Re: Homosexual Lynch Mob, Cabal

[Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>]

Stephen Boursy wrote:
> Dale Thorn wrote:
> > aga wrote:
> > > Stephen Boursy wrote:
> > >> Dave Hayes wrote:[snip]
> > A lot if people act (pretend to be?) shocked to find that a so-called
> > minority would practice discrimination.  A classic example from what
> > I've heard is the ADL going *against* the World Jewish Congress and
> > lining up with the U.S. State Dept. in the 1930's, to *suppress*
> > Jewish dissenters in the U.S., because it was "good for business"
> > at that time.

> That was due to zionism was it not?  I hate zionists with a passion.
> Zionists continue to this day to make all sorts of unsavory tradeofffs
> to keep their stolen land--there is only one solution there and Arafat
> no longer has what it takes (he sold out too).

This is really a tough one.  I'd guess that the agenda of Zionists,
as well as some of their allies, changes or incorporates additional
goals at different levels in the cabal.  We all know what the lower
levels look like, but the nature of the very top level intrigues me
to no end.  Is it just money and power, control of property etc.?
Or is it something "really evil"?

> But I think the policy of public gay bashing on the usenet to be
> counter-productive, irrational and unfair (aside from bad PR). Bob
> Allisat for example is completely alienated from some here because
> of this--I respect Allisat a great deal--he's done much for usenet
> freedom and has a real mouth on him.

That you respect him says a lot for him in spite of his alleged
irrationality.

> A large percentage of the population is gay--the average citizen is
> moving in to the usenet and we need their support if we are to toss
> the cabal in the trash and in some cases jail.

The average citizen will never support freedom fighters, and I think
this is even more true of the Internet than in the outside world.
Of course, I hope I'm wrong, or that there's some technology or
formula that will enable average people to have the courage to
defend that freedom.

> Deliberatly alienating such a large class of people is not logical
> nor is it fair.  It is of course everyones right to freely do so--
> here and in any forum on usenet.

I am sympathetic to what you're saying.  I am also sympathetic to the
opinion that there are some things that people practice which are OK
if they affect only them and nobody else, but are not necessarily OK
when they affect others.  One of the things that make a society a
society is the relative accomodation or tolerance that society has
for various practices and beliefs which are outside of the norm.

The PC premise is that it's OK to have certain practices and beliefs
which are outside (sometimes way outside) of the norm, but that to keep
from hurting the feelings of what are (or in the PC people's opinion
should be) protected classes of people/practices/beliefs, we should
refrain from speech or actions which has the effect of offending
these people.

You'll note in the last presidential campaign, to name an example, much
of the media beat up on Pat Buchanan, going so far as to call him a Nazi
and so on. (Not that they would do that to Reagan, who is IMO a real
Nazi, BTW.)  Now, those folks who don't like to be called "fag" or
whatever, did they speak out against this public labeling of Buchanan?
I don't know a damn thing about the real Buchanan, although I know that
William F. Buckley Jr. is a real scumbag, to name a relevant example.

I'm sorry if I don't conform 100%, but I just don't see any real justice
being called for and worked for by the PC mob - I only see selfishness
and an ongoing attempt to transfer more power from the mainstream public
into the hands of various special interest groups.

Tell you what, though.  If any gay interest group comes out for justice
in a substantial way, that is, if they call for changes I can believe in,
I'll support them to that extent at least, and try to stay out of their
way otherwise if possible.  But I won't hold my breath on that.