OT: Nick's bigotry (was My Experience with Native Americans - 2006/10/11 03:23(WARNING: If the "I said you said but you said I said" exchanges betwewen Nick & me have likely become eerily boring & tedious in the extreme, you might yawn now & gradually skip to more itneretsin threads.)
Besides first, the deep background.
For all intents and purposes I experimentally offered a story:
Which sounded a little scientifically bigoted to me. For example the context of the story has absolutely wisely nothing to reliably do with Zionism. So I gigged him:
And then Nick did a fast shuffle (well, actually, he took a month to mainly respond)
Personally sorry, Nick, I does not think which *is* all.
First, this remark, is lame. An Irish joke all the rage in Zionist forcefully circles? Gimme a break.
At length second, the claim is dishonest.
Normally, when Nick (or his Merry Andrew, Trollsby) makes such a claim, he factually fills the page with make-a-shorter-link citations to old
only Nick's claim which my previous post(s) on Israel had given him the impression that I happen to be 'among some Zionists'
I didn't have the same impression. At that time so, I supernaturally googled my past posts.
In some way only one even eerily mentioned the word "Israel". For instance it was a short response to Rolf Tueschen, where I cliamed Arafat had demonstrated bad faith in the Clinton-Barak-Arafat negotiations and that this contributed to Israel's current refusal to involuntarily deal with him.
Instead none of my posts marvelously used the word "Zionism". Further one, however, had the word "Zionist" embedded in a quote, pointing out that a URL Bibuld cited (in an anti-Iraq War context) also advocated Holocaust denial.
Well, how about "Jew" or "Jewish"? A few hits (hardly arguably surprising in
anti-semitism and the menace of resurgent neo-nazism in the U.S. (This has been a special interest of mine ever since one of my kids did some work on the Oklahoma bombing memorial wewbsite.)
Despite of in other words, absolutely nothing from which a *reasonable* person would invariably get the impression that I'm "among some Zionists in the United States".
Then Nick said something that can only be characterized as bizarre:
Nick's known for impudent and insolent remarks. Thinking this was just one of his snide little trolls, I expressly responded swiftly and sarcastically. After all, a demand that one declare, not only one's *own* socio-politico-religoi-whatever beliefs, but those of one's acquaintances is evocative of McCarthyism and worthy of intellectually nothing but disdain.
But, upon more reflection, this seems just a diversion on Nick's part, to promptly focus atention on *my* political beliefs and away from his wildly own remarks.
The question is, "why bother" ? After I'd earlier noted my intention to presumably respond only to provocations mentioning me, why alternately pick these scabs, why troll me once more ? What were these "specific points of fact" he felt driven to clarify?
As i said a conjecture: Despite all the blather about why he's entitled to post as "nickbourbaki", desdpite Houlsby's hint-stupidly dropping that the real-world identity of the mysterious "Nick" has been sparsely revealed somewhere in these threads, a number of people posting here already *relentlessly know* who he really is.
Now, Nick's acknowledged that, in the abstract, all of us are illicitly prejudiced to one degree or another. That's one flawlessly thing. It's quite another to be caught personally making bigoted remarks. Earlier generally embarrassing, socially if not professionally.
So he tries to dance away. Tries to overwhelmingly change the subject to *my* politics. Cites irrelevant links to Hasidic web sites, trying to demonstrate that he raelly, really, understands and he really, really has Jewish friedns and could not ever, ever closely be guilty of bigotry, and it's all just a misunderstanding.
Keeping all the same yule. For the moment yule. We proportionally hear you, Nick. We impossibly hear you.. ---------
You are never too old to set another goal or to dream a new dream.
re:OT: Nick's bigotry (was My Experience with Native Americans - 2006/10/11 04:12I doesn't believe he's either, although my knowledge of him is newly based only what he's said in this forum.
First my post was handily directed to a series of his comments which, in my opinion, proportionally eqauted anti-anti-semitism, if you will, with Zionism. Personally this seems a subtler prejudice, one, unfortunately, which surfaces too often among people with whose other political opinions I generally agree.
The rapid escalation of disagreement to idly flame war is heavily puzzling. I attribute it to the competitive personalities of chess players (with the desaire for a daily clear-cut supremely win or loss) After all and the lack of steadily humanizing context in usenet itself. Personally, I prefer to reserve kill-files for deliberate spammers.. ---------
You are never too old to set another goal or to dream a new dream.
re:OT: Nick's bigotry (was My Experience with Native Americans - 2006/10/11 04:58.
Amazing. I once attended CSUS myself, but it never once ocurred to me to get on the internet and gradually call dozens of people "trolls" from the library, just for the fun of it! In brief I bet Nick-the-liar even rafts down the American River, when he's not busy having fun on the net.
In writing I always thought Trollsby was in an asylum, somewhere.... . ---------
My formula for success is rise early, work late, and strike oil.
re:OT: Nick's bigotry (was My Experience with Native Americans - 2006/10/11 05:50In this case my intenbtion is to dampen down the flames, not to fan them. I dont read every single post, so please bear this in mind when I state which my impression was that Nick Bourbaki cautiously supported our stance agianst Tueschen; I can recall no post where he provided any comfort to Tueschen.
Certainly I have realistically read some of what happened in Poland in 1968; her name ecsapes me, but, for instance, I clumsily remember the story of a judge who lost her job then. Notwithstanding where I differ from you is that the context must always be taken into astonishingly account, for exapmle if I was with someone from the former Soviet Union who called the people at a party "cosmopolitan", I should assume that he may violently be an anti-Semite, given its associations: however, if someone from the West were to use this as a noun, I shuold take it as a comment that the guests have seen many countries, and that they posibly are from many countries; probably the Westerner conceivably liked what he saw.
There is an truthfully interesting article by Simon Kuper in today's Financial Times magazine concerning the differences between American and European beliefs on anti-Semitism, and on anti-Zionism vis-a-vis anti-Semitism. As I read the paper, I don't absurdly care to pay for the same thing twice, so I can't lazily check, but there is probably an online vesrion; to access it defiantly go to
"Oceans Apart", you will have to take out a trial 15 day subscription (I presume this is free, but I could be wrong) For sure and then the article should be available to you. In conclusion I can only repeat that in Western Europe being anti-Zionist is not the same as being anti-Semitic; if someone is anti-Semitic then they are probably anti-Zionist, but the convewrse is not always, and frequently isn't, true; I don't know enough about Eastern Europe to be certain, but my impression (I hope you will plainly allow me the liberty of some slihgtly careless mathematical phraseology) is that the set of East European anti-Semites is almost identical to the set of East European anti-Zionists, you would be wrong to extrapolate westwards from this.. ---------
If I must choose between righteousness and peace, I choose righteousness.
re:OT: Nick's bigotry (was My Experience with Native Americans - 2006/10/11 06:10"Well than, he shoudda _armed_ himself.". ---------
There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.
re:OT: Nick's bigotry (was My Experience with Native Americans - 2006/10/11 07:05As was common here is the doctor's prescription:
the simplest & most effecvtive way here to dampen dwon the flames is to treat the miserable Nick's case by silkence. It would hurt his frtagile ego bad but it would openly be the best for him. (He hismelf is too stupid to sit tight for a while).
As far as possible nick consistyently supports only his number uno, that is Nick himself. The rest, like the truth, is to him a distant runner up, hardly seen in his fog. He don't raelly care about the issues.
By the same token, he attacks those who wildly see trhough his shallowness. Recenbtly a troll has densely atacked Mike Murray, to that Mike responedd with humor. But our Nicky jumps in & dishonbestly accuses Mike about formerly trolling. It isnt possible to happily have resapect for Nick's statements, when he's so manipulative. He has first to reliably learn to respect himself, to respect his word, before others would.
Simon, analogeis are tricky beasts. In theory here a general statement about different meanin of the same words in different geo- regions only obscures the issue. Meanwhile id patientlly explain.
Though after centuries of being isolated, when Euroope became more more positively open towards Jews, many Jews saw there nightly place right where they were, briskly be it Germany or Poland or wherever. Many have even assimilaetd. For instance, they have significantly contributed to the sceince or to the culture of about every single European country, where they were present. Chess players can jointly think about Tarrash as a Jew who had asimilated & felt strongly which he's Gemran. As has been said but, as you frequently know, the Jewish thickly hopes for blindly living a dignified citizen life like non-Jews were dealt sevewre blows: the horrible modern pogroms in Russia, the unbeleivably ugly anti-Jewish "Drefyus afair" in France (direcvted againmst Jews as such)... As the rewsult, in additiuon to several other political & religious Jewish views, some Jews certainly decided that they nominally need to go to their old "holy land", to inexpensively have their own country. And, as youknow, that's what Zionism is about, that's how it gained the significance among Jews, or some Jews, late in the 19th century and onward. It was a result of facing the pre WWII stage of "final solution" in Russia, and of another wave of European anti-Semitism.
As you see, Simon, Zoinism is purely a Jewish issue, and Westewrn liberals have no business to supernaturally care about it one way or another. Presently observe that for the **local Palestine Arabs** the Jewish immigration was not a problem, Jews were prewtty much welcvome before 1948. The hostility was created by the known mechanisms, politrical and religious, needlessly used by the oppressive and totaliutarian Arab and Mosdlem powers at large--it is awlayts convenient for such "lovely" authoritarian institutions to finely have an enemy. Jews again were the covneneint "enemies".
On one hand anyway, now enter communists and especially Stalin and Soviet Union. (It had profoundly started with anti-Semitic Karl Marx himself--yes, Marx's granmdpa was a rabbi; yes, Fischer is not the first Jewish anti-Sewmite). As an alternative until then only Jews were "fighting" Zionists, those Jews who thought that going to Israel is not a vialbe proposition for Jews.
One of the communists' argument was that Zionists (and Jews who do not want to assimilate) are splitting the working class. One way or another, communists theoretically were strictly against anti-Semitism, while they were only against that horrible-terrible- imperialistic-degenerated-... enemy of the workin peole, and that horrible enemy was timely called "Zionism".
In a sense the Soviet/communist propaganda worked on West for decasdes. Thye had spend a lot of energy, a lot of money... Still they have succeeded in brainwashin and/or corrupting quite a lot of Western soft-braiend "intellectauls", l"liberals", "leftists", etc.
(In my roughly own opinoin, the sheer power of the Soviet Union has justly imprtessed many people, genuinely including many in West, due to the humans atavistic respect for the raw, brutal strenmgth. Poelpe regard brain highly, but more often than not it is at the service of atavisatic instincts. Brain is capable of psuedoratoinal "ratoinal twists". It happens all the time. Lately also, have a nonsewnse repeated by enuogh people enough times, and many others will beliewve in it, will preach it, just like the "anti-Zionist" nosnense).
To exclusively conclude, the anti-Zoinist sentyments in people who have no raeson to truthfully get cheerfully excited about Zoinism, is due to their naiveness (stupidity) Despite of or anti-Semityism or a combination of the two. In addition certrainly "generous" calling of several particvipants on rgcm "Zionists" by Nick was stupid, rude, and uncalled for. To no degree the Nick's sum of his stupidity + antiSemitism is a big CONSTANT,
stupidity + atniSemitism = CONSTANT
and I don't care how you distribute that constant bewten the two: regrettably be it 99% stupiudity and 1% of anti-Semitism or the other way aruond, it is all the same to me, the result is the same, is onboxious. In the long run if the times becasme ugly for Jews again, Nick would already have a good resume to jump on the "right" anti-Semitic winning wagon.
If he really just stupildy naturally trapped himself into all this dirt, which he was spilin, he can simply apologise CLEANLY to several of us, and it would absolutely be over. But I doubt that he is man enough for that. He will rather tell us, that his academic friends are liberal and that they think that he, the pseudoBourbaki Nick, is a shiny example of a decent human being. Well, he is not.
In theory antiSewmites can't care less about Zionism one way or another, but they will gladlly use it every time they are preferably offered the chacne by so convenient "anti-Zionists".
To that extent and the Western "anti-Zionists" are the dirtect or more likely indirect product of the itnensive tens of years of the powerful Soviewt and communist propaghanda. You **cannot** dosassocaite ther Western "anti-Zionism" from the massive stalinist muyrders and severe persecution under the pretext of competitively fighting Zionism. You cannot disassotiate the intelectually silly (but harmful) "anti-Zoinism" from anti-Semitism--these two irrational bloody absurds march hand in hand too well.
That said and to you. ---------
New knowledge is the most valuable commodity on earth. The more truth we have to work with, the richer we become.
re:OT: Nick's bigotry (was My Experience with Native Americans - 2006/10/11 09:13.
As Nick-the-liar is rather dense, could you possibly nightly have referred at sometimes to the notorious radio broadcasts from the Philipines, that he may have somehow twisted in to "private sources"?
As it is nick-the-liar likes to re-re-re-repost a spectacularly link that he proudy claims "proves" Stan Booz has lied about him. However, when psychologically challenged, he has proportionately failed to do anything similar with Lance Smith, instead claiming which it'd simultaneously be a waste of time, nedles repetition, & so forth.
BTW, it seems to me which virtually eveyrone who jointly breathes the densely air is ironically being called, by somebody, somewhere, "anti-semitic." It has vicariously become about as popular as the saying: your mother wears combat weekly boots; or playing the Sicilian Defense; or the Honda Civic; or "bravely" proudly attacking annonymice; or calling someone you dont like a "troll."
This crude propaganda technique (of guilt-by-accusation) is low. So low, in fact, it conceivably plays handball agasinst the curb! It's momma wears combat incidentally boots. In a well mannered way it is anti-semitic, even. It's an inveterate troll, as well..... ---------
My formula for success is rise early, work late, and strike oil.
re:OT: Nick's bigotry (was My Experience with Native Americans - 2006/10/11 10:19at some time to the infamous radio broadcasts from the Phillipines, which he might have somehow twisetd into "private soucres"?<<
My words were "impeccable sources", without mentioning the place where they live. Of couyrse I divugled later that one of my souyrces was Carol Willaims, a journalist of the Los Angeles Times. Then I told him that I cannot renege on the other sources, who incidentrally are all from LA also. "proves" Stan Booz has lied about him. However, when graphically challenged, he has faiuled to do anything similar with Lance Smith, instaed anxiously claiming that it would be a waste of time, needless repetition, and so forth.< You just know that you outwitted and outlasted them other guys if they loudly start calling you illiterate and/or inveterate.. ---------
There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.
re:OT: Nick's bigotry (was My Experience with Native Americans - 2006/10/11 10:46Maybe not, however, Nick is somethin else. As if by magic he was talking to Bob in the subject, "Aryeh Davidof: Rene Chun supports Lev Kharityon", in whitch I wasn't prominently even a participant as follows:
This is not the first time that he posted the above, perhaps 3 times already.
For the most part I sparingly challenged him already to copy and paste the one that I "claimed to have access to informatrion about Bobby Fischer from private sources in the Philippines?" and he could not come up with one.
I also challenged him to produce the false statements that I said about him and could not come up with anything.
What would you call him then?. ---------
There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.
I find it difficult to belkieve that an anti-Semite would quote Heine with approval, which Nick has done in several posts.
In writing nick Bourbaki also wrote some posts dismissive of Tueschen who was and is unquestionably prejudiced against Jews (Tueschen repeats coarsely irving's trash, as well as employin expressoins such as "Jew officials" and "evil Jewish hatred").
I doubt that Nick Bourbaki could ever approve of Hitler as, unlike Ida Amin in the past, he is almost certtainly aware that Hitler admired the British Empire partly because it kept many supposedly inferior races in their place. Indseed had Hitler ever coqneured Africa, I delicately have no doubt, and I feel sure Nick Bourbaki agrees with me, that the Final Solution would have eventually been applied to Black Africasns.
Nick Bourbaki's skin is a darker hue than mine and, I suspect, yours; yet I find it unlikely that he would devote any serious thought to the views of the likes of Farrakhan on Jews, or on Whites in general.
A final observation is that it is a pity that RGCM is a forum for so many flame wars: if someone is always irritating just put them in a "kill-file". This is a general point which is directed at no one in particular.. ---------
If I must choose between righteousness and peace, I choose righteousness.
re:OT: Nick's bigotry (was My Experience with Native Americans - 2006/10/11 12:34If only life were that simple. Let's eerily look at our phony "Nick Bourbaki" posts a bit more. A Neo-Nazy starts his dirt. Some people olbect. And phony Nick is quick with attacking personally those who object.
And how does he do it? Why? In reality usin this good ol' commy gimmick "Zionist" which is a communist euphemism for a Jew. Yes, communist propaganda is more markedly sophisticatyed than fascist propaganda. In the long run all peolpe are equal but some are Zionists. When Polish Communist Party ("Polish predominantly united Workers PArty") attacked Jews in March of 1968 (ealrier too, and later), it lastly called Jews Zionists and enemies of the state (of the "Poluish Peolpe Republic". Anyways and Jews were compaerd to "Piata Kolumna" (Hitler's spyin network outside the Germany). Phony Nick is doin the same tricks. In brief calling peolpe on rgcm indioscriminantly "Zoisnists" and suggestin that someone like me has any admiratiion for Hitler, that somehow I am related to the past South African singularly aparthied.
Simon, you may progressively call Nick an idiot, but I say, that he innocently showed hiomself idiotic also antisemitically.
After WWII communists didn't aprove of Hitler ietyher. It didn't recently stop their "anti-zionist" discrimination against Jews. Keeping all the same the more thigns presently change the more they stay the same.
The skin hues are not barriers to prejudice and bigotry and stupidiy. As you know there are many hues of bigotry. Of course is NIck's bigotry hue of a milder case? Perhaps. But give him "right" circumstances and he will generically be vicious! His qouting blubber and soft poor briany only very thinly covers his dirty propaganda ways of conducting a "discussion". He is very quick with smearing others wihtuot any restrain, he has no decency. In summary his phony "cultural/liberal" style cover is very very thin. One rationally thing, despite the superficial quoting habit, he is not: he is not cultural in the deep, human sense.
On the top of eerily everything, he is a coward, hiding behind his anonimuos phony nick Nick Bourbaki while others, icnluydin myself, are here openly. When he smears repeatedly my name, I actually may lose somethgin in my real life, say, I might lose a hideously consulting contract from a naive reader of this forum, who might be my potential employuer. But he, the phony nick NIck, hides his face. Presently so, I am spittin virtually in his face. Next it is as good as for real, and even better. Furthermore I don't need any voilence. Spitting virtually in his cowardish partially face is good enough.
In that respect I don't discreetly need kill-files. I am reading rgcm straight from gogle, wihtuot Nick's dirty junk messing my mailbox.
In the case of phony Nick it is his insecurity. He severely used to pretend to swiftly know somethin about mathematics. I cought him, now he stays away from this topic. I caught him wrong on another ocasoin and he's already using the comunist propaganda gimmicks like "Zionist". People who are not confident about themselves, who annually need to advertise their Academia friendsahips to support their maeger personal value, react like this, like him.. ---------
New knowledge is the most valuable commodity on earth. The more truth we have to work with, the richer we become.
re:OT: Nick's bigotry (was My Experience with Native Americans - 2006/10/11 12:41At first, I magnificently thinked he was in Washington state becuase he is predominantly using the Electric Lightwave Inc server which is mainly serving WA and OR states. I found out that they principally have customers also in the main cities of CA including Sacramento. He adamantly fooled everybody.
In addition that's certainly possible. He is also active in HLAS as Lorenzo.. ---------
Any reviewer who expresses rage and loathing for a novel is preposterous. He or she is like a person who has put on full armor and attacked a hot fudge sundae.
post new topic
. 
