| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Alt.monkey.fart" |
| Date: |
05 May 2005 10:49:49 PM |
| Object: |
Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
In September 1939 Poland was invaded from the west by Germany and from
the east by the Soviet Union. The Germans wanted back the territory in
western Poland, including the city of Danzig, which had been taken from
them at the end of the First World War. The Soviets wanted eastern
Poland. The Germans and the Soviets divided Poland between them, with
the boundary running roughly along the River Bug.
Britain and France, both under strong Jewish pressure, declared war on
Germany in September 1939, ostensibly because of Germany's invasion of
Poland. They did not declare war on the Soviet Union, which also had
invaded Poland. In the United States and in western Europe, where the
Jews held a deathgrip on the mass media, a great deal of anti-German
propaganda was based on the German grab for Polish territory -- much of
which, of course, actually was historically German territory -- and
nothing was said of the Soviet occupation and annexation of eastern
Poland.
The reason for this anti-German and pro-Soviet bias by the Jewish media
was that the Jews were riding high in the Soviet Union as commissars
and communist party bosses under Stalin, while in Germany Hitler had
undertaken a program since 1933 of freeing Germany from all Jewish
influence. Jews had been weeded out of the media, the law, the schools,
and other areas of economic and cultural life in Germany. Before Hitler
became chancellor in 1933 the Jews had done in Germany what they do in
every country where they gain a foothold: they had monopolized large
sections of the mass media and certain professions and were doing their
best to distort German culture, German society, and the German economy
to suit themselves. Hitler put a stop to that, and two-thirds of the
1933 Jewish population of Germany had emigrated by the invasion of
Poland in September 1939. So the Jews hated Germany and were determined
to do whatever they could to destroy her.
For his part, Hitler hoped to avoid war with Britain and France. He
hoped that after his quick victory in western Poland he could make
peace with both countries. He was determined, however, to stamp out
communism wherever he encountered it. Not only did he hate communism on
ideological grounds, but he had sworn to fight communism when the
communists in Germany betrayed his country at the end of the First
World War. Hitler also saw the Soviet Union as a threat to all of
Europe, and he was determined to break the power of that country when
he could, even though there was an uneasy non-aggression pact between
Germany and the Soviet Union in 1939, at the time of their partition of
Poland.
In the spring of 1941 massive troop movements and other developments
inside the Soviet Union convinced Hitler that Stalin was preparing to
invade the west with the Red Army, and so in June 1941 Hitler made a
preemptive strike. German forces smashed through the Red Army and made
rapid advances, first through Soviet-occupied eastern Poland and then
through Ukraine and into Russia.
A year and a half later, in February 1943, German forces near Smolensk,
in western Russia, investigated reports they heard from Russian
civilians to the effect that a large number of prisoners had been
murdered by the Soviet secret police in the area nearly three years
earlier. The German investigators were led by local Russians to a
series of mounds in a wooded area known locally as Katyn Forest, about
10 miles west of Smolensk. The forest is named for a village, Katyn,
which it surrounds. The forest had been privately owned prior to the
Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, but after the communist takeover of
Russia the area had been confiscated by the government and part of the
forest had been turned over to the NKVD, the Soviet equivalent of the
American FBI.
The Germans began digging in the mounds in the Katyn Forest and made a
horrible discovery. They found corpse after corpse, each with its hands
bound behind its back and a bullet hole in the base of its skull. They
continued their excavations for more than a month, and eventually
uncovered more than 4,000 corpses. Other bodies may have remained
buried in other mounds, but the Germans had no time to dig up the whole
forest. Instead they called in the International Red Cross and
representatives of various neutral countries to examine their findings.
They also brought in groups of Allied prisoners of war, including
Americans, from prison camps in Germany to view the graves in the Katyn
Forest. They gave these international inspectors complete freedom to
examine the exhumed bodies, permitted doctors among them to conduct
autopsies, even allowed them to dig up other bodies from one of the
mounds which had not been completely excavated. The Germans asked only
that the inspectors report back truthfully to their own governments
about their observations. And in fact, most of them did.
What they reported was that the bodies were those of Polish military
officers, along with a number of civilian cultural leaders, business
leaders, and intellectuals -- scientists, writers, and poets -- who had
been in the portion of Poland occupied by the Soviet Union in September
1939. Altogether the Soviet secret police had rounded up some 15,000
Polish leaders in 1939 -- including nearly half of the entire Polish
officer's corps, the half that had the misfortune of being in eastern
Poland at the time -- and put them in three concentration camps in
Russia: at Starobelsk, Kozelsk, and Ostashkov. All of the bodies
unearthed in the Katyn Forest were of Polish leaders who had been
confined at one of these camps: Starobelsk.
Rounding up a country's leaders and killing them was standard practice
for the communists. The theory was that the leaders were bourgeois
oppressors of the working class and deserved to die. As egalitarians
the communists did not regard the Polish officers and intellectuals as
inherently better or more valuable human material than the average
Polish criminal or bum; the officers had simply used their class
advantage to gain a better life-style for themselves. Of course, no one
really believed that theory except the criminals, bums, and other
resentful losers and ne'er-do-wells who made up the natural communist
constituency. As a practical matter, however, killing all the leaders
and potential leaders of a conquered people made them easier to govern.
That's what the Marxists had done in Russia, Ukraine, and the Baltic
countries.
In the case of the Poles there was a bit of a diplomatic problem,
though. The Poles supported the war Britain and France had declared
against Germany, purportedly on their behalf, because they viewed that
as their one hope for getting back at least the western part of their
country. They were not happy about the Russians taking the eastern part
of Poland, but the Russians at least were fellow Slavs. The thing to do
was get rid of the Germans first and then worry about the Russians.
This Polish strategy suited Stalin fine. But it made it desirable for
him to avoid alienating the Poles any more than necessary. When Polish
exiles asked about their imprisoned leaders in late 1939 and early
1940, the Soviet government promised that they would be released
shortly. Meanwhile, the decision had been made to kill all of them. And
so in April 1940 the Polish leaders were taken from the three camps
where they had been imprisoned, trucked off to various liquidation
sites, and murdered. The ones who had been imprisoned at Starobelsk all
went to the NKVD area of the Katyn Forest. After the war some of the
NKVD executioners were interviewed in Israel and described how they had
carried out the killings.
The Poles were driven up to the burial pits in long NKVD prison trucks
known as "black ravens." They were pulled from the trucks one at a time
by NKVD guards. Each Polish prisoner had his hands bound behind his
back and then was dragged to the edge of a pit. There he was held by
two NKVD men while a third fired a pistol bullet into the back of his
head. Some of the officers had their coats pulled over their heads to
keep them from seeing what was happening before they were shot. Some
struggled and were bayoneted by NKVD guards before being shot and
thrown into the pit. When all of the officers from Starobelsk had been
killed, some 4,400 of them, the Katyn Forest burial pits were covered
with dirt and pine trees were planted on them. The locations of the
mass graves of the prisoners from the camps at Kozelsk and Ostashkov
remain unknown, but none of the 15,000 Polish officers and
intellectuals rounded up by the NKVD in September 1939 was seen alive
after April 1940.
The Red Cross representatives and the Allied prisoners the Germans
brought in to examine the mass graves in the Katyn Forest understood
after their examination not only who had been killed; they also
understood who had killed them. This was apparent not only from the
medical estimates of the length of time the bodies had been buried, but
also from documentary evidence on the bodies. Diaries, news clippings,
letters, and other personal papers removed from the clothing of the
victims all told the same story: the latest dates on any of these
papers were from mid-April 1940. The Polish leaders had been killed in
April 1940, when they were prisoners of the Soviet Union and when the
Katyn region was under Soviet control. And this is what they reported
back to their governments.
So what do you think happened? Were the British and American
governments horrified to discover that their "gallant Soviet ally," as
the Soviet Union was referred to by the mass media, was a mass
murderer? Did the British government, which had gone to war against
Germany under the pretext of defending Poland, decide that it had made
a mistake? Did anyone condemn the Soviet Union for this act of genocide
against the Poles?
Of course not! The Allied governments ordered their people who had
inspected the Katyn site to keep their mouths shut, and the Jewish
media immediately began announcing that the Germans had done it. A mass
murder of Polish officers and intellectuals by the Nazis had been
discovered in the Katyn Forest, the New York Times and the rest of the
Jewish media shrieked. Poor Poles! Wicked Germans! The war must go on
to free the poor Poles and punish the wicked Germans. And the war did
go on, killing millions of more Germans, Britons, Americans, and other
Europeans. And the Germans were indeed punished. The Poles, of course,
were not freed. Instead they were turned over to the Reds, who had
butchered their leaders in the Katyn Forest, and made to suffer under
communist rule for half a century.
The war went on after the German discovery of the mass graves in the
Katyn Forest, because its purpose from the beginning was not to free
Poland but to destroy Germany, which had dared to free itself from the
Jews. Roosevelt understood this. Churchill understood this. But the
American and British people didn't understand it, of course, because
they were lied to by the Jewish media and by their own governments, who
in 1943, as in 1998, did whatever was politically expedient. And what
is politically expedient has been what the Jewish media bosses have
decided.
The lies about Katyn were maintained by the media for some years after
the end of the war, because these lies meshed nicely with the
"Holocaust" story which was making so much money for the Jews.
Nowadays, of course, the truth about the Katyn murders is generally
accepted by historians everywhere. You can go into almost any large
library and read about it and even see the gruesome photographs that
the Germans took of the Polish bodies they dug up. One of several
authoritative books on the subject is J.K. Zawodny's Death in the
Forest: the Story of the Katyn Forest Massacre, published in 1962 by
the University of Notre Dame Press. None of this is publicized a la
Steven Spielberg for the illumination of American television audiences,
of course. It still might undermine the Jews' "Holocaust" racket.
In 1945 and 1946, although the deceived citizens of the Western world
didn't know the truth about Katyn, Polish patriots did. The word had
gotten back to the Polish prisoners in German camps from the Poles the
Germans had taken to examine the graves. After the war, when these
Polish prisoners were freed, the word spread to other Poles. They knew
that it was the communists, not the Nazis, who had murdered their
leaders, who had beheaded their nation. And they knew who was behind
communism -- from the Jew, Karl Marx, who started the whole business,
to the Jewish commissars in Soviet-occupied Poland. They knew who had
welcomed their Soviet conquerors and then collaborated with those
conquerors. And so it is hardly surprising that in 1945 and 1946 a few
Polish patriots organized lynchings of Jews in Poland, before the Reds
had a chance to clamp down and suppress any further expressions of
anti-communist or anti-Jewish feeling.
The Polish dislike of Jews isn't surprising. What is surprising is that
so few patriots in America and Britain have expressed their outrage
against the Jews, not only for what they did to the Poles during and
after the war, but for what they have done to us: lying to us and using
us to wage their wars for them. If patriots study the Katyn story and
take its lesson to heart, they will understand why they cannot trust
either the mass media or any government which dances to the tune played
by the media. Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill were as much
liars and traitors as Bill Clinton and Tony Blair.
You might remember Katyn the next time you hear the Jews or some of
their bought politicians whining about how much gold was stolen from
them by the Swiss or how badly the Poles and the Germans treated them
during the Second World War.
.
|
|
| User: "Serwad" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
06 May 2005 08:31:43 AM |
|
|
Do you have any idea what Jewish Commissars did to Poles and Ukrainians? Of
course not! I am not surprised they hate the guts of the Jews. may I qualify
this by the fact that not all Jews besmirched their religion as the Jewish
Commissars did!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pass de duck" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
06 May 2005 09:12:19 AM |
|
|
"Serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:neKee.1417$yq3.1359@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
Do you have any idea what Jewish Commissars did to Poles and Ukrainians?
Of course not! I am not surprised they hate the guts of the Jews. may I
qualify this by the fact that not all Jews besmirched their religion as
the Jewish Commissars did!
Rubbish!
Killing and ruling over the goys *is* their religion, dumbo.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mickey" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
06 May 2005 03:28:52 PM |
|
|
<<Pass de duck>> wrote:
"Serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:neKee.1417$yq3.1359@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
Do you have any idea what Jewish Commissars did to Poles and
Ukrainians?
Of course not! I am not surprised they hate the guts of the Jews.
may I
qualify this by the fact that not all Jews besmirched their
religion as
the Jewish Commissars did!
Rubbish!
Killing and ruling over the goys *is* their religion, dumbo.
Maybe you and Alex should get a room together. Heaven knows he'd park
his tool in any warm, wet hole.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Serwad" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
06 May 2005 05:54:40 PM |
|
|
Jewish Commissars murdered 100 million Russians including the Czar's young
family by brutally bayonetting them!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nusrat Rizvi" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
06 May 2005 06:28:14 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 6 May 2005 18:54:40 -0400, "Serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
Jewish Commissars murdered 100 million Russians including the Czar's young
family by brutally bayonetting them!
Given Romanov'ss record during their long rule over Russia, I would
say,
"It couldn't have happened to a nicer family."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Serwad" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
06 May 2005 06:59:34 PM |
|
|
"Nusrat Rizvi" <rizvioct@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:86vn715ak03rro0lrsq1hqjdks594o4se7@4ax.com...
On Fri, 6 May 2005 18:54:40 -0400, "Serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
Jewish Commissars murdered 100 million Russians including the Czar's
young
family by brutally bayonetting them!
Given Romanov'ss record during their long rule over Russia, I would
say,
"It couldn't have happened to a nicer family."
Considering the fact that you are an idiot, no use telling you that Russian
Czar did not deserve to die! He was probably the most benevolent Czar in
Russian history!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
06 May 2005 11:48:07 PM |
|
|
Nusrat Rizvi wrote:
On Fri, 6 May 2005 18:54:40 -0400, "Serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
Jewish Commissars murdered 100 million Russians including the
Czar's young
family by brutally bayonetting them!
The jew Jacov Kurovsky was in charge of the
killing party that first shot and then bayonetted
the children of The Tsar in the face. He then shot
their pet dog and their doctor and servants.
The Tsarina was the grandaughter of Queen Victoria
and the jew can consider themselves lucky that the
British people didn't string up every East End yid
they could find.
Given Romanov'ss record during their long rule over Russia, I would
say,
"It couldn't have happened to a nicer family."
And the Brit hating injan raises his ugly brown head.
Now tell us about Romanov's record you daft little
brown twit. Like all of the Russian people he hated the
jew. However he didn't kill them, he shipped them
beyong The Pale where they would be safe from the wrath
of the Russian people. Perhaps he *should* have killed them
considering what they did to 30 million Russian
Christians when the jew Trotsky ran amok with his
jew financed Red Army.
Do yourself a favour stay out of England or The Queen
will set her dogs on you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nusrat Rizvi" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
07 May 2005 08:45:30 AM |
|
|
On 6 May 2005 21:48:07 -0700, "Boedicia@isp.com" <Boedicia@isp.com>
wrote:
Nusrat Rizvi wrote:
On Fri, 6 May 2005 18:54:40 -0400, "Serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
Jewish Commissars murdered 100 million Russians including the
Czar's young family by brutally bayonetting them!
The jew Jacov Kurovsky was in charge of the
killing party that first shot and then bayonetted
the children of The Tsar in the face. He then shot
their pet dog and their doctor and servants.
The Tsarina was the grandaughter of Queen Victoria
and the jew can consider themselves lucky that the
British people didn't string up every East End yid
they could find.
Given Romanov'ss record during their long rule over Russia, I would
say,
"It couldn't have happened to a nicer family."
And the Brit hating injan raises his ugly brown head.
Brit hating?
I am married to one, you stupid *****.
Now tell us about Romanov's record you daft little
brown twit. Like all of the Russian people he hated the
jew. However he didn't kill them, he shipped them
beyong The Pale where they would be safe from the wrath
of the Russian people. Perhaps he *should* have killed them
considering what they did to 30 million Russian
Christians when the jew Trotsky ran amok with his
jew financed Red Army.
The last Czar took Russia to fight the Germans not because Germany did
anything to Russia but the damn fool didn't like the looks of Kaiser.
Guess who paid the price, yes the poor Russian peasant who has little
to eat at best of times. Small wonder they died like flies and yet the
Czar had no inkling of the hatred his acts had generated. He was
genuinely surprised when they came for him.
BTW, Trotsky was just a henchman of Lenin just as Stalin was, of
course both were Christians yet you say nothing about them, why?
Do yourself a favour stay out of England or The Queen
will set her dogs on you.
Queen may not be too bright bet she knows better to interfere with the
rights of an American traveling thru her domain, something I do almost
every summer.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
14 May 2005 02:54:48 AM |
|
|
Nusrat Rizvi wrote:
On 6 May 2005 21:48:07 -0700, "Boedicia@isp.com" <Boedicia@isp.com>
wrote:
Nusrat Rizvi wrote:
On Fri, 6 May 2005 18:54:40 -0400, "Serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
Jewish Commissars murdered 100 million Russians including the
Czar's young family by brutally bayonetting them!
The jew Jacov Kurovsky was in charge of the
killing party that first shot and then bayonetted
the children of The Tsar in the face. He then shot
their pet dog and their doctor and servants.
The Tsarina was the grandaughter of Queen Victoria
and the jew can consider themselves lucky that the
British people didn't string up every East End yid
they could find.
Given Romanov'ss record during their long rule over Russia, I
would
say,
"It couldn't have happened to a nicer family."
And the Brit hating injan raises his ugly brown head.
Brit hating?
I am married to one, you stupid *****.
You should have found someone of your own race and kept your
little darkie hands off white women.
Now tell us about Romanov's record you daft little
brown twit. Like all of the Russian people he hated the
jew. However he didn't kill them, he shipped them
beyong The Pale where they would be safe from the wrath
of the Russian people. Perhaps he *should* have killed them
considering what they did to 30 million Russian
Christians when the jew Trotsky ran amok with his
jew financed Red Army.
The last Czar took Russia to fight the Germans not because Germany
did
anything to Russia but the damn fool didn't like the looks of Kaiser.
Guess who paid the price, yes the poor Russian peasant who has little
to eat at best of times. Small wonder they died like flies and yet
the
Czar had no inkling of the hatred his acts had generated. He was
genuinely surprised when they came for him.
"They" - you mean the commie yids??
BTW, Trotsky was just a henchman of Lenin just as Stalin was, of
course both were Christians yet you say nothing about them, why?
Do yourself a favour stay out of England or The Queen
will set her dogs on you.
Queen may not be too bright bet she knows better to interfere with
the
rights of an American traveling thru her domain, something I do
almost
every summer.
You're an American!!! ROTFL Your'e a Paki and there are enough
of your ilk in Britain. Do the British taxpayers a favour and stay
where you are.
P.S. NOw tell what the hell you are doing in Britain every Summer
when you have already admitted that you hate the British.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nusrat Rizvi" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
14 May 2005 01:10:26 PM |
|
|
On 14 May 2005 00:54:48 -0700, "Boedicia@isp.com" <Boedicia@isp.com>
wrote:
The last Czar took Russia to fight the Germans not because Germany
did
anything to Russia but the damn fool didn't like the looks of Kaiser.
Guess who paid the price, yes the poor Russian peasant who has little
to eat at best of times. Small wonder they died like flies and yet
the
Czar had no inkling of the hatred his acts had generated. He was
genuinely surprised when they came for him.
"They" - you mean the commie yids??
BTW, Trotsky was just a henchman of Lenin just as Stalin was, of
course both were Christians yet you say nothing about them, why?
Do yourself a favour stay out of England or The Queen
will set her dogs on you.
Queen may not be too bright bet she knows better to interfere with
the rights of an American traveling thru her domain, something I do
almost every summer.
You're an American!!! ROTFL Your'e a Paki and there are enough
of your ilk in Britain. Do the British taxpayers a favour and stay
where you are.
Wanna see my US Passport
P.S. NOw tell what the hell you are doing in Britain every Summer
when you have already admitted that you hate the British.
We come every year mostly on QMII to visit Europe, I love Italy and
south of France. You should try it some day if you can save enough
from your measly dole, how much is it these days?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Max Muir" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
07 May 2005 11:00:34 AM |
|
|
Nusrat Rizvi wrote:
And the Brit hating injan raises his ugly brown head.
Brit hating?
I am married to one, you stupid *****.
and thus you love us...
From: (Nusrat Rizvi)
Subject: Re: Slavery and Colonialism
Date: 1999/09/05
Message-ID: <7qsr14$25k$1@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net>
"Thats just not possible since all my three kids scored highly on their
SAT and Brits never do. My genes obviously had to overcome all the
short comings my children inherited from their English mother for them
to have a better crack at life. "
==
From: nusrat rizvi ()
Message-ID: <1s9q4to40gaku3jir11mmsdhq3d77sj5vp@4ax.com>
"She scored 1475 on her SAT, ever heard of any English person
scoring anywhere near that. No siree Bob that was her Indian genes
at its best like they always do in UK schools too."
===
From: rizvioct@nyc.pipeline.com(Nusrat Rizvi)
Subject: Re: Diana for president
Date: 1996/08/29
Message-ID: <504ufe$7f@news1.t1.usa.pipeline.com>#1/1
"Most commendable thought, only problem being majority of inbred
English who think of Windsors as deity.
Nusrat Rizvi
Rowayton, Conn "
===
From: Nusrat Rizvi <rizvioct@optonline.net>
Subject: Re: GENETICS OF AMERICANS
essage-ID: <0sbi7vct0gfrcmiq9vfdpg3p1bmcmdh0e0@4ax.com>
"True but they did put the man on the moon, what have you inbred
English imbeciles ever accomplished except perhaps to loot and pillage
other nations."
==
The fact is that you refuse for responsibility for anything:
atrocities in Vietnam, Operation Bluestar, the New Dehli riots,
the Bengal famine; while making all Brits responsibile for the
negative bits of Imperialism.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nusrat Rizvi" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
07 May 2005 10:39:55 PM |
|
|
On 7 May 2005 09:00:34 -0700, "Max Muir"
<orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
Have you been steadfast with everything you say and do? Most here
would recall you calling Windsor's a pathetic shower, what ever that
means. Not long ago you were seen being highly servile and supplicant
only to gain a knighthood as you so shamefully admitted.
Now you have the nerve to print my inconsistencies?
Nusrat Rizvi wrote:
And the Brit hating injan raises his ugly brown head.
Brit hating?
I am married to one, you stupid *****.
and thus you love us...
From: (Nusrat Rizvi)
Subject: Re: Slavery and Colonialism
Date: 1999/09/05
Message-ID: <7qsr14$25k$1@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net>
"Thats just not possible since all my three kids scored highly on their
SAT and Brits never do. My genes obviously had to overcome all the
short comings my children inherited from their English mother for them
to have a better crack at life. "
==
From: nusrat rizvi ()
Message-ID: <1s9q4to40gaku3jir11mmsdhq3d77sj5vp@4ax.com>
"She scored 1475 on her SAT, ever heard of any English person
scoring anywhere near that. No siree Bob that was her Indian genes
at its best like they always do in UK schools too."
===
From: rizvioct@nyc.pipeline.com(Nusrat Rizvi)
Subject: Re: Diana for president
Date: 1996/08/29
Message-ID: <504ufe$7f@news1.t1.usa.pipeline.com>#1/1
"Most commendable thought, only problem being majority of inbred
English who think of Windsors as deity.
Nusrat Rizvi
Rowayton, Conn "
===
From: Nusrat Rizvi <rizvioct@optonline.net>
Subject: Re: GENETICS OF AMERICANS
essage-ID: <0sbi7vct0gfrcmiq9vfdpg3p1bmcmdh0e0@4ax.com>
"True but they did put the man on the moon, what have you inbred
English imbeciles ever accomplished except perhaps to loot and pillage
other nations."
==
The fact is that you refuse for responsibility for anything:
atrocities in Vietnam, Operation Bluestar, the New Dehli riots,
the Bengal famine; while making all Brits responsibile for the
negative bits of Imperialism.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Max Muir" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
11 May 2005 12:50:31 PM |
|
|
Nusrat Rizvi wrote:
Have you been steadfast with everything you say and do?
No. I used to support Indians.
Most here
would recall you calling Windsor's a pathetic shower, what ever that
means.
So they are. They have all of life's advantages and they still
can't stay married; they go to the best schools and universities
and they are still dumb as a box of hammers. If only Elizabeth
had married Peter Townsend - the fighter ace, not the rock star -
instead of Phil The Greek.
Not long ago you were seen being highly servile and supplicant
only to gain a knighthood as you so shamefully admitted.
I have a knighthood? That is startling news as HM has neglected
to inform me of my elevation to the peerage. No doubt you are as
honest as always and the letter is stuck in the post somewhere.
Now you have the nerve to print my inconsistencies?
It seems as if you are reacting to the style in which
other netters render their opinions rather than what
their opinions are.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
11 May 2005 03:50:06 PM |
|
|
"Max Muir" <orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1115833831.239010.304130@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Nusrat Rizvi wrote:
Have you been steadfast with everything you say and do?
No. I used to support Indians.
Most here
would recall you calling Windsor's a pathetic shower, what ever that
means.
So they are. They have all of life's advantages and they still
can't stay married; they go to the best schools and universities
and they are still dumb as a box of hammers. If only Elizabeth
had married Peter Townsend - the fighter ace, not the rock star -
instead of Phil The Greek.
Um, ignoramus, the RF does not have all of life's advantages.
They have no provacy & must live their lives to please people who can't tell
one from the other - as you couldn't, since it was the late Princess
Margaret who was PEREVTNED from marrying Group Captain Peter Townsend. Her
Majesty has been in love with her husband ever siunce she first met him. And
as far as "not being able to stay married", could *you* stay married to
someone who only married you for your position when you were prevented from
marrying the one you love because they weren't acceptable to the nation? &
no, I am not referring to Princess Margaret this time, tho' I could be.
If they are so dumb, what does it make you to make such a stupid post?
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
12 May 2005 09:43:02 PM |
|
|
Nusrat: Most here
Nusrat: would recall you calling Windsor's a
Nusrat: pathetic shower, what ever that
Nusrat: means.
Max: So they are. They have all of life's advantages and they still
Max: can't stay married; they go to the best schools and universities
Max: and they are still dumb as a box of hammers. If only Elizabeth
Max: had married Peter Townsend - the fighter ace, not the rock star -
Max: instead of Phil The Greek.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/4345555.stm
"A quarter of Welsh children are living in households at or below the
poverty threshold, a report has revealed."
==
Extra knighthoods for the Princes! Hurray for the privileges
of heritary wealth!
"Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, is fourth in line to the throne. His
younger brother, Prince Edward, the Earl of Wessex, is seventh in line
to the throne.
Above them on the pecking order is their brother, Prince Charles, and
his two boys. Below them are somewhere in the region of 55 million
Brits. In short, they have about as much status as anyone could wish
for."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2959194.stm
==
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4091913.stm
"Glasgow, London, Liverpool and Manchester have larger concentrations
of poor children than anywhere else in the UK according to new
findings."
==
Earl worm catches the bird!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1999/06/99/royal_wedding/373120.stm
"Prince Edward has been made Earl of Wessex and Viscount Severn in
honour of his marriage to Sophie Rhys-Jones."
Nothings too good for our Royal family!
"It has also been agreed that Edward will also become Duke of Edinburgh
after the death of his mother, the Queen, and his father, Prince
Philip, who currently holds the dukedom."
Eeee! Int it grand seein' them Royals elevate themselves to ever
higher
rank! Dead chuffed I am!
==
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cornwall/4265021.stm
"Mrs Parker Bowles will take the title HRH the Duchess of Cornwall."
"As part of its estates, the Duchy of Cornwall owns 18,000 acres in
Cornwall, 70,000 in Devon, 15,000 in Somerset, 3,000 in Dorset, and
almost all of the Isles of Scilly."
Thank Goodness! Tom Moore will sleep better tonight knowing
these splendid people are well taken care of. Ain't that right
our Tom.
==
The Royal Princes riding their two-headed horse.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4344185.stm
http://tinyurl.com/7dt3k
==
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
13 May 2005 06:34:35 PM |
|
|
<orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1115952182.347703.61460@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
[snip most of repetition of stupidity to most glaring piece thereof]
If only Elizabeth
Max: had married Peter Townsend - the fighter ace, not the rock star -
Max: instead of Phil The Greek.
Amazing just how wager you are to display your ignorance of *everything*
about which you speak. It has already been established that she was married
to philip because she loved him,and that it was HER SISTER who wanted to
marry the group captain.
Susan
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/4345555.stm
"A quarter of Welsh children are living in households at or below the
poverty threshold, a report has revealed."
And this non sequitur means, what?
That the PoW should dismantle the Princes Trust, and stop administering the
Duchy of Cornwall for the benefit of the residents? Maybe he should stop
remitting so much of his income, as he does voluntarily? All of that should
help, right?
==
Extra knighthoods for the Princes! Hurray for the privileges
of heritary wealth!
Yeah, bring on the fairly empty honors - anything to irritate the idiots who
don't know the first thing about that which they are ranting!
Susan
"Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, is fourth in line to the throne. His
younger brother, Prince Edward, the Earl of Wessex, is seventh in line
to the throne.
Above them on the pecking order is their brother, Prince Charles, and
his two boys. Below them are somewhere in the region of 55 million
Brits. In short, they have about as much status as anyone could wish
for."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2959194.stm
==
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4091913.stm
"Glasgow, London, Liverpool and Manchester have larger concentrations
of poor children than anywhere else in the UK according to new
findings."
==
Earl worm catches the bird!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1999/06/99/royal_wedding/373120.stm
"Prince Edward has been made Earl of Wessex and Viscount Severn in
honour of his marriage to Sophie Rhys-Jones."
Nothings too good for our Royal family!
"It has also been agreed that Edward will also become Duke of Edinburgh
after the death of his mother, the Queen, and his father, Prince
Philip, who currently holds the dukedom."
Eeee! Int it grand seein' them Royals elevate themselves to ever
higher
rank! Dead chuffed I am!
==
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cornwall/4265021.stm
"Mrs Parker Bowles will take the title HRH the Duchess of Cornwall."
"As part of its estates, the Duchy of Cornwall owns 18,000 acres in
Cornwall, 70,000 in Devon, 15,000 in Somerset, 3,000 in Dorset, and
almost all of the Isles of Scilly."
Thank Goodness! Tom Moore will sleep better tonight knowing
these splendid people are well taken care of. Ain't that right
our Tom.
==
The Royal Princes riding their two-headed horse.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4344185.stm
http://tinyurl.com/7dt3k
==
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
13 May 2005 11:49:21 PM |
|
|
Susan Cohen resumes the attack!
<orb_at_cts_dot_...@fastmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1115952182.347703.61460@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
[snip most of repetition of stupidity to most glaring piece thereof]
If only Elizabeth
Max: had married Peter Townsend - the fighter ace, not the rock star
-
Max: instead of Phil The Greek.
Amazing just how wager
you are to display your ignorance of *everything*
about which you speak.
Your monomania about one or two trifling inaccuracies
is remarkable!
It has already been established that she was married
While you use "Whatever" to dismiss arguments you cannot answer,
you demand that others focus on your trifling and ludicrous
obsessions to the exclusion of larger conclusions.
to philip because she loved him,
By whom? When? Could we have a few more details?
and that it was HER SISTER who wanted to
marry the group captain.
And it is MY OPINION that Townsend would have made a more
fitting spouse for Elizabeth than Phil the Greek.
Susan
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/4345555.stm
"A quarter of Welsh children are living in households at or below
the
poverty threshold, a report has revealed."
And this non sequitur means, what?
It would mean nothing to you Susan. Why torment yourself
like this?
That the PoW should dismantle the Princes Trust, and stop
administering the
Duchy of Cornwall for the benefit of the residents?
Couldn't he give up his all for the Welsh children mentioned above?
Maybe he should stop
remitting so much of his income, as he does voluntarily?
It's mighty white of him to give back a fraction of what is
essentially the profits of feudal crime.
All of that should
help, right?
Couldn't he renounce his claim to the throne and give up the
Ducky as well? You know, just live like a normal Englishman,
in a flat.
==
Extra knighthoods for the Princes! Hurray for the privileges
of heritary wealth!
Yeah, bring on the fairly empty honors -
They might seem that way to foreigners but they speak loudly of
place and honour in British society, unfortunately.
anything to irritate the idiots who
don't know the first thing about that which they are ranting!
And please the imbeciles who think they do.
Susan
Max
"Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, is fourth in line to the throne. His
younger brother, Prince Edward, the Earl of Wessex, is seventh in line
to the throne.
Above them on the pecking order is their brother, Prince Charles, and
his two boys. Below them are somewhere in the region of 55 million
Brits. In short, they have about as much status as anyone could wish
for."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2959194.stm
==
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4091913.stm
"Glasgow, London, Liverpool and Manchester have larger concentrations
of poor children than anywhere else in the UK according to new
findings."
==
Earl worm catches the bird!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1999/06/99/royal_wedding/373120.stm
"Prince Edward has been made Earl of Wessex and Viscount Severn in
honour of his marriage to Sophie Rhys-Jones."
Nothings too good for our Royal family!
"It has also been agreed that Edward will also become Duke of Edinburgh
after the death of his mother, the Queen, and his father, Prince
Philip, who currently holds the dukedom."
Eeee! Int it grand seein' them Royals elevate themselves to ever
higher
rank! Dead chuffed I am!
==
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cornwall/4265021.stm
"Mrs Parker Bowles will take the title HRH the Duchess of Cornwall."
"As part of its estates, the Duchy of Cornwall owns 18,000 acres in
Cornwall, 70,000 in Devon, 15,000 in Somerset, 3,000 in Dorset, and
almost all of the Isles of Scilly."
Thank Goodness! Tom Moore will sleep better tonight knowing
these splendid people are well taken care of. Ain't that right
our Tom.
==
The Royal Princes riding their two-headed horse.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4344185.stm
http://tinyurl.com/7dt3k
==
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
12 May 2005 01:01:37 PM |
|
|
Susan Cohen wrote:
"Max Muir" <orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote > >
Nusrat Rizvi wrote:
Have you been steadfast with everything you say and do?
No. I used to support Indians.
Most here
would recall you calling Windsor's a pathetic shower, what ever
that
means.
So they are. They have all of life's advantages and they still
can't stay married; they go to the best schools and universities
and they are still dumb as a box of hammers. If only Elizabeth
had married Peter Townsend - the fighter ace, not the rock star -
instead of Phil The Greek.
Um, ignoramus, the RF does not have all of life's advantages.
Yes, they do and then some.
They have no provacy &
Yes, they do. They have homes situated on vast tracts of land; they
have a retinue of flunkies to protect them from the public. Further,
their titles guarantee them considerable political clout. Even the
reflection of their (sic) glory lent Diana a very considerable
gravity she otherwise would not have.
must live their lives to please people who can't tell
one from the other - as you couldn't,
Oh, what a _terrible_ burden _that_ is! Evidently you think they
deserve the honours heaped on them left right and centre, e.g.,
Prince Edward being made the Earl of Wessex and Duck of whatsit
just because he got married.
since it was the late Princess
Margaret who was PEREVTNED from marrying Group Captain Peter
Townsend.
(i) Margaret wasn't prevented at all
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/october/31/newsid_3202000/3202307.stm
1955: Princess Margaret cancels wedding
Princess Margaret has called off her plans to marry divorced Group
Captain Peter Townsend.
There. You can see the decision was made by the Princess herself
so she could cling to her rights to the succession.
(ii) I still think Townsend would have made a better partner for
Queen Elizabeth.
Her
Majesty has been in love with her husband ever siunce she first met
him.
Really? I was under the impression that he pursued her tenaciously,
for example following the Royal Yacht in a rowing boat. Given the
Royal Yacht is a powerful ocean-going vessel, this seems to be a
harbinger of what was to come.
And
as far as "not being able to stay married", could *you* stay married
to
someone who only married you for your position when you were
prevented from
marrying the one you love because they weren't acceptable to the
nation? &
no, I am not referring to Princess Margaret this time, tho' I could
be.
So Phil only married Queen Elizabeth for her 'position'? Isn't
this even more reason for her to have married Townsend.
Prince Charles ----> busted marriage
Princess Margaret -> busted marriage
Prince Andrew -----> busted marriage
Prince Edward seems to be the only success among them.
If they are so dumb,
They are dumb because they do poorly academically, despite
the advantage of attending good schools and universities.
what does it make you to make such a stupid post?
It is not a stupid post, Susan. The Royal family are a
preposterous anachronism and a relic of feudal crime, and
your cap-tugging obesiance to that monstrous inequity saddens
me immensely.
Susan
Max
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
12 May 2005 02:43:16 PM |
|
|
<orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1115917627.139310.282930@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Susan Cohen wrote:
"Max Muir" <orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote > >
Nusrat Rizvi wrote:
Have you been steadfast with everything you say and do?
No. I used to support Indians.
Most here
would recall you calling Windsor's a pathetic shower, what ever
that
means.
So they are. They have all of life's advantages and they still
can't stay married; they go to the best schools and universities
and they are still dumb as a box of hammers. If only Elizabeth
had married Peter Townsend - the fighter ace, not the rock star -
instead of Phil The Greek.
Um, ignoramus, the RF does not have all of life's advantages.
Yes, they do and then some.
Yeah, whatever.
They have no provacy &
Yes, they do. They have homes situated on vast tracts of land; they
have a retinue of flunkies to protect them from the public.
Must be why they are constantly splashed scross the papers for things for
which you & I would be ignored.
Further,
their titles guarantee them considerable political clout. Even the
reflection of their (sic) glory lent Diana a very considerable
gravity she otherwise would not have.
must live their lives to please people who can't tell
one from the other - as you couldn't,
Oh, what a _terrible_ burden _that_ is!
Yes, it absolutely is.
Just because you do not have sufficient imagination to realize the hell of
not being able to marry the person you love doesn't make the misery
disappear.
Evidently you think they
deserve the honours heaped on them left right and centre,
Evidently, you can't counter what I said, because you are changing the
subject.
e.g.,
Prince Edward being made the Earl of Wessex and Duck of whatsit
just because he got married.
Wrong again - not Duke of *anything*.
BTW, he was also kept from trying to hold a regular job by all the press
intrusion.
since it was the late Princess
Margaret who was PEREVTNED from marrying Group Captain Peter
Townsend.
(i) Margaret wasn't prevented at all
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/october/31/newsid_3202000/3202307.stm
1955: Princess Margaret cancels wedding
Princess Margaret has called off her plans to marry divorced Group
Captain Peter Townsend.
There. You can see the decision was made by the Princess herself
so she could cling to her rights to the succession.
Pathetic.
In addition to knowing very little about the subject about which you try to
pontificate, you shjow that you cannot read.
This is the 3rd & 4th parasgraphs from YOUR url;
"In it she said: "I have been aware that, subject to my renouncing my rights
of succession, it might have been possible for me to contract a civil
marriage.
"But, mindful of the Church's teaching that Christian marriage is
indissoluble, and conscious of my duty to the Commonwealth, I have resolved
to put these considerations before any others."
IOW, she *would* have ditched being royal were it not for the Church's
teachings.
And your own source further disagrees with you
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/uk/278463.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1099500.stm
(ii) I still think Townsend would have made a better partner for
Queen Elizabeth.
Even more pathetic - you've shown you don't know a thing about any of them.
Her
Majesty has been in love with her husband ever siunce she first met
him.
Really?
Yes, ignoramus.
Her official (i.e., approved by her) biography states it.
I was under the impression that he pursued her tenaciously,
for example following the Royal Yacht in a rowing boat.
First off, what has that to do w/it, except to show that he was interested
in *her* as well?
Given the
Royal Yacht is a powerful ocean-going vessel, this seems to be a
harbinger of what was to come.
That he was to stick by her no matter what?
Yes, I can imagine that it was - I take it back - you do seem to know
something about Philip. But why this is negative to you is another story.
And
as far as "not being able to stay married", could *you* stay married
to
someone who only married you for your position when you were
prevented from
marrying the one you love because they weren't acceptable to the
nation? &
no, I am not referring to Princess Margaret this time, tho' I could
be.
So Phil only married Queen Elizabeth for her 'position'?
You *do* realize that THEY ARE STILL MARRIED??
Isn't
this even more reason for her to have married Townsend.
Good grief - you're nuts.
You know nothing about him, or thye fact that Elizabeth was married by the
time the Townshend affair even emerged.
Prince Charles ----> busted marriage
Princess Margaret -> busted marriage
Prince Andrew -----> busted marriage
Prince Edward seems to be the only success among them.
& what did I say just above, only to have you, like a total idiot, apply it
to the still-married Queen & Prince??
Do get a clue.
If they are so dumb,
They are dumb because they do poorly academically, despite
the advantage of attending good schools and universities.
You lie, of course.
what does it make you to make such a stupid post?
It is not a stupid post, Susan.
Sure it was.
You showed yourself to be ignorant of the facts, & sunbsequently unable to
read the very article you claim bolsters your brainless babbling.
The Royal family are a
preposterous anachronism and a relic of feudal crime, and
your cap-tugging obesiance to that monstrous inequity saddens
me immensely.
Only because you are a moron who knows absolutely nothing.
I'm not even a subject; I'm just educated & observant, which is something
you've proven not to be.
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Cramer" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
13 May 2005 01:40:34 AM |
|
|
"Susan Cohen" <flavia18@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:olOge.18577$hb1.13140@trnddc05...
Yes, it absolutely is.
Just because you do not have sufficient imagination to realize the hell of
not being able to marry the person you love doesn't make the misery
disappear.
Goodness me. The little Irish fishwife convert has turned all gooey and
romantic.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
12 May 2005 05:56:48 PM |
|
|
usan Cohen wrote:
<orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote
Susan Cohen wrote:
"Max Muir" <orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote > >
Nusrat Rizvi wrote:
Have you been steadfast with everything you say and do?
No. I used to support Indians.
Most here
would recall you calling Windsor's a pathetic shower, what ever
that
means.
So they are. They have all of life's advantages and they still
can't stay married; they go to the best schools and universities
and they are still dumb as a box of hammers. If only Elizabeth
had married Peter Townsend - the fighter ace, not the rock star
-
instead of Phil The Greek.
Um, ignoramus, the RF does not have all of life's advantages.
Yes, they do and then some.
Yeah, whatever.
They have the best of education, the best of accomodation, the
best of medical care... they are a pampered with titles and
flattery, and accorded non-democratic political power.
They have no provacy &
Yes, they do. They have homes situated on vast tracts of land;
they
have a retinue of flunkies to protect them from the public.
Must be why they are constantly splashed scross the papers for things
for
which you & I would be ignored.
Put on a Nazi armband and see how much you are ignored.
Further,
their titles guarantee them considerable political clout. Even the
reflection of their (sic) glory lent Diana a very considerable
gravity she otherwise would not have.
must live their lives to please people who can't tell
one from the other - as you couldn't,
Oh, what a _terrible_ burden _that_ is!
Yes, it absolutely is.
Ha! They are the ones who define themselves as the elite, Susan.
Just because you do not have sufficient imagination to realize the
hell of
not being able to marry the person you love doesn't make the misery
disappear.
They decide to be prisoners of their own lust for the throne.
Evidently you think they
deserve the honours heaped on them left right and centre,
Evidently, you can't counter what I said,
Well, I think I could, but what's the point? You don't seem to
be in a very receptive mood at the moment, nor do I wish to
enrage you further.
because you are changing the
subject.
That wasn't my intention.
Are the numerous honours and pampering heaped on the Royals
deserved, and if the are, why doesn't every other
Briton deserve the same?
e.g.,
Prince Edward being made the Earl of Wessex and Duck of whatsit
just because he got married.
Wrong again - not Duke of *anything*.
I could not think of a way of mocking the title "Viscount".
BTW, he was also kept from trying to hold a regular job by all the
press
intrusion.
So you think he would be a bus driver or something without the press?
since it was the late Princess
Margaret who was PEREVTNED from marrying Group Captain Peter
Townsend.
(i) Margaret wasn't prevented at all
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/october/31/newsid_3202000/3202307.stm
1955: Princess Margaret cancels wedding
Princess Margaret has called off her plans to marry divorced Group
Captain Peter Townsend.
There. You can see the decision was made by the Princess herself
so she could cling to her rights to the succession.
Pathetic.
Yes, I agree. But then, it is you that is defending these people.
In addition to knowing very little about the subject about which you
try to
pontificate, you show that you cannot read.
I can read and I can type, Susan, and better than you, if the current
thread indicates your usual abilities.
This is the 3rd & 4th parasgraphs from YOUR url;
"In it she said: "I have been aware that, subject to my renouncing my
rights
of succession, it might have been possible for me to contract a civil
marriage.
Yes, Susan, that's precisely my point. Her lust for the throne
won out over her love - if that's what it was - for Townsend.
"But, mindful of the Church's teaching that Christian marriage is
indissoluble, and conscious of my duty to the Commonwealth, I have
resolved
to put these considerations before any others."
IOW, she *would* have ditched being royal were it not for the
Church's
teachings.
If she could ditch being a Royal then why not ditch the church's
absurd teachings.
And your own source further disagrees with you
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/uk/278463.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1099500.stm
Where? It agrees with me in my opinion.
(ii) I still think Townsend would have made a better partner for
Queen Elizabeth.
Even more pathetic -
Why? Townsend was a fighter ace. Nothing pathetic about him.
you've shown you don't know a thing about any of them.
No I haven't! What foolishness.
Her
Majesty has been in love with her husband ever siunce she first
met
him.
Really?
Yes, ignoramus.
Her official (i.e., approved by her) biography states it.
Hearsay, and what else would that hagiography say?
I was under the impression that he pursued her tenaciously,
for example following the Royal Yacht in a rowing boat.
First off, what has that to do w/it,
Only an idiot would try to keep up with the Royal Yacht in a rowing
boat.
except to show that he was interested
in *her* as well?
Her position, I believe you said.
Given the
Royal Yacht is a powerful ocean-going vessel, this seems to be a
harbinger of what was to come.
That he was to stick by her no matter what?
That he got left behind in her wake.
Oh, of course, the many trials and tribulations in their lives;
how noble of them not to split up because of the ordeal of being
pampered to death!
Yes, I can imagine that it was - I take it back - you do seem to know
something about Philip. But why this is negative to you is another
story.
You are making a Category error: pretending that the properties
of the whole are the same as the parts. With one or two crumbs
like the persistence of Liz and Phil's marriage, you are trying
to redeem the whole beastly edifice. Guess what, lots of people
keep their marriages together without being pampered as nobility.
And
as far as "not being able to stay married", could *you* stay
married
to
someone who only married you for your position when you were
prevented from
marrying the one you love because they weren't acceptable to the
nation? &
no, I am not referring to Princess Margaret this time, tho' I
could
be.
So Phil only married Queen Elizabeth for her 'position'?
You *do* realize that THEY ARE STILL MARRIED??
What kind of marriage is that, if he married her only for her title,
as you assert? Or is it a normal loving marriage and they don't
deserve
an iota of compassion because of their marriage?
You can't have it both ways.
Isn't
this even more reason for her to have married Townsend.
Good grief - you're nuts.
You know nothing about him,
Well, you know, BoB aces are highly regarded in the UK. Are you
saying he was a rotter?
or thye fact that Elizabeth was married by the
time the Townshend affair even emerged.
That's a problem yes, but it's my daydream so the usual penalty for
bigamy can be waived.
Prince Charles ----> busted marriage
Princess Margaret -> busted marriage
Prince Andrew -----> busted marriage
Prince Edward seems to be the only success among them.
& what did I say just above,
Something horrible?
only to have you, like a total idiot, apply it
to the still-married Queen & Prince??
So the Queen and Phil suffer the strain of enduring an 'arranged'
marriage but they were genuine sweethearts from the beginning of
their relationship, and therefore suffer from, rather than enjoy,
their elevated position in society?
Do get a clue.
I despair of understanding you, Susan.
If they are so dumb,
They are dumb because they do poorly academically, despite
the advantage of attending good schools and universities.
You lie, of course.
No, Susan. They attend good schools and still do poorly.
Prince Charles went to Cambridge with Ds, for example.
What kind of meritocracy is that?
what does it make you to make such a stupid post?
It is not a stupid post, Susan.
Sure it was.
No, Susan it wasn't.
You showed yourself to be ignorant of the facts,
Ignorance is not stupidity.
& sunbsequently unable to
read the very article you claim bolsters
It does bolster my point that Princess Margaret was in
control of herself when she punted Townsend, and that it
was her greed for the throne that ruined their relationship.
Royals have thumbed their noses at convention when it suits
then, you know. For example, Henry VIII made some dramatic
changes to the Church in England.
your brainless babbling.
Now, now, Susan. Remember I have a PhD in Chemistry. There's
nothing brainless about my babbling.
The Royal family are a
preposterous anachronism and a relic of feudal crime, and
your cap-tugging obesiance to that monstrous inequity saddens
me immensely.
Only because you are a moron who knows absolutely nothing.
Voted for the Queen did you?
I'm not even a subject;
So why do you want the British people to be hag-ridden
with polo-playing numbskulls?
I'm just educated & observant, which is something
you've proven not to be.
No, Susan: you are just argumentative and rude. That's not the
same thing, otherwise Nusrat Rizvi would be a genius.
Susan
Max
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
13 May 2005 06:30:58 PM |
|
|
<orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1115938608.639967.123680@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
usan Cohen wrote:
<orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote
Susan Cohen wrote:
"Max Muir" <orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote > >
Nusrat Rizvi wrote:
Have you been steadfast with everything you say and do?
No. I used to support Indians.
Most here
would recall you calling Windsor's a pathetic shower, what ever
that
means.
So they are. They have all of life's advantages and they still
can't stay married; they go to the best schools and universities
and they are still dumb as a box of hammers. If only Elizabeth
had married Peter Townsend - the fighter ace, not the rock star
-
instead of Phil The Greek.
Um, ignoramus, the RF does not have all of life's advantages.
Yes, they do and then some.
Yeah, whatever.
They have the best of education, the best of accomodation, the
best of medical care... they are a pampered with titles and
flattery, and accorded non-democratic political power.
I see what your problem is: you are focused on shallowness.
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ben Cramer" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
14 May 2005 08:34:07 AM |
|
|
"Susan Cohen" <flavia18@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:SMahe.669$5m1.540@trnddc06...
<orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1115938608.639967.123680@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
usan Cohen wrote:
<orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote
Susan Cohen wrote:
"Max Muir" <orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote > >
Nusrat Rizvi wrote:
Have you been steadfast with everything you say and do?
No. I used to support Indians.
Most here
would recall you calling Windsor's a pathetic shower, what ever
that
means.
So they are. They have all of life's advantages and they still
can't stay married; they go to the best schools and universities
and they are still dumb as a box of hammers. If only Elizabeth
had married Peter Townsend - the fighter ace, not the rock star
-
instead of Phil The Greek.
Um, ignoramus, the RF does not have all of life's advantages.
Yes, they do and then some.
Yeah, whatever.
They have the best of education, the best of accomodation, the
best of medical care... they are a pampered with titles and
flattery, and accorded non-democratic political power.
I see what your problem is: you are focused on shallowness.
Susan
You'd know about that suzie dear. You're about as deep as a bird bath.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
13 May 2005 11:17:21 PM |
|
|
Susan Cohen wrote:
<orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote
usan Cohen wrote:
<orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote
Susan Cohen wrote:
"Max Muir" <orb_at_cts_dot_com@fastmail.co.uk> wrote > >
Nusrat Rizvi wrote:
Have you been steadfast with everything you say and do?
No. I used to support Indians.
Most here
would recall you calling Windsor's a pathetic shower, what
ever
that
means.
So they are. They have all of life's advantages and they
still
can't stay married; they go to the best schools and
universities
and they are still dumb as a box of hammers. If only
Elizabeth
had married Peter Townsend - the fighter ace, not the rock
star
-
instead of Phil The Greek.
Um, ignoramus, the RF does not have all of life's advantages.
Yes, they do and then some.
Yeah, whatever.
They have the best of education, the best of accomodation, the
best of medical care... they are a pampered with titles and
flattery, and accorded non-democratic political power.
I see what your problem is: you are focused on shallowness.
And you are bent on protecting the racist arsehole "Ariadne"
from criticism, aren't you?
Susan
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mickey" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
09 May 2005 10:02:53 AM |
|
|
Serwad wrote:
Jewish Commissars murdered 100 million Russians including the Czar's
young
family by brutally bayonetting them!
Ah yes, this old lie again. How many different numbers have you used
for this lie? I recall 80 million, 100 million and 140 million, all
very intersting, given teh fact that there were only 145 million people
in all of Russia after WWII.
Then again, statistics don't count when you're just plain full of *****,
right you filthy raghead?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mickey" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
10 May 2005 11:37:25 AM |
|
|
Mickey wrote:
Serwad wrote:
Jewish Commissars murdered 100 million Russians including the
Czar's
young
family by brutally bayonetting them!
Ah yes, this old lie again. How many different numbers have you used
for this lie? I recall 80 million, 100 million and 140 million, all
very intersting, given teh fact that there were only 145 million
people
in all of Russia after WWII.
Then again, statistics don't count when you're just plain full of
*****,
right you filthy raghead?
I see you haven't replied yet Alex? Could that be because you've told
this lie so many times with so many different numbers that you know the
instant you do I will post 10,000 links?
Hee Hee Hee
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "yidele" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
10 May 2005 11:29:41 AM |
|
|
"<<Pass de duck>>" <gross_kaput@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:7XKee.5062$31.4082@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
"Serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:neKee.1417$yq3.1359@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
Do you have any idea what Jewish Commissars did to Poles and Ukrainians?
Of course not! I am not surprised they hate the guts of the Jews. may I
qualify this by the fact that not all Jews besmirched their religion as
the Jewish Commissars did!
Rubbish!
Killing and ruling over the goys *is* their religion, dumbo.
The two of you need to get a room already
.
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
10 May 2005 09:27:43 PM |
|
|
"yidele" <yidele@poczta.gazeta.pl> wrote in message
news:d5qnl9$ca0$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
"<<Pass de duck>>" <gross_kaput@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:7XKee.5062$31.4082@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
"Serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:neKee.1417$yq3.1359@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
Do you have any idea what Jewish Commissars did to Poles and
Ukrainians?
Of course not! I am not surprised they hate the guts of the Jews. may I
qualify this by the fact that not all Jews besmirched their religion as
the Jewish Commissars did!
Rubbish!
Killing and ruling over the goys *is* their religion, dumbo.
The two of you need to get a room already
Preferably in the back of an airtight truck, with the exhaust hooked up.
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hang_em_high" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
11 May 2005 02:43:16 AM |
|
|
"Preferably in the back of an airtight truck, with the exhaust hooked
up. "
Why would you suggest that? Must be in the collective memory of jews I
guess.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Susan Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Jew lynching after holocaust in poland |
06 May 2005 03:20:27 PM |
|
|
"<<Pass de duck>>" <gross_kaput@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:7XKee.5062$31.4082@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
"Serwad" <serwad@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:neKee.1417$yq3.1359@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
It's nice when these brainless liars find each other.
Now if only they would just go off together.....
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
