery Babylon the Great will get hers in the neck. You
might want to read the Book of Revelation for more detail. I just have
to sit and occupy His Promised Land until He comes again in glory.
>What would
>you do if someone made you President tomorrow?
Hire a bunch of Mafia as bodyguards. The last guy that bucked the
Eastern Establishment went to Dallas and got shot.
>As long as I'm asking you to explain your opinions, I might as well
>add your recent comment to the effect that "Christians should really
>read the Talmud; they'd really get an education." What exactly would
>they find out? Post all the details in net.religion.
Thanks, no. I'll let the other occupants of net.religion post the details.
And take the resulting flak.
Honestly, I have not been able to find an English translation of the
Talmud. Unfortunately, the only information I have on it is what has been
published in so-called "hate literature." What I've read there nauseates
me.
I have two choices. I can believe what I have read, or I can find out
the truth. I cannot find out the truth without reading the book. If I read
the book, I can find out one of two things. If the Hate Literature is correct,
then I am justified in my criticism of Judaism. If the Literature is wrong,
then I owe people an apology. There might be great philosophy in the Talmud,
but, unless I can read it myself, how can I judge? I asked a book dealer
a year ago to find me one. I'm still waiting.
I've noticed that many people get all bent out of shape whenever I say
anything on the net about Christians reading the Talmud. I would think that
if there is such a thing as a Judeo-Christian ethic and heritage, then maybe
Christians should be reading it. If it were really the great book that every-
body says it is, then Christians might be more tolerant of Jews, right?
>>Which is why I carry a big pistol.
>
>Try not to shoot yourself in the balls, ok?
I wouldn't feel it. They're very large, and made of brass. Besides,
.45-ACP bullets are expensive.
(I have to hand it to the Israelis. I just bought a thousand rounds
of Israeli Military Industries M-193 5.56-mm Ball FMJ ammo for $162.50,
that's 16.25 cents a round. I can't even reload my own for that price.)
So have a good weekend, in any event. I'll be glad to answer any further
questions.
--Don Black
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
[End of text.]
I haven't seen anybody yet give a good, rational definition of the term
"Nazi." Maybe the definition is anything that happens to suit the fancy of
the ADL and its minions.
And maybe, just maybe, Nazism is so closely related to Communism that
they are one and the same. After all, Karl Mordecai-Marx wrote a very
uncomplimentary tome on The Jewish Question as far back as 1844. Surprise,
surprise! Your saint isn't as holy as you thought!
Listen up, you Whited Sepulchers. If you want to have a "pissing contest"
here, go ahead. I've cooled my jets in the last couple of months. I'm
trying to be "nice" to you. But the gloves come off if the B______t continues.
--Don Black
(Member, Board of Policy, Liberty Lobby, 300 Independence Ave SW,
Washington DC 20003.)
myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Latitudinarian Lobster) (08/09/85)
> > A Nazi is a member of the National German Socialist Party, an admirer > of the Little Corporal. I am neither a German or a socialist or otherwise > a follower of Adolph. I am, however, an American Nationalist, to wit, > one who places America first. I abhor socialism of any flavor. Let's make it National Socialist German Workers' Party (NASDP). > > There are other examples of legitimate national pride. For example, > if I were a Jew, I'm sure I would feel a sense of nationalism toward > Israel. Well, I'm not, I'm an American. > More accurately, in the national pride sense, you're a citizen of the US. Nicaraguans are Americans, too. But of course, it's OUR hemisphere, isn't it? > > --Don Black > Lordy, Don, thou defends thyself with such fervor and long-windedness that you MUST be a Nazi (or at least a bombast). -- Jeff Myers The views above may or may not University of Wisconsin-Madison reflect the views of any other Madison Academic Computing Center person or group at UW-Madison. ARPA: uwmacc!myers@wisc-rsch.ARPA UUCP: ..!{harvard,ucbvax,allegra,heurikon,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!myers BitNet: MYERS at MACCWISC
oliver@unc.UUCP (Bill Oliver) (08/10/85)
In article <1385@uwmacc.UUCP> myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Latitudinarian Lobster) writes: > >Lordy, Don, thou defends thyself with such fervor and long-windedness >that you MUST be a Nazi (or at least a bombast). > >-- >Jeff Myers Look, you guys, I bet that there are bunches of us out here in netland who really just don`t care (outside of transient curiosity) whether or not Mr. Black is a Nazi. If he is a Nazi, in title or in thought, then nobody really needs to spend lots of cycles telling him he`s a toad because he will make that plain in his postings. If he is not a Nazi, then of course he will defend himself at length from such accusations, and such defense is not simple bombast. I would get royally angry if someone decided to be judge and jury and call me such things on the net. I suggest we take the case to Judge Moriarity Wapner, and discuss the case fully in net.beat.dead.horse. Bill Oliver