black@nisysg.DEC (03/21/85)
>I think that all Black can say about the Aryan Nations is that they're "a >little (!!!) far out" speaks for itself. This implies that I agree with them entirely. Well, I don't--not entirely, anyway. Some of their members are very active in the protest movement against the Marxist Internal Revenue Service. (Oh, the IRS isn't Marxist, is it? Take a look in the Communist Manifesto sometime. Article 2, I believe.) >As I already mentioned, Falwell and the "new Christian right" are incredibly >bulging with hypocrisy. The "old Christian right" (e.g., Carl McIntyre) >was quite blatant in its hatred for Jews and just about anyone else who looked >at them funny, and the "new Christian right" is just engaging in a supposedly >sly public relations move when they "clean up their act" and show how much >they "love" Jews and Israel. It makes me want to spit. I guess there's mixed emotions about Falwell et alia. Most of the comments about him, Oral Roberts, and Billy Graham were just the opposite from Identity ministers. For example, why is it that Billy Graham has no problem preaching in the Soviet Union? Is it because the Soviets really do have freedom of religion? More than likely they know he'll go back to the US and preach the wonders of the Soviet nation. >I'll say. Kinda almost makes you appreciate the fact that Arndt at least >quotes sources, as bogus as they might be. Let's start with "The Life of an American Jew in Racist Marxist Israel," by Jack Bernstein (the American Jew who wrote it), published by Liberty Library, 300 Independence Ave., SE, Washington, DC 20003. I also have several acquaintences who happen to be of the Jewish persuasion. (Notice I refrain from using the line, "Some of my best friends are Jews?") >No, please, tell us. What are you afraid to tell us, sir? The Antichrist is those who are anti-Christ. If the shoe fits, wear it. >I think the implication of this paragraph is clearly that the things and people >that Black lists at the top MAY have been thought to be a problem (at least >by him) and perhaps to him they still are problems, but there's some much >more important problem. Between your bigoted rantings at the top and the >hallucinations and delusions of grandeur, I think we can all rest assured that >you either really are an a**h*** who is as full of s*** as humanly possible, >or an obnoxious clown who thinks jokes about "Jews as a problem" are funny. >(Sound familiar?) I'm sure that the vast majority of Christians out there >feel the same way, and if they'd get off their behinds and speak their minds >about you rather than just saying "He's just a crackpot a**h***! Forget him!", >we'd all be a lot better off. I can only hope to THEIR god that they do. >Because if they don't and people with your perspective enter the American >Christian mainstream and influence the future of American freedom, we're >really gonna learn the meaning of antichrist----Don Black is looking at it >right in his own mirror. [Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr] (The *****'s indicate where I have deleted explitives from the original text. --DB) Why is it allright to be anti-Christian, anti-God, anti-Moslem, but anti-Jewish or anti-Israeli is anathema? Is this not hypocritical? If anybody out there disagrees with me, fine. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. In fact, I invite commentary--sane, reasonably-presented commentary. (By the way, my MAIL is running 2 to 1 in favor.) The biggest problem amongst Christians today is that we do tend to ignore people such as yourself, Rich. That is, those who are bent on eliminating any sort of God from everyday life. We don't take you seriously enough. And when we do we get labled A**h***s (usually f***ing a**h***s), s***heads, bigots, racists, Nazis, etc. And the worst ephitets are thrown when we get near the truth. ******************************************************************************* >I thought that anti-Jewish ranting went out with my Daddy's >generation. First, it ain't true. Second, it ain't nice. >Third, how are we ever going to successfully preach the >Kingdom to Jewish folks, if they get (GET HELL!! MAINTAIN !!) >the distinct impression that we hate them and would rather >color them gone. >Mind you, Mr Black, I have been accused of being an anti-semite >and have never used such vile rhetoric as you have displayed >recently. >Bob Brown {...ihnp4!akgua!rjb} Did I say anywhere that I want to see Jews get "colored gone?" Please, Brownie, quote me if you will, but kindly don't put words into my mouth. I can do enough of that myself, thank you. Why is it that invectives aimed at Christianity are tolerated, but legitimate questions about Judaism become "vile rhetoric?" No, you're right--it ain't nice to rant untruths about Jews. But I have a lot of questions about what the truth is. So do a lot of people. How am I to learn if I don't ask? ****************************************************************************** >You heard wrong. Yes, you need educating, but first you've got to stop >visiting those book stores in Torrance for your information about Jews. >Does it really bother you that the deity you worship was an Israeli >citizen--and a Jew--and not Ernst Zundel? 1. That book store in Torrence, CA, is the Institute for Historical Review, a non-profit organization that studies the causes of war. It is most noted for its attempts to investigate by forensic means the Holocaust of recent history. It posted a $50,000 reward for anyone who could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the Holocaust actually took place in Europe under Hitler. That reward has not yet been collected. The library was sacked and burned on 4 July 1984 by a professional arsonist. Leaders of the Jewish Defense League held a news conference in the rubble the day after, and danced on the ashes of the files. These same people subsequently provided the authorities with the name of the arsonist. The library has since reopeed in a more secure facility. (The Jewish Defense League is by its own admission a branch of the Israeli army, founded by an American rabbi who is now a member of the Israeli knesset. What in blue blazes is the Israeli army doing conducting armed operations against American civilians on American territory?) >> They tell me that Falwell's preaching is so pro-Israel and pro-Jewish >> that he trips over himself. >Who keeps telling you these things? Do you have a tape-recording of >"The Elders of Zion" near your bed? Falwell speaks for himself. I'm sure his literature service will be glad to provide you with his views on request. I personnally subscribe to several Fundementalist publications, just to see what they have to say. Probably the most pro-Israeli group is Chick publications. As for the tape recordings, I believe the full title is "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," (Rich Rosen should be able to correct me if I'm wrong), and no, I don't have a copy. I do have a good one on the Illuminatti, though. >> I guess maybe an even greater problem in America is not with Communism, >> not with atheists, not with the Jews, or the schools, or the politicians, >It's nice to know that the Jews are not (yet) the greatest problem in >Don Black's America. There you go again, putting words in my mouth. Did I say the Jews were a problem? >P.S. Is it only non-Christians (as Rosen pointed out) that are mortified by > this man's ravings? bill peter Why am I raving, Bill? Besides,, there are a lot of "non-Christians" in this world that have a lot worse things to say. For example ask the Lebanese. (Today's Boston "Globe" [20 March 1985] has a real eye-opener in it. The paper reports in graphic detail about the Israeli march through a Lebanese village, the house ransackings, the arrests, the bulldozed houses, etc. Is this what's in store for the US? >Well, I guess Rich was right. EVEN NON-FUNDAMENTALISTS ARE IN AGREEMENT >WITH BLACK! While Black is spouting his hatred of Jews, liberals, and >non-missionary-positioners on this net, Machionni has the visciousness >to discuss theology with this guy! And denigrating his critics!!!! >Even worse! Saying things like "Don is correct," or "I have no >qualms with Black," or "Black's point is well taken." >Oh great Ubizmo! Is this what people like Marchionni were doing while >the European Jews were being put in death camps? (Don't answer this, >I know the answer already.) What death camps?? >> From his postings I think Don is willing to work within the compromise >> of a pluralistic society. > >Stick it, Marchionni. [bill peter] I can't add any more, Bill. Somehow you say it all yourself. ******************************************************************************* >The things which happen to non-Jews in Israel is precisely why I think that >a state religion is a bad idea. The Israelis have a different problem, though, >they are at war. It is necessary to maintain your ideology if you are going >to fight an effective war. Do you think that the US is already in such a >state of war and doesn't realise it? If so, then what do you think that >subversives like me should do? [Laura Creighton] I agree about state religions, Laura. This is why our founding fathers decreed in the Costitution prohibited the recognizing of any one religion. They did acknowlege that the free exercise thereof should not be prohibited, thus recognizing the legitimacy of ALL religions. If you really are a subversive, I recommend heading for the hills with a sack of food, a good rifle, a good book, and a member of the opposite sex ( :-) ) when the Big One hits. >ps -- teh behaviour of Jews in Israel is rather different than the behaviour >of Jews in North America. Is this because the Jews in North America did not >have this opportunity? I don't think so, since the attitude of Jews who have >not chosen to return to Israel seems contrary to this. Perhaps it is simply >that power corrupts -- in that case do you *still* want a Christian State >of America? Remember it is going to be run by the sort of unenlightened >Christians that you meet all the time... Yeah, I'll still take a Christian state over a Judaic state any day of the week. A matter of personal preference, I guess. Ideally, we'd have a state governed precisely by the Constitution, as I advocate. But many people are afraid of the Constitution, since they'd have to stop being corrupt. >oops. The problems that you run into when news doesn't arrive in order... >*Now* Black's real reply gets here...after the replies to the replies. >Most of the things that you said happens in Israel don't. Non Jews can >become citizens. You can buy Bibles in the bookstores. You can talk >about Christianity all you want. It is difficult to rise in political >rank, though, unless you are Jewish, and the same bias appears to >extend to universities and other bureacracies. [Laura Creighton] Again, Laura, thanks for the sane, reasonable reply. Somebody on this net posted a reply that mentioned the Law of Return, but I must have deleted the file inadvertantly. This is the same bias that is mentioned by Jack Bernstein in his book concerning his exploits in Israel. It seems he is of one Jewish sect (or race, or whatever the proper word is), I believe the term he uses is Ashkenasic, and if my memory is correct, his wife is Sephardic (I feel uneasy quoting things without the original in front of me.) But anyway, they wouldn't even let the poor chap get decent housing. ***************************************************************************** So now let me ask another legitimate question of the net. How does the State of Israel determine who is a Jew and who is not, under the Law of Return? In Hoc signo, Don Black
dsg@mhuxi.UUCP (David S. Green) (03/21/85)
[] > Let's start with "The Life of an American Jew in Racist Marxist Israel," > by Jack Bernstein (the American Jew who wrote it), published by Liberty > Library, 300 Independence Ave., SE, Washington, DC 20003. I also have > several acquaintences who happen to be of the Jewish persuasion. (Notice > I refrain from using the line, "Some of my best friends are Jews?") Something tells me that this book is not normative Jewish thought. I never heard of the author, title or publisher. > (The Jewish Defense League is by its own admission a branch of the Israeli > army, founded by an American rabbi who is now a member of the Israeli > knesset. What in blue blazes is the Israeli army doing conducting armed > operations against American civilians on American territory?) > The JDL is not and never was a branch of the Israeli Army. Where are you getting your material from? Rejected scripts from "All in the Family"?
js2j@mhuxt.UUCP (sonntag) (03/21/85)
> >You heard wrong. Yes, you need educating, but first you've got to stop > >visiting those book stores in Torrance for your information about Jews. > >Does it really bother you that the deity you worship was an Israeli > >citizen--and a Jew--and not Ernst Zundel? > > 1. That book store in Torrence, CA, is the Institute for Historical Review, > a non-profit organization that studies the causes of war. It is most noted > for its attempts to investigate by forensic means the Holocaust of recent > history. It posted a $50,000 reward for anyone who could prove beyond a > reasonable doubt that the Holocaust actually took place in Europe under > Hitler. That reward has not yet been collected. And who gets to decide what a reasonable doubt is? Some impartial group, or the same people who'd have to shell out the $50K? Maybe next year they'll offer $50K to whoever can prove the world is round? Later that same article, we see that Black doesn't believe in the holocaust: > What death camps?? Since there are plenty of surviving eyewitnesses still around, what conclusion can we draw about Black, based on his disbelief of a well- documented occurance? Just from this datum, I find it difficult to avoid concluding that he's a nazi. Further silence by myself on the subject of Black's postings should not be construed as tacit approval, but as 'too disgusted to bother argueing with this <fill in your favorite expletive>.' -- Jeff Sonntag ihnp4!mhuxt!js2j "What sheems to be the problem, Ossifer?"- T. Kennedy
arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Ken Arnold%CGL) (03/22/85)
In article <1202@decwrl.UUCP> black@nisysg.DEC writes: >>Is this what people like Marchionni were doing while >>the European Jews were being put in death camps? > > What death camps?? What else is there to say? Don Black doesn't believe that Hitler killed 12 million people in concentration camps, including 6 to 6.5 million Jews. I am almost tempted to ask him what he thinks happened? Did 12 million people all just go out for a walk one day and not come back? Is Auschwitz just a Hollywood prop set erected to gain attention so they could later build an amusement park? Are the tatoos on peoples' arms just things they got when they were in the Navy and don't want to own up to? Are the films of the death camps found in Nazi archives really just scenes from would-be humorists who just didn't get good reviews? Anyone who can seriously state that s/he doesn't think the Nazi death camps really existed is dangerously deranged. I think I will keep my eye on the Identity "Christian" movement. -- Ken Arnold
gwhawkins@watrose.UUCP (gwhawkins) (03/22/85)
I must say that the author (I just forgot his name) of If the shoe fits is not ranting. His statements were written down calmly and rationally. It just goes to show you what a rational mind can come up with when exposed to "different" sources of information (The followers of Sun Myung Moon are another good example of this). Most of the writers to net.religions have been exposed to very "main stream" notions of the world. We feel that our ideas are more right than his because (for one thing) we feel that more people agree with us. I don't necessarily think that this makes us more right than him, but that's not what I think is the important issue here. The point I want to make is about the idea that the Aryans (or Americans or whatever) are G-ds chosen people. The idea that anyone has been chosen by G-d (or some other cosmic critter) as better in some spiritual way than everyone else, is a sad one. How can you be expected to deal with someone in an honest manner if you don't concider the other person (creature) to be as "good" as you are. The idea of being better than the rest leads to intollerance. I don't care what his notions of history are, but he seems to consider himself (or the Aryans if there is a difference) better than everyone else and I think (personally) that this is a very very sad understanding of the world. larry fast (Universty of Waterloo) broadcasting from exile
brower@fortune.UUCP (Richard Brower) (03/23/85)
In article <1214@decwrl.UUCP> black@nisysg.DEC writes: >Some of their members are very active in the protest >movement against the Marxist Internal Revenue Service. (Oh, the IRS isn't >Marxist, is it? Take a look in the Communist Manifesto sometime. Article >2, I believe.) Sorry, the IRS (of the United States, anyway) is not bound the the Communist Manifesto. Besides which the IRS has been used by US Presidents lately in order to harrass leftists and other people they don't agree with. >In fact, I invite commentary--sane, reasonably-presented >commentary. (By the way, my MAIL is running 2 to 1 in favor.) Just as I would have expected. Other Christians really do support hatred and bigotry, but haven't the balls you do to come out and make their views public. As a side note, class this note in with those who do not support any position you have stated on this net. >bigots, racists, Nazis, etc. If the shoe fits (and it is obvious that it does), wear it. > Why is it that invectives aimed at Christianity are tolerated, >but legitimate questions about Judaism become "vile rhetoric?" > No, you're right--it ain't nice to rant untruths about Jews. But >I have a lot of questions about what the truth is. So do a lot of people. >How am I to learn if I don't ask? If you want to learn what Judaism is about, I suggest you start by learning Hebrew and then reading the Bible. Then find a rabbi and talk for several years (in your case it may take longer) about the things you don't understand. You don't start by repeating the worst bigotry you have heard about them with a "isn't this so!" tacked on to the end each sentenence. >for its attempts to investigate by forensic means the Holocaust of recent >history. It posted a $50,000 reward for anyone who could prove beyond a >reasonable doubt that the Holocaust actually took place in Europe under >Hitler. That reward has not yet been collected. If they don't accept the evidence of the few thousand who escaped, eyewittness accounts by the soldiers who cleaned up the bodies, etc. what do they mean by proof? >(The Jewish Defense League is by its own admission a branch of the Israeli >army, founded by an American rabbi who is now a member of the Israeli >knesset. What in blue blazes is the Israeli army doing conducting armed >operations against American civilians on American territory?) Another vicious lie! Didn't your mother teach you that you shouldn't lie? Didn't your religion? > What death camps?? See above. I cannot take any more! -- Richard A. Brower Fortune Systems {ihnp4,ucbvax!amd,hpda,sri-unix,harpo}!fortune!brower
shindman@utcs.UUCP (Paul Shindman) (03/25/85)
In article <1202@decwrl.UUCP> black@nisysg.DEC writes: > > >(The Jewish Defense League is by its own admission a branch of the Israeli >army..... >......... What in blue blazes is the Israeli army doing conducting armed >operations against American civilians on American territory?) > > > Don Black Well, I couldn't pass up the opportunity to show Don Black with both feet in his mouth up to the hips. Ok Mr. Black, for a man who claims he doesn't say anything without backing it up with two verifiable sources....where are your sources for this big fib??? This statement is one of the stupidest, most preposterous ones you've come up with yet. And I imagine that the IRS is a self-admitted arm of the Soviet People's Army too ??? Cripes! You are either a certifiable nut or a dangerous loonie. Either way, you keep telling us you've got all the facts right when it's painfully obvious that not only are you wrong, but you out-and-out post inflammatory lies with *no* substantiation whatsoever. Why don't you just stop posting and demonstrate how you IC's also have the ability to not say stupid things on the net, or don't you have that ability? Paul Shindman
barry@ames.UUCP (Kenn Barry) (03/25/85)
[] I number of people have asked why Christians on the net have been unwilling to criticize Don Black for the nonsense he's been posting. I think the reason is obvious: the Christians are obeying the Eleventh Commandment - "Thou shalt not speak ill of thy fellow Christians when non-believers are present". Christians are not the only group which follow such a solidarity rule, and the rest of us should not be too quick to assume that silence implies tacit agreement. But I'd like to point out a couple of things to those Christians who are following this unwritten law. Consider the following quote from one of Black's articles: >For example, why is it that Billy Graham has no >problem preaching in the Soviet Union? Is it because the Soviets really do >have freedom of religion? More than likely they know he'll go back to the US >and preach the wonders of the Soviet nation. Clearly, no one has told Black about the Eleventh Commandment. Net.religion has echoed again and again with the pained cries of Christians who insist that the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc., are not examples of *real* Christianity. Well, my friends, we now have Mr. Black as a contemporary example of the kind of thinking (and I use the term loosely) which led to these atrocities. If you want to show the rest of us that these attitudes play no part in your religion, Mr. Black has given you an excellent opportunity. If not, that's your privelege, but, please, don't act so surprised when you're then lumped in with the "Kill for Christ" Christians. Consider, also, that it's *your* religion being dragged through the gutter by Black's diatribes; why should the rest of us make a distinction, if you are unwilling to do so? Granted, your silence does not prove agreement; but history will make the same judgment of those who stand by with *silent* disapproval of hatred and bigotry, as of those who dance around the burning crosses. You will be known by the company you keep. P.S. to Bob Brown - I'm glad to see at least one Christian was willing to speak up, judging by the quote Black extracted from one of your articles (I missed the original posting). How do you feel about the deafening silence from the rest of the flock? - From the Crow's Nest - Kenn Barry NASA-Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- USENET: {ihnp4,vortex,dual,hao,menlo70,hplabs}!ames!barry
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Professor Wagstaff) (03/26/85)
>>In fact, I invite commentary--sane, reasonably-presented >>commentary. (By the way, my MAIL is running 2 to 1 in favor.) [DON BLACK] > Just as I would have expected. Other Christians really do support hatred and > bigotry, but haven't the balls you do to come out and make their views public. > As a side note, class this note in with those who do not support any position > you have stated on this net. [BROWER] Oh, come on. Even *I* wouldn't go that far. We don't believe any of the filthy untruths this man has to offer, so why should we believe what he has to say about the content of his mail. No, the closedmouthed Christians may not be quick to tear down what Black has to say (perhaps they do believe some of it and are ashamed to admit it publicly), but I doubt they'd rush off private letters of support to him. But, let's ask. Paul? (Dub*) Larry? "charley"? Have you been sending notes of support to Black? >>for its attempts to investigate by forensic means the Holocaust of recent >>history. It posted a $50,000 reward for anyone who could prove beyond a >>reasonable doubt that the Holocaust actually took place in Europe under >>Hitler. That reward has not yet been collected. > If they don't accept the evidence of the few thousand who escaped, eyewittness > accounts by the soldiers who cleaned up the bodies, etc. what do they mean > by proof? Good point. After all, anyone who survived it is obviously biased, and of course so is anyone else who admits to witnessing aspects of it? Thus there cannot be proof. > I cannot take any more! [BROWER] Be prepared to take plenty more. Those like Black are all around with plenty more to offer unless we speak up. -- Otology recapitulates phonology. Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr
mas@drutx.UUCP (SchwarzMA) (03/26/85)
I am posting this because our mail system does not always deliver. Mr. Black, I would like to know where this library is. I for one totally believe that the Death camps of WWII did exist under Hitler. My proof rests in 5 people including my father who had horrible things perpetrated on them by the Shostawful(sp?) at these non-existant Death camps(B***S***). I am a first generation American and have never known the people who raised my father until he was 9 years, but the counts of the day the SS came to my father's dwelling to take them to their work camp is a day he will never forget. I have a friend who son(5 years old) was in line to take a train to their awaited reassignment and was with a friend, the little boy's friend was sent to Auswitz and the son was to go to a work camp. The son said he wanted be with his friend and in turn was immediately reassigned to Auswitz. The boys were gassed. Any person who can say that the Death camps did not exist is crazier than Hitler. My father was luck to be here. I for one can use the $50k and if someone is just that stupid to offer it like that, fine I could use the money. By the way my dad hates dogs, Mr. Black can you tell me why he might??? I doubt it, your library probably thought that the Alan Berg murder was the greatest Jew Killing since WWII. I feel for all you people who face the facts and ignore them. Shalom Mike Schwarz
teitz@aecom.UUCP (Eliyahu Teitz) (03/27/85)
> Why is it allright to be anti-Christian, anti-God, anti-Moslem, but > anti-Jewish or anti-Israeli is anathema? Is this not hypocritical? > If anybody out there disagrees with me, fine. I'm not going to lose any > sleep over it. In fact, I invite commentary--sane, reasonably-presented > commentary. (By the way, my MAIL is running 2 to 1 in favor.) > I have a question. Why are you anti-Jew and anti-Israel? I wouldn't be proud of the fact that your mail runs 2 to 1in favor either. This is a sad commentary on our society. Firstly, baseless hate. Then, not to even have the courage to discuss it to see how foolish it is, but rather to live with this hatred. > > 1. That book store in Torrence, CA, is the Institute for Historical Review, > a non-profit organization that studies the causes of war. It is most noted > for its attempts to investigate by forensic means the Holocaust of recent > history. It posted a $50,000 reward for anyone who could prove beyond a > reasonable doubt that the Holocaust actually took place in Europe under > Hitler. That reward has not yet been collected. The library was sacked > and burned on 4 July 1984 by a professional arsonist. Leaders of the > Jewish Defense League held a news conference in the rubble the day after, > and danced on the ashes of the files. These same people subsequently > provided the authorities with the name of the arsonist. The library has > since reopeed in a more secure facility. > Are the gas chambers in Auschwitz our imagination? Or did the Germans use Zyklon-B to "delouse" the Jews. Nice idea. If you kill a person he won't have to worry about lice any more. Besides, how can you trick an entire nation into believing a hoax. Surely there are Jews beyond reproach who would not perpetrate such a nasty falsehood. One last problem. Did the ews tatoo themselves for fun? Also, why did the US and Russia, and other European nations go along with the lie? Why do they still keep it going today? Why has Mengele been afraid to shw his face in public? Why did he run away? Surely he could prove beyond a doubt that his experiments were harmless. Another problem. Were the soldiers who liberated the concentration camp paid off to lie before they went in or only after they saw the truth? > (The Jewish Defense League is by its own admission a branch of the Israeli > army, founded by an American rabbi who is now a member of the Israeli > knesset. What in blue blazes is the Israeli army doing conducting armed > operations against American civilians on American territory?) > Not a strong arguement. If I claimed to be a faction of the US army and I bombed the White House, would you ask what the army is doing killing the president. Obviously you'd say the peson was crazy. Why do you believe every bad thing you hear about Jews? Do you think that we are capable of keeping an eye out on every Jew in the world ( well if we are doing it with the holocaust, maybe we can do it with this too ). What you have to realize, Mr. Black, before you post anything about Jews and Judaism, is that we are humans, just like you ( I know this probably makes you uneasy but it is a fact of life ). We have our beliefs and you have yours. We do not go around plotting ways to destroy the non-Jewish world. We have better things to do ( like try and insure our survival, from people like you ). I usually do not attack people when they post. I find it repulsive. Hwever, you have shown a blatant disregard for the truth. You do not even attempt to discern the truth. You make wild statements without verifying their validity. Stop, and think before you post next time. Are you saying something that is unfounded. Do you have verification of your claims. Becasue one disgruntled person says something or writes something is not a verification. Look at other sources. Ask others. But do not go trumpeting your ideas as absolutes without checking into them first. You are entitled to your opinion and I can't take it away from you. But you are doing yourself a tremendous injustice by believing everything you hear and read. > >> I guess maybe an even greater problem in America is not with Communism, > >> not with atheists, not with the Jews, or the schools, or the politicians, > > >It's nice to know that the Jews are not (yet) the greatest problem in > >Don Black's America. > > There you go again, putting words in my mouth. Did I say the Jews were a > problem? > Yes you did. When you say something is a greater problem than the Jews it usually means that the Jews are a lesser problem, but a problem nonetheless. > > >P.S. Is it only non-Christians (as Rosen pointed out) that are mortified by > > this man's ravings? bill peter > > Why am I raving, Bill? Besides,, there are a lot of "non-Christians" > in this world that have a lot worse things to say. For example ask the > Lebanese. (Today's Boston "Globe" [20 March 1985] has a real eye-opener > in it. The paper reports in graphic detail about the Israeli march through > a Lebanese village, the house ransackings, the arrests, the bulldozed > houses, etc. Is this what's in store for the US? > Do you think the Israelis are in the demolision business. As if they have nothing better to do. The war in Lebanon was and is a tremendous expense for Israel. They would like nothing better than to leave and let the Lebanese solve their own problems ( 10 years of civil war is their method ). The only problem is that Israel entered with one purpose in mind, and it wasn't to annex Lebanon. They wanted to insure the security of their northern border. Look over the past few years. Before the Israelis entered Lebanon there were constant bombings of Israel's nothern settlements. Once the army entered, and sent the PLO scurrying, te attacks stopped. Kind of proves that the Israelis knew what they were talking about, doesn't it. Or were the Israelis practicing the age old tradition of deception, including bombing their own people? Look at the facts before you sit at the keyboard Mr Black. Maybe then you wouldn't have to take your foot out of your mouth so often. > > >Oh great Ubizmo! Is this what people like Marchionni were doing while > >the European Jews were being put in death camps? (Don't answer this, > >I know the answer already.) > > What death camps?? > Try taking a tour of Poland. Go to Auschwitz. You'll see the death camps. You can't miss them. Unless you think they are schoolhouses. > > > I agree about state religions, Laura. This is why our founding fathers > decreed in the Costitution prohibited the recognizing of any one religion. > They did acknowlege that the free exercise thereof should not be prohibited, > thus recognizing the legitimacy of ALL religions. > So then why do you hate Judaism so much? > > Yeah, I'll still take a Christian state over a Judaic state any day > of the week. A matter of personal preference, I guess. Ideally, we'd > have a state governed precisely by the Constitution, as I advocate. But > many people are afraid of the Constitution, since they'd have to stop > being corrupt. > A christian state is against the constitution, since there is a concept of separation of church and state. So how could you have a state governed precisely by the Constitution, if you ignore the document in setting up your state. Another point. If you advocate as well as you research, I pity those who would live in your country. > > This is the same bias that is mentioned by Jack Bernstein in his book > concerning his exploits in Israel. It seems he is of one Jewish sect (or > race, or whatever the proper word is), I believe the term he uses is > Ashkenasic, and if my memory is correct, his wife is Sephardic (I feel > uneasy quoting things without the original in front of me.) But anyway, > they wouldn't even let the poor chap get decent housing. > Please quote exactly. Also, why do you trust any one person over another. Is it becasue he is telling you what you want to hear. There are many on this net who will refute his statements one by one and prove them false. Becasue one person had bad experiences in a country should not tarnish your view of the country. This kind of stereotyping is extremely dangerous. After all, I could say, after reading your article, that all christians are out to kill me and I'd better do it to them first. > So now let me ask another legitimate question of the net. How does > the State of Israel determine who is a Jew and who is not, under the Law > of Return? > > The law of return is a secular law of the State of Israel. It simply says that any person who is Jewish ( born to a Jewish mother or converted to the religion ) may obtain instant citizenship in the State of Israel. None Jews must go through a naturalization period, just like those wishing to obtain citizenship in America must. I hesitated in responding because I knew I would react with anger. I have not, to my surprise. Rather I am exasperated at your lack of concern for facts which areeasily verifiable. Just go to any library and read a few books. Before you post to the net, not after. Maybe in the future you will respond and write articles in a more mature fashion. Eliyahu Teitz.
tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) (03/27/85)
A quote from barry@ames.UUCP (Kenn Barry) Mon Mar 25 15:06:18 1985: > A number of people have asked why Christians on the net have > been unwilling to criticize Don Black for the nonsense he's been posting. > I think the reason is obvious: the Christians are obeying the Eleventh > Commandment - "Thou shalt not speak ill of thy fellow Christians when > non-believers are present". Christians are not the only group which follow > such a solidarity rule, and the rest of us should not be too quick to > assume that silence implies tacit agreement. Sorry, Kenn, that just ain't true. Christianity has always (and I mean from early Roman days to the present) been known for the violence of its infighting. For present-day examples, look at them flame the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses, or listen to the multitudes of Protestants who will openly announce to one and all that Catholics aren't real Christians. The facts are practically the opposite of what you claim, and that is what makes the silence of most Christians on this issue suspicious. If they felt that there was some important doctrinal disagreement, they'd be all over the theocrats, as they usually are with "heretics". As it is, it seems that they feel the differences are so small that they are not worth arguing about, if there are any differences. Of course, we must give proper credit to those Christians like Charley Wingate who ARE taking cretins like Black to task. Well done, Charley. (Sorry, Byron, you don't count. :-> ) -=- Tim Maroney, Carnegie-Mellon University, Networking ARPA: Tim.Maroney@CMU-CS-K uucp: seismo!cmu-cs-k!tim CompuServe: 74176,1360 audio: shout "Hey, Tim!"
barry@mit-eddie.UUCP (Mikki Barry) (03/27/85)
Sorry Mr. Schwartz, your father and all his friends have been lying to you all these years. They spent their time in a country club during WWII, and nobody really died, they all are living in Tahiti. The Jews all over the world hold mass conventions to make sure they're getting their story straight about the holocaust. Come on Don Black, WAKE UP! You may not believe in what happened in the concentration camps because you weren't there, and you didn't see it. How then can you believe so strongly in Jesus and the resurrection? You weren't there. You didn't see it. But wait, it has been documented in the bible! And the holocaust is documented by the stone walls and gas chambers of Auchwitz, and the scars of the survivors. A damn sight more evidence than your bible, wouldn't you say? We even have movies of the skeleton-like survivors, and the mass murders and burial trenches. Where are your movies of Jesus? How about just ONE MORE piece of documentation besides the bible or christian writings? The holocaust is documented by most religions, most historians (except IC's), and by all who lived through it. Why is the story of Jesus and the resurrection ONLY documented by ONE religion and ONE book? Don, I'd really like to know how the evidence before your eyes can be disregarded, and the contention of evidence about Jesus be accepted unquestioningly. Mikki Barry "In the beginning was the Word, and it was written by a baboon"
glp@osu-eddie.UUCP (Georgia Pritchett) (04/04/85)
> - From the Crow's Nest - Kenn Barry > NASA-Ames Research Center > Moffett Field, CA > > I number of people have asked why Christians on the net have > been unwilling to criticize Don Black for the nonsense he's been posting. > I think the reason is obvious: the Christians are obeying the Eleventh > Commandment - "Thou shalt not speak ill of thy fellow Christians when > non-believers are present". Christians are not the only group which follow > such a solidarity rule, and the rest of us should not be too quick to > assume that silence implies tacit agreement. But I'd like to point out > a couple of things to those Christians who are following this unwritten > law. Consider the following quote from one of Black's articles: > . . . > Net.religion has echoed again and again with the pained cries > of Christians who insist that the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc., are > not examples of *real* Christianity. Well, my friends, we now have Mr. > Black as a contemporary example of the kind of thinking (and I use the > term loosely) which led to these atrocities. If you want to show the > rest of us that these attitudes play no part in your religion, Mr. Black > has given you an excellent opportunity. If not, that's your privelege, > but, please, don't act so surprised when you're then lumped in with the > "Kill for Christ" Christians. Consider, also, that it's *your* religion > being dragged through the gutter by Black's diatribes; why should the > rest of us make a distinction, if you are unwilling to do so? Okay you want Christians to speak up. You are full of sh*t. There is no Eleventh Commandment and I know of very few Christians who behave in the manner you present. And if the ones you know do, why are you lumping the rest of us with them anyway. Pardon me if I say that your ideas suck out the ass and then some. Yes "Christians" have done some pretty awful things. So have most other religions and for that matter most other governments (since your examples are things that came from organized "Christian" governments). I am not giving that as an excuse. I am simply pointing out that if you choose to lump me in there then you are being very unfair. When I choose to become a Christian (and it is an individual choice), I did not do so because I knew about all these really "neet" people who had been Christians and done lots of fun and exciting things like burn heretics. I will not bore you with the why (since you have already heard it and that isn't the issue). Why is it that Non-Christians insist on lumping Christians together in a group? But there I am lumping also. I don't know the reasons that others had for not answering but I personally only read this group when I want to be amused. So it is usually only at the begining of the quarter. I used to read it alot but I got tired of messages like yours. Probably most of the people who still read it don't care to post for fear that you will find something wrong with what they say (as I am sure you will with my stuff. But since I probably won't read any followups, I don't really care). No one would say anything about the number of Non-Christians who didn't post followups if some weird screwed-up Atheist insisted that all Christians be shot at dawn if not before. Most people would just accept the fact that guys like that don't represent Non-Christians as a whole and leave it at that. They wouldn't say that any Non-Christian who didn't post a followup obviously agreed. Come off it. You are just using this as another chance to say "Look all Christians are like this. Just where do they get off." In anycase, in response to Black's article (which was purged by the time I started this), from the cuts I saw, he is your typical screwed individual whose mind rotted sometime around birth. While I have always believed that it's not my place to decide if someone is actually a Christian, I would seriously doubt whether he has a right to claim such a title. His views are altogether unfounded (and not at all consistent with the Bible). I know of no Christians who would agree with him (although I do not claim to speak for all). Put simply he is f*cked up. At the risk of sounding like a Christian (God forbid), I would say that most of his beliefs are straight from the Devil himself. ---georgia
barry@ames.UUCP (Kenn Barry) (04/08/85)
From georgia (osu-eddie!glp): >> - From the Crow's Nest - Kenn Barry >> >> Net.religion has echoed again and again with the pained cries >> of Christians who insist that the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc., are >> not examples of *real* Christianity. Well, my friends, we now have Mr. >> Black as a contemporary example of the kind of thinking (and I use the >> term loosely) which led to these atrocities. If you want to show the >> rest of us that these attitudes play no part in your religion, Mr. Black >> has given you an excellent opportunity. If not, that's your privelege, >> but, please, don't act so surprised when you're then lumped in with the >> "Kill for Christ" Christians. Consider, also, that it's *your* religion >> being dragged through the gutter by Black's diatribes; why should the >> rest of us make a distinction, if you are unwilling to do so? > > Okay you want Christians to speak up. You are full of sh*t. There is >no Eleventh Commandment and I know of very few Christians who behave in the >manner you present. And if the ones you know do, why are you lumping the >rest of us with them anyway. Pardon me if I say that your ideas suck out >the ass and then some. .... >Probably most of the people who still read it don't >care to post for fear that you will find something wrong with what they say >(as I am sure you will with my stuff. But since I probably won't read any >followups, I don't really care). Now, why on Earth would you think I'd "find something wrong" with an enlightened response like yours? :-} Actually, I've been rather relieved to note that a number of Christians *have* seen fit to respond to Black's lunacy in the manner it deserves. I wish I *could* claim credit for that, but the real credit goes to those Christians who realized that Black went beyond the normal moronic flaming, and were unwilling to let his pernicious ideas pass themselves off as Christian. And secondary credit to Rosen and others who've been a lot more vocal than me. By the way, suggesting an Eleventh Commandment was hardly an insult; Tim Maroney thought I was being too generous (or at least inaccurate) in suggesting such an innocuous reason for the silence. >Yes "Christians" have done some pretty awful things. >So have most other religions and for that matter most other governments >(since your examples are things that came from organized "Christian" >governments). I am not giving that as an excuse. I am simply pointing out >that if you choose to lump me in there then you are being very unfair. Actually, the Inquisition originated within the Church, not with a government. In any case, reread what I wrote: I did not say that I lumped Christians together, I said that history will lump the silent with the approving. > I don't know the reasons that others had for not answering but I >personally only read this group when I want to be amused. So it is usually >only at the begining of the quarter. I used to read it alot but I got tired >of messages like yours. I did not expect every Christian on the net to respond to Black. I *was* bothered that many Christians who've already shown they have a lot to say in this forum about everything *else*, had nothing to say about Black. I'm even more bothered when you and others seem more interested in flaming those who have raised Black's postings as an issue, than Black, himself. > No one would say anything about the number of Non-Christians who >didn't post followups if some weird screwed-up Atheist insisted that all >Christians be shot at dawn if not before. Most people would just accept the >fact that guys like that don't represent Non-Christians as a whole and leave >it at that. Black presents his nonsense as Christian. If I *were* a Christian I'd be even more sickened by his stuff than I am, anyway. >They wouldn't say that any Non-Christian who didn't post a >followup obviously agreed. Come off it. You are just using this as another >chance to say "Look all Christians are like this. Just where do they get >off." My goodness, we *are* touchy, aren't we? Sorry to disappoint you, but I have nothing against Christians. I've even known some who were big enough to accept sincere criticism from non-Christians. > In anycase, in response to Black's article (which was purged by the >time I started this), from the cuts I saw, he is your typical screwed >individual whose mind rotted sometime around birth. While I have always >believed that it's not my place to decide if someone is actually a >Christian, I would seriously doubt whether he has a right to claim such a >title. His views are altogether unfounded (and not at all consistent with >the Bible). I know of no Christians who would agree with him (although I do >not claim to speak for all). Put simply he is f*cked up. > At the risk of sounding like a Christian (God forbid), I would say >that most of his beliefs are straight from the Devil himself. The above is the kind of response I had hoped my message would elicit from Christians, and I am sincerely glad that you chose to add this afterthought to your flame. Thanks for making my day. - From the Crow's Nest - Kenn Barry NASA-Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- USENET: {ihnp4,vortex,dual,hao,menlo70,hplabs}!ames!barry