[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [NOISE] Re: Nazis on the Net
- To: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: [NOISE] Re: Nazis on the Net
- From: [email protected] (Anonymous)
- Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 14:36:16 +0200 (MET DST)
- Organization: Replay and Company UnLimited
- Sender: [email protected]
- XComm: Replay may or may not approve of the content of this posting
- XComm: Report misuse of this automated service to <[email protected]>
[email protected] writes:
| Abraham Lincoln is one reason I _don't_ use the above definition; by mine,
| he'd be a separatist (wanted to move Blacks to Liberia, if I recall correctly).
| I trust that everyone involved in this discussion (with the exception of the
| neo-Nazi) would agree that Abraham Lincoln was better than those in the South
| who wanted to keep blacks enslaved?
Do we have a neo-Nazi in this discussion?? Are you implying that any sceptic
of a few Holocaust `facts' is a neo-Nazi?? Do you infer that all pro-lifers
are Republicans??
It is because of such baseless inferences, I have to remain anonymous. I would
dearly love to debate under my real name, but am prevented from doing so by the
neo-Nazi name-calling.
Yes you are correct, I disagree that Abraham Lincoln was better than those in
the South, not for racial reasons (remember, the Civil War was *not* about
slavery, because the slavery issue only arised *after* the war started), but
because I believe that a diverse set of countries is `better' than one. I
believe that countries that want independence (such as Chechnya) should have
it. (Yes, I am likening Abe Lincoln to Boris Yeltsin).
[ You may also like to consider that blacks as well as whites fought for the
South. ]
---
``The believer is happy. The doubter is wise''. - Hungarian proverb