Re: COMMUNITY CONNEXION...

Attila sez:

>         the SWC is a prime example of very narrow view which is trying to 
>     "control" what we can say --unfortunately, SWC is guilty of the same
>     mind-control tactics as the core Nazi party which persecuted them  ==
>     a very poor example.  In Germany, trading on collective guilt they 
>     will never stop feeding, they have effectively controlled the issue
>     so that _any_ speech or revision against their agenda is a hate crime,
>     and therefore a serious felony. 

   Sounds like you're a little weak on your history, Attila. Not that I
agree with the SWC's policies one bit, but some basic dates and facts -
when SW was born, when he founded his C, when WW2 was, what the Nazis did
during it and what the SWC has done since, when and how the anti-Nazi and
hate speech laws were passed in Germany, whether "any" speech or revision
against the SWC's agenda (or do you just mean "JEWS"?), etc - would make
pretty short work of your nonsense.

On Sun, 14 Jan 1996, Anonymous wrote:

> Attila sez:
> 
> >         the SWC is a prime example of very narrow view which is trying to 
> >     "control" what we can say --unfortunately, SWC is guilty of the same
> >     mind-control tactics as the core Nazi party which persecuted them  ==
> >     a very poor example.  In Germany, trading on collective guilt they 
> >     will never stop feeding, they have effectively controlled the issue
> >     so that _any_ speech or revision against their agenda is a hate crime,
> >     and therefore a serious felony. 
> 
>    Sounds like you're a little weak on your history, Attila. Not that I
> agree with the SWC's policies one bit, but some basic dates and facts -
> when SW was born, when he founded his C, when WW2 was, what the Nazis did
> during it and what the SWC has done since, when and how the anti-Nazi and
> hate speech laws were passed in Germany, whether "any" speech or revision
> against the SWC's agenda (or do you just mean "JEWS"?), etc - would make
> pretty short work of your nonsense.
> 

	oh, I do not think so --I would answer you in private mail if you 
    were not afraid to state a Reply-To address.  history is a 
    fascinating study in continual revisionism --to the victor goes the 
    right to rewrite history, or:

	I do not fear history, I intend to write it.
		--Winston Churchill

    	I could have stated my position much clearer: this particular demand
    is based on the same hysteria as has been found throughout history;
    and, see my other comments elsewhere. 

    As to anonyminity, I remain,

	attila == Herr Doktor Professor Daniel Fluekiger

__________________________________________________________________________
    go not unto usenet for advice, for the inhabitants thereof will say:
      yes, and no, and maybe, and I don't know, and fuck-off.
_________________________________________________________________ attila__

    To be a ruler of men, you need at least 12 inches....

> Sounds like you're a little weak on your history, Attila. Not that I
> agree with the SWC's policies one bit, but some basic dates and facts -
> when SW was born, when he founded his C, when WW2 was, what the Nazis did
> during it and what the SWC has done since, when and how the anti-Nazi and
> hate speech laws were passed in Germany, whether "any" speech or revision
> against the SWC's agenda (or do you just mean "JEWS"?), etc - would make
> pretty short work of your nonsense.

Congratulations.  You win the award for this weeks longest run-on
sentence. 

Is there some special reason you had to post this little history
lesson anonymously?

--
     Mike Duvos         $    PGP 2.6 Public Key available     $
     mpd@netcom.com     $    via Finger.                      $

> > Sounds like you're a little weak on your history, Attila. Not that I
> > agree with the SWC's policies one bit, but some basic dates and facts -
> > when SW was born, when he founded his C, when WW2 was, what the Nazis did
> > during it and what the SWC has done since, when and how the anti-Nazi and
> > hate speech laws were passed in Germany, whether "any" speech or revision
> > against the SWC's agenda (or do you just mean "JEWS"?), etc - would make
> > pretty short work of your nonsense.

[...]

> Is there some special reason you had to post this little history
> lesson anonymously?

Aha, at last some cypherpunk relevance. Would the post have been ok if it
had been signed? 

Anonymity isn't the issue, content is.  No one needs a reason or special
justification for anonymity -- we're entitled to it.  But we're also 
entitled to ignore people we don't want to communicate with, including 
anonymous people.

This is Eric's list, and he's entitled to make a rule that anonymous posts
aren't allowed, but he hasn't done so -- anonymous posts are ok.  If we
don't like Eric's rules, we're entitled to set up another list with
different rules on another server and post there.  And of course if you
don't like anonymous posts, you're entitled to skip them. 

Banning anonymity doesn't give you any protection at all from off topic
posts.  Check the archives if you don't believe me.