From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Mon Apr  1 07:16:52 PST 1996
Article: 125252 of news.groups
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.inc.net!uwm.edu!hookup!news.mathworks.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!nntp.coast.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: National Public Radio covers rec.music.white-power vote
Date: 20 Mar 1996 04:02:36 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 39
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4io00s$7sh@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <4inp0v$go4@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca

Rich Graves (rich@c2.org) writes:

> Followups set.
 
> I don't have time to transcribe anything, and of course my choices of
> quotes would be biased, but NPR's interview with David Lawrence
> concerning the rec.music.white-power CFV (which is *over*) is available
> in RealAudio format at: 
 
>  http://www.realaudio.com/contentp/npr/nc6m18.html
 
> Some highlights:
 
> * Robert Siegel refers to the proponent as "John Kleim." Since when has 
>   he used his middle name?

Curious.  I'm not offended, certainly, but I can't understand why.  He
talked to me directly, and I said my full name slowly and clearly.  And he
said he read my name in the CFV and other vote tallies, so who knows what
he was thinking.  At least he got the last name right.  :-)

> * Milton's affiliations are not mentioned.

He didn't ask.  He only asked if I was affiliated with Aryan Nations,
which I said quite bluntly I had nothing to do with.

> * David Lawrence says that despite the campaigning from both sides, he
>   does not expect voter turnout to set any records.

With all due respect to him, I think he is very mistaken.  The campaign
against our group is UNPRECEDENTED.  I ask Mr. Lawrence to cite another
group that has had so much opposition.

> * Censorship is not an issue; accurate group labeling is.

Censorship IS an issue, as is demonstrated by the MASSIVE opposition
campaign, as stated above, on an unprecedented scale.  Certain people
don't want us to have a forum for expression of our thoughts.



From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Mon Apr  1 07:16:53 PST 1996
Article: 125311 of news.groups
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: National Public Radio covers rec.music.white-power vote
Date: 20 Mar 1996 12:40:11 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 24
Sender: bb748@freenet.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4ioubb$hra@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <4inp0v$go4@Networking.Stanford.EDU> <4io00s$7sh@freenet-news.carleton.ca>  <4ioh2o$23q@elaine35.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet.carleton.ca

Rich Graves (rich@c2.org) writes:

>>> With all due respect to him, I think he is very mistaken.  The campaign
>>> against our group is UNPRECEDENTED.  I ask Mr. Lawrence to cite another
>>> group that has had so much opposition.

>>Oh, I think the us.* hierarchy probably has you beat.
 
> The aforementioned Mr. Lawrence cited soc.culture.kashmir and so on.

I watched the soc.culture.kashmir vote, and I didn't see any "Racist
newsgroup proposal alert" type mass mailings.  I didn't see any spams to
dozens of newsgroups and mailing lists. 

> I have *no idea* what the numbers will look like. I'm starting to think it
> might have won, not because of serious interest but because most of my
> friends voted YES out of an anti-censorship impulse, while folks who 
> had been urged to vote NO abstained because nobody likes spam. The only 
> thing I'm sure about is that I'll be surprised.

As will I.  I don't know how many supporters voted, but we're hoping for
at least 300 YES votes just from our people.  If not, I'll be disappointed
in my own side.  



From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Mon Apr  1 07:16:54 PST 1996
Article: 125350 of news.groups
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: National Public Radio covers rec.music.white-power vote
Date: 20 Mar 1996 18:40:11 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 42
Sender: bb748@freenet.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4ipjeb$qo2@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <4inp0v$go4@Networking.Stanford.EDU> <4io00s$7sh@freenet-news.carleton.ca> 
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet.carleton.ca

Modemac (modemac@netcom.com) writes:

> : With all due respect to him, I think he is very mistaken.  The campaign
> : against our group is UNPRECEDENTED.  I ask Mr. Lawrence to cite another
> : group that has had so much opposition.
 
> How many times do we have to tell you this, Kleim?
 
> The opposition agaionst your proposal comes from the fact that you have
> adamantly refused to provide us with ANY proof that a "need"  exists for
> your group. 

You, sir, are a fool.  Or a fucking liar.

I believe the latter is most likely the case.  You know damn well that
most of the opposition has NOTHING, repeat NOTHING to do with the alleged
lack of need or namespace arguments: it has ALL to do with "anti-racism." 
YOU may have voted against it on the grounds of YOUR opinion that it is
unnecessary or is wrongly named, but MOST people voted against it based
upon the topic of the proposed group.  Your's may not have been, but
their's was a matter of censorship.  

Want proof?  I have it.  Several "anti-racist" morons accidentally thought
I was the OPPONENT of the group, and asked me how to vote against it.  They
made clear their reasons for voting NO, which had NOTHING to do with
lack of need or namespace.

> You have failed to show that there is a groundswell of support for this 
> newsgroup.

We shall see when Mr. Handler posts the results.

> You have refused to answer innumerable requests for PROOF to back your 
> claims that this newsgroup is "needed."

No amount of "proof" would be good enough for you.

> That's why I voted NO for your proposal, and that's why I opposed it.

That may be true for you, but MOST people voted against "racism."  They
don't even understand your arguments, let alone share them. 



From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Mon Apr  1 07:16:55 PST 1996
Article: 125449 of news.groups
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: National Public Radio covers rec.music.white-power vote
Date: 21 Mar 1996 04:18:28 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 22
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4iqlak$98u@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <4inp0v$go4@Networking.Stanford.EDU> <4io00s$7sh@freenet-news.carleton.ca>  <4ipjeb$qo2@freenet-news.carleton.ca> 
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca

Stephanie Smith replies to me:

>> Want proof?  I have it.  Several "anti-racist" morons accidentally
>> thought I was the OPPONENT of the group, and asked me how to vote 
>> against it.  They made clear their reasons for voting NO, which 
>> had NOTHING to do with lack of need or namespace.
 
> Several anti-racists voting for political reasons = proof that most people
> voted no for political reasons? When, presumably, hundreds of people
> voted?

No, doofus, I have proof that there was a concerted effort to generate no
votes from people who had no idea what the newsgroup creation process is
about.

These were list moderators, asking me if they should send out instructions
to vote no to their lists.  They are a sampling of the type of opposition
we had.  Further, Aryan Corps Counterintelligence reports that several
infiltrated "multicultural" and leftist mailing lists also had NO vote
instructions posted.  I'd guess that 85% of the people who voted no did so
exclusively on political grounds. 



From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Mon Apr  1 07:16:56 PST 1996
Article: 125632 of news.groups
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!hookup!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.internet.media-coverage,alt.culture.internet,alt.culture.usenet,alt.censorship,alt.skinheads,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: rec.music.white-power editorial in _USA Today_
Date: 22 Mar 1996 02:35:15 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 55
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4it3l3$4lu@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca news.groups:125632 alt.internet.media-coverage:14578 alt.culture.internet:16036 alt.culture.usenet:20733 alt.censorship:74370 alt.skinheads:15752 alt.politics.nationalism.white:15936 alt.politics.white-power:22598


_USA Today_ editorial, March 21, 1996

"RACISM ON THE NET"
  
Even in the wildest reaches of the Internet, where anything goes and most
things have gone at least twice, the flow of free speech is sometimes at
risk. 
   
Take this ugly little battle: On one side, a band of racists wants a
formal place on the Net to discuss "white power" music. On the other, a
cadre of Internet users believes white power deserves no such setting. 
   
At risk is the wondrous anarchy of the Internet's newsgroups. These exist
by the thousands in an Internet subset called Usenet, where they are
divided in two. 
   
In the "alternative" category, newsgroups careen about essentially without
limits. In the other, qualified newsgroups are organized into eight
subject "hierarchies": politics, science, etc. Membership in these is
preferred because, for the most part, these hierarchies are carried by the
Internet's networks without question. 
   
In this case, a fan proposed that the "recreation" hierarchy, which
includes music sections, add a white-power newsgroup. This would put the
music - and its central tenets - smack in the middle of the Net. 
   
Then the fight commenced. Although the Usenet contains no real structure,
it is self-regulating. Newsgroups proposed for a hierarchy are subject to
a discussion period and then balloting by interested Netizens. 
   
In this case, opponents argued that white-power advocates should hold
their discussions in one of the "alternative" newsgroups; that the
hierarchies constituted a special garden in the Net's "village green"; and
that white-power music deserved no bench there. 
   
To be sure, racism deserves neither respect nor credibility. But in this
case, exclusion may have unintended results. 
   
If offensive ideas by themselves are a basis for exclusion, then who else
should be locked out? Some would make the same argument against the
hip-hop and music-poetry newsgroups, where harsh and violent rap lyrics
may be discussed. 
   
Without their own newsgroup, the white-power devotees will only
contaminate other newsgroups with their static. Give them a lair to call
their own, and at least you know where not to tread. 
   
There are advantages to Usenet's ad hoc self-governance. It helps protect
the system from outsiders seeking to control its carbonated anarchy. But
if the system then turns against speech, the result is the same: Free
exchange of ideas is constricted. Even in the ether - especially in the
ether - that's something to beware. 




From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Mon Apr  1 07:16:56 PST 1996
Article: 126647 of news.groups
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!kryten.awinc.com!laslo.netnet.net!news.sprintlink.net!terra.net!news.bitstream.com!tristram.edc.org!news3.near.net!paperboy.wellfleet.com!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.mathworks.com!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: talk.politics.socialism.national
Date: 27 Mar 1996 02:52:33 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 11
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4jaahh$8ba@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <827874144.132@uunet.uu.net> <4j9sem$3cc@knot.queensu.ca>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca

Andy (3arb@qlink.queensu.ca) writes:

> I think the title talk.politics.socialism.national is confusing as one 
> can debate how socialistic the national socialists were. How about 
> talk.politics.nazi or talk.politics.fascism instead?

Only if you support changing the largest of the Marxist-oriented groups to
talk.politics.commie.

National Socialism is the proper name for the philosophy and the newsgroup.



From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Mon Apr  1 07:16:57 PST 1996
Article: 126901 of news.groups
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!xmission!news.netimages.com!news.cais.net!news1.erols.com!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: talk.politics.socialism.national
Date: 28 Mar 1996 01:50:10 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 15
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4jcr8i$4r0@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <827874144.132@uunet.uu.net>  <4jc8q5$1hl@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca

Rich Graves (rich@c2.org) writes:

> Of course, it would be best if an actual national socialist would chime 
> in and give his or her opinion. Milton? Les? Whitewolf? I know you're 
> reading this. Milton has voiced his support for the group in general 
> terms, but I think he should help shape the namespace issue.

I would prefer talk.politics.national-socialism.  talk.politics.socialism.
national will do.

The fact we have to remember is that the so-called "anti-racist" opponents
of National Socialism will oppose any proposal for such a group, using
whatever phony arguments or other means they have available.  As they are
in whining about National Socialism not being a "real" form of socialism. 



From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Mon Apr  1 09:05:58 PST 1996
Article: 74370 of alt.censorship
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!hookup!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.internet.media-coverage,alt.culture.internet,alt.culture.usenet,alt.censorship,alt.skinheads,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power
Subject: rec.music.white-power editorial in _USA Today_
Date: 22 Mar 1996 02:35:15 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 55
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4it3l3$4lu@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca news.groups:125632 alt.internet.media-coverage:14578 alt.culture.internet:16036 alt.culture.usenet:20733 alt.censorship:74370 alt.skinheads:15752 alt.politics.nationalism.white:15936 alt.politics.white-power:22598


_USA Today_ editorial, March 21, 1996

"RACISM ON THE NET"
  
Even in the wildest reaches of the Internet, where anything goes and most
things have gone at least twice, the flow of free speech is sometimes at
risk. 
   
Take this ugly little battle: On one side, a band of racists wants a
formal place on the Net to discuss "white power" music. On the other, a
cadre of Internet users believes white power deserves no such setting. 
   
At risk is the wondrous anarchy of the Internet's newsgroups. These exist
by the thousands in an Internet subset called Usenet, where they are
divided in two. 
   
In the "alternative" category, newsgroups careen about essentially without
limits. In the other, qualified newsgroups are organized into eight
subject "hierarchies": politics, science, etc. Membership in these is
preferred because, for the most part, these hierarchies are carried by the
Internet's networks without question. 
   
In this case, a fan proposed that the "recreation" hierarchy, which
includes music sections, add a white-power newsgroup. This would put the
music - and its central tenets - smack in the middle of the Net. 
   
Then the fight commenced. Although the Usenet contains no real structure,
it is self-regulating. Newsgroups proposed for a hierarchy are subject to
a discussion period and then balloting by interested Netizens. 
   
In this case, opponents argued that white-power advocates should hold
their discussions in one of the "alternative" newsgroups; that the
hierarchies constituted a special garden in the Net's "village green"; and
that white-power music deserved no bench there. 
   
To be sure, racism deserves neither respect nor credibility. But in this
case, exclusion may have unintended results. 
   
If offensive ideas by themselves are a basis for exclusion, then who else
should be locked out? Some would make the same argument against the
hip-hop and music-poetry newsgroups, where harsh and violent rap lyrics
may be discussed. 
   
Without their own newsgroup, the white-power devotees will only
contaminate other newsgroups with their static. Give them a lair to call
their own, and at least you know where not to tread. 
   
There are advantages to Usenet's ad hoc self-governance. It helps protect
the system from outsiders seeking to control its carbonated anarchy. But
if the system then turns against speech, the result is the same: Free
exchange of ideas is constricted. Even in the ether - especially in the
ether - that's something to beware. 




From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Mon Apr  1 15:11:14 PST 1996
Article: 14874 of misc.activism.militia
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Approved: militia-request@atype.com (11c2a25406f3a70132882b7dca47e311)
References: <827945311$21296@atype.com>
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Return-Path: 
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!news.webdirect.ca!newsfeed.direct.ca!xmission!news.uoregon.edu!news.u.washington.edu!uw-beaver!uhog.mit.edu!grapevine.lcs.mit.edu!atype.com!militia-request
Newsgroups: misc.activism.militia
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 96 20:16:53 GMT
Message-ID: <828303413$5836@atype.com>
Subject: Re: How Dare You Support the Freemen?
Lines: 40


Mark T Pitcavage (mpitcava@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu) writes:

> I'm disappointed but not surprised that members of this newsgroup would offer 
> support to the Montana Freemen, who are nothing but a bunch of criminals and 
> terrorists.  

So the Jewish-controlled media tell us.

> Using counterfeit money orders and other means, they instituted a 
> network of fraud and duplicity that bilked countless average, ordinary citizens
> out of hard-earned money, costing them in many cases their cars, houses, or 
> bank accounts.

So we are told by the Jewish-controlled media.  And even if it's true...

Like Congress, like citizens? 

I don't hear anyone "in the 'mainstream'" whining about the SAME
activities of the Washington Criminals. 

> But they did not stop there.  They also used terror as a weapon, issuing death 
> threats and attempting in at least one case to carry them out.  They had no 
> compunction about threatening the lives of children or other innocents.

Yes, I agree that Clinton, Reno, and their fellow criminals should stop
this type of behavior...

> They had no redeeming features, no "patriotism," no admirable qualities at all.
>  They were scum, they are scum, and they deserve to be caught, prosecuted, 
> convicted, and thrown in jail for a long, long time.

So the Jewish-controlled media and the Washington Criminals insist we believe.

> Anybody who supports them is supporting larceny and terror.

Then perhaps you should consider renouncing your allegiance to the Federal
government. 




From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Tue Apr  2 00:57:03 PST 1996
Article: 128089 of news.groups
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: talk.politics.natl-socialism
Date: 1 Apr 1996 23:11:22 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 17
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4jpnqq$c7q@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <827874144.132@uunet.uu.net>  <4jp5cf$ofe@fcnews.fc.hp.com> <4jpaji$mo5@Networking.Stanford.EDU> <4jpijl$sfn@elaine20.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca


James Alexander Chokey (jchokey@leland.Stanford.EDU) writes:

> 	While I think that the new name for the proposed group,
> (i.e. t.p.natl-socialism) is certainly better than the previous
> one, since it does not seek to classify this political phenomenon
> as a subgenre of socialism, may I suggest another name that may
> even be more clear?  How about talk.politics.white-power?  There'd
> certainly be little chance of mistaking what the group was about,
> it eliminates the inelegant abbreviation, *and* it uses the moniker for 
> the movement that the proponents of this "philosophy" used when they 
> proposed their rec.music.* group-- so they should have no objections to 
> the name.  

One problem.  National Socialism is indeed "White Power," but all White
nationalist philosophies/ideologies are not National Socialist. 



From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Tue Apr  2 14:21:22 PST 1996
Article: 15004 of misc.activism.militia
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Approved: militia-request@atype.com (7ce382e871607353a944b9d38d0aa700)
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Return-Path: 
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!uwm.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!uhog.mit.edu!grapevine.lcs.mit.edu!atype.com!militia-request
Newsgroups: misc.activism.militia
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 96 14:49:33 GMT
Message-ID: <828370173$7629@atype.com>
Subject: Revolutionary Majorities
Lines: 424


Revolutionary Majorities
   
An Essay by L. R. Beam 

   
   If citizens of this country ever again enjoy the blessings of liberty
   and true freedom, it will not be the result of a majority of its
   citizens having risen up in righteous indignation at govenmental abuse
   of themselves and their culture. If a restoration of the Constitution
   of our forebearers occurs - with all that this implies - it will
   probably not be because a plurality of citizens fought for it,
   supported it, or cared one way or another. If lawful government is
   reestablished it will come about because a revolutionary majority
   makes it happen.
   
   Within the American historical experience a revolutionary majority may
   be defined as any number of citizens sufficient to initiate general
   hostilities against a destructive government.
   
   The American Revolution of 1776 defines the term, sets the precedent
   and provides the example for patriots of today.
   
   Throughout most of the Revolutionary War, those patriots who were
   seeking to overthrow the government lacked support of over two-thirds
   of their fellow citizens. John Adams, one of the "radicals" in favor
   of the Revolution and who was later to become the second President of
   the United States, stated that depending on how the war was going,
   those fighting for freedom had the opposition of from a third to two
   thirds of the people. Others like Pennsylvania delegate to the
   Continental Congress Joseph Galloway was sure that four-fifths of the
   people "were or wanted to be, loyal to the King." (Galloway eventually
   sided with the Loyalists, as those who supported the King's government
   were called.) Colonel London Carter, a member of the Virginia
   aristocracy and a strong patriot, stated in his diary in March of 1776
   (but a bare three months before the signing of the Declaration of
   Independence) that an observer of events in the Northern colonies was
   sure "nine-tenths of the people are violently against it"
   (independence).
   
   The exact number of "the friends of government", as the patriots
   disparingly refered to those who opposed the Revolution, cannot be
   stated with accuracy. As John Adams indicated, the number was in a
   constant state of flux, depending on political events and who was
   winning in the armed conflict. One thing is certain, however; the
   American Revolution was anything but a broad-based popular uprising of
   a disaffected people. Rather, it was a very unpopular rebellion of a
   politically radical minority who, because they posessed a clear
   understanding of the rights of man coupled with a deep concern for the
   state of relative personal freedom, were able to perceive the shackles
   of tyranny prior to their being presented for fastening. This
   discernment of tyranny at a distance not only set them apart from
   their fellow man but constrained them to rebel.
   
   The radical political leaders of the Revolution such as John Adams,
   Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson,
   George Washington, Richard Henry Lee, John Hancock, and Joseph Warren,
   to name but a few of the more well known, had to conduct their
   struggle for freedom in the face of disapprobation and rejection by
   their peers before the time of actual armed conflict, and after its
   commencement to charges and cries of "incendiaries and traitors."
   Indeed "the friends of government" knew little restraint when it came
   to condemning the Republic's Founders. The Loyalists called
   Washington, among other things; a liar, perjurer, murderer,
   blasphemer, criminal, traitor, patron of villainy, and a villain's
   chief. The other Founders faired little better and were variously
   refered to as being dregs, illiberal (sic!) and violent men,
   dispicable wretches, bandits, rude, and depraved. While thus labeled
   by "respectable citizens," these men led the country toward rebellion.
   
   
   Correspondingly, the Founders had an analogous movement among the
   common people which, although the objective of overthrowing the
   government was the same, the methods were those resorted to by people
   in every age when faced with overpowering force of all-powerful
   government, namely, mob action, riots, uprisings, midnight forays, and
   harassment, intimidation, or terroristic acts directed against
   governmental supporters. All of these and other acts came under the
   single heading of patriotism so far as their perpetrators were
   concerned.
   
   After a review of non-battlefield hostilities, it becomes apparent
   that the American Revolution was won more by mob action than by armed
   conflict! Thus, any idea that the Revolution was won in an ordeal of
   battle is out of place in view of the facts.
   
   During the entire length of the armed conflict from 1775 to 1781, the
   King's armies lost only 1,512 men killed in battle; this seven-year,
   battle-death casuality rate was exceeded by Union forces at Cold
   Harbor in 1864 during the first eight minutes of a single engagement.
   The King's armies had previously lost far larger numbers of men in the
   Seven Years War (French and Indian Wars) yet pressed on to victory. An
   adequate explanation then of the patriots' final triumph over the
   government must be provided by other than a military victory.
   
   An answer, in great part, lies in the violence and vigilante action
   carried on by the patriots against the government and its supporters!
   Though most Americans today are familiar with the Boston Tea Party,
   few know much about the secret organization that conducted it, the
   Sons of Liberty. Led by Samuel Adams, John Hancock, Dr. Warren ("the
   greatest incendiary of them all"), and Paul Revere, they met in
   secret, dressed in disguises, and carried out vigilante actions under
   the cover of darkness. This revolutionary Ku Klux Klan was as much
   dreaded by "the friends of government" as its ideological offspring,
   the Klan, ever was by unruly Blacks. The Sons of Liberty and other
   similar groups were responsible, during the course of the conflict for
   independence, for causing tens of thousands of Loyalist to flee the
   country (the Klan was usually satisfied with merely running
   undesirables out of the county).
   
   The means were simple and effective. Terror and intimidation were
   directed against the Loyalists. Methods used to create these twin
   scourges of "the friends of government" included, but were not limited
   to, whippings, coats of tar and feathers, banishment, church burnings
   (if run by a Loyalist preacher or used for a Loyalist meeting place),
   confiscation of property, and whereever deemed necessary - death of
   any one of several reliable methods.
   
   Other patriotic groups of a sy formed throughout the thirteen colonies
   to carry on a relentless persecution of "the friends of government."
   Each organization operated independently of the other though often
   exchanged information on Loyalists.
   
   Often these ad hoc associations went by the name of "Committees of
   Public Safety," though the name as well as the tactics employed varied
   from place to place. Thus in the colony of New York, the patriots
   bluntly called themselves "the oppressors of the friends of
   government" and stated proudly that they tarred and feathered
   governmental supporters with the "decorum that ought to be preserved
   in public punishments." Boston had its mysterious "Joyce Junior" who
   led a group of Knight Riders and enforcers who saw to it that those
   who did not display the necessary revolutionary mentality were
   properly punished. The rebel Continental Congress established
   "associations," whose purpose was to locate the Loyalists and turn
   their names over to the local vigilante to be dealt within the manner
   they deemed proper. In every colony, if the accusation was one of
   giving information to government agents, the traitor to liberty was
   hanged by the neck or dealt with in some other terminally appropriate
   manner.
   
   Even religious leaders were not exempt from the patriotic purges that
   cleansed away supporters of the king. Preachers who failed to support
   the cause of liberty (or who had forgotten that David slew Goliath
   rather than turning the other cheek) were run out of town on a rail in
   the glowing light of the flames from their quickly disappearing
   church. This was considered leniency, others were forced to flee to
   England or Canada in fear of their lives.
   
   By the end of the conflict in 1781, for every government Red-Coat
   killed on the battlefield, seventy Loyalists had been driven from
   their homes and forced to settle in England or Canada, totaling over
   one hundred thousand people.
   
   The government and its "friends" accused the revolutionary freedom
   fighters (whom they often called "the Sons of Anarchy") of "committing
   the most shocking outrages" and of "daily invasions upon private
   property" while led by men who were "well known incendiaries and
   traitors," whose chief purpose in life was to commit "crimes against
   the Constitutional authority of the State" (historically, government's
   which have oppressed and abused their citizens justify their actions
   based on the "law" or "Constitutional authority").
   
   No doubt, had the effort to overthrow the government been
   unsuccessful, the Founding Fathers and their citizen supporters would
   have been hanged by "the friends of government," as the very worst
   sort of traitors and terrorists.
   
   In summary of the American Revolution, while Washington's determined
   and skillful leadership of the army, no doubt made victory possible,
   it did not assure it. The Spirit of '76 - a massive campaign of terror
   directed by patriotic citizens against all those who supported the
   goverment was the deciding factor that brought freedom to America.
   
   American Constitutional liberty was born in mob pressure, fostered by
   secret societies, nurtured during seven years of intimidating
   violence, and institutionalized at the expense of well over a hundred
   thousand people. With this American history in mind, one who is
   faithful to the ideas of the Founding Fathers of this nation can have
   nothing but contempt and suspicion of the motives (or ignorance) of
   those people both within and without the government who would condemn
   citizens of today "for taking the law into their own hands" in defense
   of their rights.
   
   Had those who desired liberty in 1776 waited until a numerical
   majority of their fellow citizens were ready to "wake-up" (as the
   saying is today) to fight for the overthrow of the government, or had
   they hesitated in the use of "illegal" force and violence (force and
   violence are never legal except when used by those in power) against
   their governmintal enemies, they would have all died in their old age
   as law-abiding subjects of the King - minus their freedom.
   
   Patriots of 1775 considered the sympathies of less than a third of the
   people sufficient to begin general hostilities against their
   oppressors. Herein lies the historical context of the American
   revolutionary majority. It has been wisely said that those who do not
   know and understand history can repeat its successes.
   
   In America today, the manacles of slavery and destruction once forged
   in London by the King are now forged in Washington. Acts of tyranny
   are carried out in the name of the federal government rather than in
   the name of the Throne. The vicious enforcers of dictatorial policies
   often call themselves F.B.I. or I.R.S. agents instead of his Royal
   Majesty's troops or tax collectors of the Realm. Substituting for the
   Redcoats of the British are the "bluecoats" of the bureaucrats and in
   far greater numbers. Though babblings for "the divine rights" of kings
   to rule have ceased, modern fools prattle of "democratic majorities"
   composed of an illiterate electorate enfranchised for the purpose of
   dispossessing the descendents of the Founders. While different in
   nomenclature the end results are exactly the same - the dark, cold,
   tight chains of slavery.
   
   A numerical majority of today's citizens cannot read these footprints
   of tyranny nor understand where they lead. In this they are no
   different than their counterparts of 200 years ago. Modern governments
   have mass communications to subtly guide the thinking of their
   subjects; thus is seen the phenomenon of today's citizen rushing forth
   to place the cuffs of bondage upon his own wrist by irrationally
   clamoring (as he has been indoctrinated) for more laws and government
   to solve problems created by an excess of both. This mental inversion,
   whereby the citizen willfully aids in efforts to subjugate himself, is
   of no small import for those who treasure their liberty. The
   implications are many, but the consequences could be singular: a
   governmentally programed democratic majority may, as they dance along
   to mental tunes played by an electronic band of orchestrated
   communication, gleefully drag down (with their self-fastened chains)
   everyone else in the black hole of oblivion.
   
   Only one thing seems capable of closing the yawning mouth of the pit
   and that is the formation of a new revolutionary majority coupled with
   resurrection of the Spirit of '76. Anything short of this seems
   certain to pass on to today's children an increasingly difficult task
   of freeing themselves from transistorized chains of governmental
   control. Such a legacy is the bequeathal of cowards, not free men.
   
   The first American Revolutionists accused those who ruled them of
   excessive taxation, interference with property rights, illegal search
   and seizure, not protecting the citizens from incursions by several
   thousand Indians, policies destructive of the general welfare, and
   "altering fundamentally the form of our government," among other
   things.
   
   Today the federal government taxes its subjects for forty percent of
   their income, instead of the three percent (less than a dollar twenty
   a year) tax of the King; interferes with the ownership and use of
   virtually every description of property; authorizes everything from
   game wardens to I.R.S. agents to search, arrest, or seize property
   without a warrant. It allows fifteen million aliens to illegally cross
   its borders in less than a ten-year period; and conducts a policy of
   systematic extermination of its young men through no-win wars, and
   subjects the Founders' children to enforced equality. Each of the
   acts, individually amounts to altering fundamentally the form and
   purpose for which the federal government was created. Taken as a
   whole, they are a cry for - nay - a demand for, a new campaign of
   terror conducted against the government and its friends in the great
   American tradition of 1776.
   
   An examination of the depth and magnitude of policies fostered by
   federal rulers detrimental to the people of present day America make
   the abuses of the English King's government pale into insignificance.
   One thing is clear; comparison of the criminal acts of the two
   governments makes those who value their liberty and freedom long for
   the bitter days of English despotism.
   
   While there are many similarities between the first American
   Revolution and the second (coming soon at a place near you), there are
   also significant differences.
   
   The first and paramount dissimilarity is that while our heroic
   Forefathers fought to overthrow their legally constituted government
   and were thus revolutionaries in the truest sense of the word, those
   who seek to break the quickly tightening bands of servitude today war
   against an illegal government that imposes itself upon the people
   under the color of the law. By the Washington regime's disobedience to
   and violation of the bonds of the Constitution, established by the
   Founders of this country, it has made of itself an unlawful body with
   no more right to govern the American people than has the present Queen
   of England. That the government survives despite the crimes it has
   committed is explainable only because the atrocities it systematically
   imposes are papered over with a veneer of legality. Propaganda that
   numbs the mind keeps people from rising against those who abuse them.
   
   There is no law in this country - other than power, which currently
   rests with the Pirates of the Potomac, who pose as our lawful
   government while using over powering force to quell those who resist
   their destructive policies. The Constitutional Revolutionist of today
   is actually fighting for a transfer of power from those who can make
   no legitimate claim to power, to those who inherently hold it as a
   natural right - the lawful citizens of this country.
   
   Another salient difference between the first American Revolution and
   the second is the contrast between the quality of the people of then
   and now. Our ancestors were strong men, who stated often that they
   were resolved "to die as free men rather than live as slaves." They
   were conditioned to doing their own thinking while at the same time
   ever holding before themselves the guiding lights of honor and duty.
   
   Today, raised in the lap of luxury, many people gladly exchange their
   freedom for the right to accumulate material possessions. Not one
   person in fifty can truthfully state that his opinions are the result
   of independent research rather than the mindless acquisition of
   pre-programmed "opinions" obtained by indulging in endless hours of
   obeisant T.V. watching (that modern day golden calf of those lost in
   the mental wilderness). Further, most Americans do not know the
   meanings nor values of honor and duty, the two great concepts of
   higher man.
   
   It is quite clear that the virtue of the present generation has
   declined to such a miserable degree that most people will never
   voluntarily help to make themselves free. Consequently they will have
   to be made to make themselves free.
   
   A great objective of revolutionary majorities is that of thrusting
   freedom upon those who are too weak to make themselves free while
   providing its blessings for the stronger, more noble elements of the
   race. This is done in the firm belief that under sound government,
   future generations will be naturally healthy in mind and spirit. The
   revolutionary patriot benignantly grants freedon to others while
   establishing framework that will allow posterity to be both free and
   strong. Other than the "great commission" of the Lord, no calling is
   as exalted or as honorable. These two significant differences - one of
   law, one of character - between the first struggle for freedom and the
   present one is deserving of substantial thought and analysis by those
   capable of so doing. Consider what type of self-preserving behavior
   can be expected from a government that already wades to its knees in
   the blood of young men deliberately sacrificed to the false god of
   Internationalism. Were the government really intent on opposing
   Communism, it would start a war in Washington and work its way to
   Vietnam. What behaviour can be expected from a people who willingly
   pass their sons through the fire to be consumed? Each of these
   concepts deserve most careful examination.
   
   Opposing the federal purveyors of mass murder and the "the friends of
   government" who make such perfidy possible are men who trace their
   political lineage to times of Magna Carta, and who are mental as well
   as physical descendents of the Founding Fathers. They believe, as did
   their forebearers, that government is a social contract entered into
   by people of a similar mind for their mutual benefit. This agency
   created by the people can only, legitimately, be their servant - never
   their master. Further, it cannot possess lawful authority to deprive
   those who create it (or their heirs) of natural rights. In normal
   times men who arrayed themselves against the criminal acts of
   government would be called Constitutionalists, but "these are the
   times that try mens souls" as well as test their courage. Thus
   contemporary patriots become known as Constitutional Revolutionists
   determined to overthrow every vestige of unlawful government doing so
   with a firm belief that honor demands and duty requires the
   reestablishment of the law of their fathers.
   
   It can be realized then, that those who remain guilty of loyalty to
   the present illegal government in the District of Columbia are
   chargeable with treason to the Constitution of the United States and
   deserving the same fate of their historical predecessors who, in the
   name of the King, trampled upon sacred rights of Englishmen in 1776.
   
   It should be stated in their defense, however, that most of those who
   are participants in this odious transgression against the good of our
   noble forebearers do so in complete ignorance of the law. Having
   obtained ninety-five percent of their misinformation from government
   licensed T.V. and the remaining five percent from conversations with
   others who are also completely maladroit at obtaining facts on their
   own, they are victims of methodical thought control which began during
   their childhood and has been continued at a subliminal level
   throughout their lives.
   
   Though no doubt the maxim "ignorance of the law is no excuse for its
   violation" makes these people criminals, the mitigating circumstances
   of their lawlessness should be considered by those who are seeking to
   reestablish lawful rule in this country.
   
   A period of grace, commensurable with what the struggle will allow, is
   in order, thus providing the present supporters of unlawful government
   an opportunity to defect as they became cognizant of the law.
   
   By this fraternal act to the erring members of our race we serve not
   only the interest of justice but, at whatever point in time the grace
   period is of necessity terminiated, all excuse for collaboration with
   the enemy will have been removed. Having held long aloft the olive
   branch of peace and forgiveness, no just complaint can be made by
   those who failed to avail themselves of it, when with the other hand,
   the terrible swift sword of vindication falls upon their necks.
   
   Even after the patriots of today have invoked "the Sprit of '76," and
   have successfully dammed the Mississippi with rotting corpses of the
   lying politicians, criminal bureaucrats, racial tratiors, communists,
   assorted degenerates, cultural distorters, and those who resist the
   implementation of lawful Constitutional government, these patriots
   will have exhibited far more restraint and benevolence than the
   present government of the United States. For while Constitutionalists
   of today war against those guilty of the most heinous crimes upon our
   people, usurpers in Washington destroy in mind and wherever possible
   the bodies of those guilty of nothing more than having white skin.
   
   Coalescing within America today is a second revolutionary majority
   whose members in the spirit of their forebearers are resolved to die
   as free men rather than to live as slaves. Like their noble ancestors,
   today's revolutionary majority must fight for the children of carping
   critics just as fiercely as for their own families. Emulating its
   predecessor, obedience is given only to the dictates of the code of
   natural law. For once again the enemies of liberty use the law of the
   nation as their shield - yea - even their justification for destroying
   freedom of the people. A government exceeding the power granted by
   their fathers - they are not bound to obey but bound to resist.
   
   John Adams said, that "freedon is a counter balance for poverty,
   discord, and war," and that if the revolutionary struggle failed, it
   would be because moderates tried to find a "middle ground" and to
   conduct "half a war," for freedom. Likewise, today's tired voices are
   heard calling for politics as usual - moderation as always. Such
   thinking has allowed generations to die in chains in former times and
   will so again if adhered to.
   
   The age of the conservative like that of the dinosaur, has ended. Now
   begins a new age, destiny calls for her great men who by their iron
   will alter the pages of history from that of a tale of shame,
   cowardice, and decline, to a saga of glory, bravery, and rebirth.
   Soon, very soon, we will have a revolutionary majority...
   
   
--

http://www.natall.com





From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Tue Apr  2 14:21:23 PST 1996
Article: 15020 of misc.activism.militia
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Approved: militia-request@atype.com (36eebf2b234aa325c10ae8a55669a027)
References: <828330273$6538@atype.com> <828386357$10351@atype.com> <828390828$11590@atype.com>
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Return-Path: 
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!xmission!news.uoregon.edu!news.u.washington.edu!uw-beaver!uhog.mit.edu!grapevine.lcs.mit.edu!atype.com!militia-request
Newsgroups: misc.activism.militia
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 96 1:33:06 GMT
Message-ID: <828408786$13781@atype.com>
Subject: Re: Torchman On Gun Control
Lines: 10


Mark T Pitcavage (mpitcava@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu) writes:

> The "Militia of Montana" is a paramilitary organization with no legality, 
> legitimacy or authority whatsoever.  

Tell us, dear Mark, what gives the Federal Government either legality,
legitimacy, or authority?

Hint: they have more guns than we do.


From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Sun Apr  7 11:09:00 PDT 1996
Article: 30080 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads
Subject: Good doggie!  Fetch some more anti-Semitic posts...
Date: 7 Apr 1996 04:11:19 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 19
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4k7f97$cd4@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:16767 alt.politics.white-power:24414 alt.revisionism:30080 alt.skinheads:17445

In a smoke-filled room, somewhere on Vancouver Island...

Ken Mcvay:  "Damn that Kleim!  He's making me look like an asshole.  What 
            are you guys gonna do?"

Rabbi Steinbaum:  "Oy vey, Mcvay!  Vot are YOU goink to do?  Vot do you think
                  vee are payink you for?  Do you vont to go back to selling
                  schokolat bars at the gas station?"

Abe Cohn:  "Damned be Jesus!!  You hired a _gas station attendant_?  This is
           a waste of time.  I'm going back to New Yuk!"

Ken Mcvay:  "I'm sorry, I'm sorry.  I just need more time."

Rabbi Steinbaum:  "Time!  Time!  I lost over one hundert family in the 
                  showers of Dachau!  You vont 'time'.  Vee have no 'time'."

David Weiss:  "What can we expect from a goyish putz?"



From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Wed Apr 10 14:11:27 PDT 1996
Article: 30477 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!news.umbc.edu!haven.umd.edu!cs.umd.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!admaix.sunydutchess.edu!ub!news.drenet.dnd.ca!crc-news.doc.ca!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads
Subject: Re: Good doggie!  Fetch some more anti-Semitic posts...
Date: 10 Apr 1996 11:31:35 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 8
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4kg66n$rks@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <4k7f97$cd4@freenet-news.carleton.ca> <4kfbji$2roc@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:24862 alt.politics.nationalism.white:17018 alt.revisionism:30477 alt.skinheads:17834

Gord McFee (gmcfee@ibm.net) writes:

> (OK Miltie--you asked for it.)

Ahh!  But there's a big difference, Gordo.

MINE is closer to the truth; yours is just delusionary.



From bn857@freenet.toronto.on.ca Wed Apr 10 14:53:17 PDT 1996
Article: 30251 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!uunet.ca!news.uunet.ca!gts!lethe!abyss!news2.compulink.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads
From: bn857@freenet.toronto.on.ca (Milton Kleim)
Subject: Milton Kleim: Professional Idiot and coward
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7
Organization: Toronto Free-Net Inc., Toronto, Ontario Canada
X-Client-Port: 1231
Message-ID: 
References: 
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: grimnet31.idirect.com
Date: 8 Apr 96 13:41:29 GMT
Lines: 9
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.nationalism.white:16866 alt.politics.white-power:24624 alt.revisionism:30251 alt.skinheads:17636

In article , bn857@freenet.toronto.on.ca 
says...
>
>
>Need anything more be said?
>-- 

Need anything more be said?



From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Fri Apr 12 16:49:58 PDT 1996
Article: 25086 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!news.tcst.com!news.spectrum.titan.com!news.titan.com!news.cerf.net!newsserver.sdsc.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!caen!spool.mu.edu!news.sol.net!uniserve!news1.ottawa.istar.net!fonorola!news.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!csn!news-1.csn.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: I AM STILL ASHAMED TO BE WHITE !!!, and I will report you!
Date: 6 Apr 1996 04:46:27 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 31
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4k4sv3$5t1@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <4jvhlb$4j5@guava.epix.net> <4k3f0a$skn@guava.epix.net>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca


 (jackl@aol.com) writes:

> This must be illegal!  

Sure...in Israel.

But you're in the United States.  There's this thing called the First
Amendment...

> It is my intention to continue to disrupt these
> racist activities until such time as AOL pulls this chat line off the
> internet.  

Surprise, surprise!  America Offline doesn't control the Internet.

> There is no need to continue to breed hatered.  These poor
> souls have been oppressed by white society for far to long.  Don't you
> think it's time we made some effort at restatution and allow these
> people the chance to raise themselves to a level at which they could
> have some control of government thus having some control over thier
> own lives?  

Please let me suggest you show solidarity with the "downtrodden,
oppressed" colored hordes, and abandon your White-created car, turn off
your White-created television set, and what the heck, trash your computer,
too, since technology it uses was created by EVIL (!!!) "Dead White males"
like (gasp!) the racist William Shockley.


 "We must secure the existence of our People and a future for White children."


From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Sun Apr 14 14:05:55 PDT 1996
Article: 129457 of news.groups
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!gatech!hookup!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Milton Kleim's campaign against soc.politics.marxism
Date: 13 Apr 1996 20:25:22 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 20
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4kp2ji$50a@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <828991360.9029@uunet.uu.net> <4kgmg6$cv3@doffen.uninett.no>  <4koadg$5pe@shore.shore.net>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca

EskWIRED (eskwired@shore.net) writes:

> Last night, for the first time, I read some of Mr. Kleim's writings on 
> the WWW.  I was shocked.  I have heard about such racist views, but 
> seeing them firsthand was an eye opener.

My condolences.  Please let me bestow my apologies upon you, since facts
and realistic interpretation of today's socio-political phenomenon so
obviously upset you.

> My impression is that when dealing with someone who is so delusional, and 
> has such low self-esteem as to feel threatened by others in the manner that 
> he does, no amount of logic or facts will work to convince him of anything.
> His basic premise is that he is suffering at the hands of people who are 
> inferior to him.  This doesn't quite make sense.

Ah, yes!  The old "he's obviously insane" trick.  





From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Tue Apr 16 09:53:33 PDT 1996
Article: 17445 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!en.com!in-news.erinet.com!imci5!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: Ban This Newsgroup
Date: 14 Apr 1996 18:33:08 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 7
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4krgd4$ma@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <4kqmk8$jqv@preeda.internex.net.au>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:25608 alt.politics.nationalism.white:17445


Repo Man (bogon@drongo.net) writes:

> God told me that this newsgroups is evil.  It should be banned.

God commands you to learn good grammar.



From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Sat Apr 20 12:25:43 PDT 1996
Article: 13347 of alt.society.revolution
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!slider.bme.ri.ccf.org!kira.cc.uakron.edu!ns.mcs.kent.edu!news.ysu.edu!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!qns3.qns.com!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.unabomber,alt.society.anarchy,alt.society.revolution,misc.headlines,talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: The Unabomber Manifesto 5/14
Date: 20 Apr 1996 05:53:59 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 259
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4l9u5n$g39@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.society.anarchy:26482 alt.society.revolution:13347 misc.headlines:21906 talk.philosophy.misc:34303


   THE MOTIVES OF SCIENTISTS
   
   87. Science and technology provide the most important examples of
   surrogate activities. Some scientists claim that they are motivated by
   "curiosity" or by a desire to "benefit humanity." But it is easy to
   see that neither of these can be the principal motive of most
   scientists. As for "curiosity," that notion is simply absurd. Most
   scientists work on highly specialized problems that are not the object
   of any normal curiosity. For example, is an astronomer, a
   mathematician or an entomologist curious about the properties of
   isopropyltrimethylmethane? Of course not. Only a chemist is curious
   about such a thing, and he is curious about it only because chemistry
   is his surrogate activity. Is the chemist curious about the
   appropriate classification of a new species of beetle? No. That
   question is of interest only to the entomologist, and he is interested
   in it only because entomology is his surrogate activity. If the
   chemist and the entomologist had to exert themselves seriously to
   obtain the physical necessities, and if that effort exercised their
   abilities in an interesting way but in some nonscientific pursuit,
   then they wouldn't give a damn about isopropyltrimethylmethane or the
   classification of beetles. Suppose that lack of funds for postgraduate
   education had led the chemist to become an insurance broker instead of
   a chemist. In that case he would have been very interested in
   insurance matters but would have cared nothing about
   isopropyltrimethylmethane. In any case it is not normal to put into
   the satisfaction of mere curiosity the amount of time and effort that
   scientists put into their work. The "curiosity" explanation for the
   scientists' motive just doesn't stand up.
   
   88. The "benefit of humanity" explanation doesn't work any better.
   Some scientific work has no conceivable relation to the welfare of the
   human race-most of archaeology or comparative linguistics for example.
   Some other areas of science present obviously dangerous possibilities.
   Yet scientists in these areas are just as enthusiastic about their
   work as those who develop vaccines or study air pollution. Consider
   the case of Dr. Edward Teller, who had an obvious emotional
   involvement in promoting nuclear power plants. Did this involvement
   stem from a desire to benefit humanity? If so, then why didn't Dr.
   Teller get emotional about other "humanitarian" causes? If he was such
   a humanitarian then why did he help to develop the H-bomb? As with
   many other scientific achievements, it is very much open to question
   whether nuclear power plants actually do benefit humanity. Does the
   cheap electricity outweigh the accumulating waste and the risk of
   accidents? Dr. Teller saw only one side of the question. Clearly his
   emotional involvement with nuclear power arose not from a desire to
   "benefit humanity" but from a personal fulfillment he got from his
   work and from seeing it put to practical use.
   
   89. The same is true of scientists generally. With possible rare
   exceptions, their motive is neither curiosity nor a desire to benefit
   humanity but the need to go through the power process: to have a goal
   (a scientific problem to solve), to make an effort (research) and to
   attain the goal (solution of the problem.) Science is a surrogate
   activity because scientists work mainly for the fulfillment they get
   out of the work itself.
   
   90. Of course, it's not that simple. Other motives do play a role for
   many scientists. Money and status for example. Some scientists may be
   persons of the type who have an insatiable drive for status (see
   paragraph 79) and this may provide much of the motivation for their
   work. No doubt the majority of scientists, like the majority of the
   general population, are more or less susceptible to advertising and
   marketing techniques and need money to satisfy their craving for goods
   and services. Thus science is not a pure surrogate activity. But it is
   in large part a surrogate activity.
   
   91. Also, science and technology constitute a power mass movement, and
   many scientists gratify their need for power through identification
   with this mass movement (see paragraph 83).
   
   92. Thus science marches on blindly, without regard to the real
   welfare of the human race or to any other standard, obedient only to
   the psychological needs of the scientists and of the government
   officials and corporation executives who provide the funds for
   research.
   
   THE NATURE OF FREEDOM
   
   93. We are going to argue that industrial-technological society cannot
   be reformed in such a way as to prevent it from progressively
   narrowing the sphere of human freedom. But, because "freedom" is a
   word that can be interpreted in many ways, we must first make clear
   what kind of freedom we are concerned with.
   
   94. By "freedom" we mean the opportunity to go through the power
   process, with real goals not the artificial goals of surrogate
   activities, and without interference, manipulation or supervision from
   anyone, especially from any large organization. Freedom means being in
   control (either as an individual or as a member of a small group) of
   the life-and-death issues of one's existence; food, clothing, shelter
   and defense against whatever threats there may be in one's
   environment. Freedom means having power; not the power to control
   other people but the power to control the circumstances of one's own
   life. One does not have freedom if anyone else (especially a large
   organization) has power over one, no matter how benevolently,
   tolerantly and permissively that power may be exercised. It is
   important not to confuse freedom with mere permissiveness (see
   paragraph 72).
   
   95. It is said that we live in a free society because we have a
   certain number of constitutionally guaranteed rights. But these are
   not as important as they seem. The degree of personal freedom that
   exists in a society is determined more by the economic and
   technological structure of the society than by its laws or its form of
   government. [16] Most of the Indian nations of New England were
   monarchies, and many of the cities of the Italian Renaissance were
   controlled by dictators. But in reading about these societies one gets
   the impression that they allowed far more personal freedom than our
   society does. In part this was because they lacked efficient
   mechanisms for enforcing the ruler's will: There were no modern,
   well-organized police forces, no rapid long-distance communications,
   no surveillance cameras, no dossiers of information about the lives of
   average citizens. Hence it was relatively easy to evade control.
   
   96. As for our constitutional rights, consider for example that of
   freedom of the press. We certainly don't mean to knock that right; it
   is very important tool for limiting concentration of political power
   and for keeping those who do have political power in line by publicly
   exposing any misbehavior on their part. But freedom of the press is of
   very little use to the average citizen as an individual. The mass
   media are mostly under the control of large organizations that are
   integrated into the system. Anyone who has a little money can have
   something printed, or can distribute it on the Internet or in some
   such way, but what he has to say will be swamped by the vast volume of
   material put out by the media, hence it will have no practical effect.
   To make an impression on society with words is therefore almost
   impossible for most individuals and small groups. Take us (FC) for
   example. If we had never done anything violent and had submitted the
   present writings to a publisher, they probably would not have been
   accepted. If they had been been accepted and published, they probably
   would not have attracted many readers, because it's more fun to watch
   the entertainment put out by the media than to read a sober essay.
   Even if these writings had had many readers, most of these readers
   would soon have forgotten what they had read as their minds were
   flooded by the mass of material to which the media expose them. In
   order to get our message before the public with some chance of making
   a lasting impression, we've had to kill people.
   
   97. Constitutional rights are useful up to a point, but they do not
   serve to guarantee much more than what might be called the bourgeois
   conception of freedom. According to the bourgeois conception, a "free"
   man is essentially an element of a social machine and has only a
   certain set of prescribed and delimited freedoms; freedoms that are
   designed to serve the needs of the social machine more than those of
   the individual. Thus the bourgeois's "free" man has economic freedom
   because that promotes growth and progress; he has freedom of the press
   because public criticism restrains misbehavior by political leaders;
   he has a right to a fair trial because imprisonment at the whim of the
   powerful would be bad for the system. This was clearly the attitude of
   Simon Bolivar. To him, people deserved liberty only if they used it to
   promote progress (progress as conceived by the bourgeois). Other
   bourgeois thinkers have taken a similar view of freedom as a mere
   means to collective ends. Chester C. Tan, "Chinese Political Thought
   in the Twentieth Century," page 202, explains the philosophy of the
   Kuomintang leader Hu Han-min: "An individual is granted rights because
   he is a member of society and his community life requires such rights.
   By community Hu meant the whole society of the nation." And on page
   259 Tan states that according to Carsum Chang (Chang Chun-mai, head of
   the State Socialist Party in China) freedom had to be used in the
   interest of the state and of the people as a whole. But what kind of
   freedom does one have if one can use it only as someone else
   prescribes? FC's conception of freedom is not that of Bolivar, Hu,
   Chang or other bourgeois theorists. The trouble with such theorists is
   that they have made the development and application of social theories
   their surrogate activity. Consequently the theories are designed to
   serve the needs of the theorists more than the needs of any people who
   may be unlucky enough to live in a society on which the theories are
   imposed.
   
   98. One more point to be made in this section: It should not be
   assumed that a person has enough freedom just because he says he has
   enough. Freedom is restricted in part by psychological controls of
   which people are unconscious, and moreover many people's ideas of what
   constitutes freedom are governed more by social convention than by
   their real needs. For example, it's likely that many leftists of the
   oversocialized type would say that most people, including themselves,
   are socialized too little rather than too much, yet the oversocialized
   leftist pays a heavy psychological price for his high level of
   socialization.
   
   SOME PRINCIPLES OF HISTORY
   
   99. Think of history as being the sum of two components: an erratic
   component that consists of unpredictable events that follow no
   discernible pattern, and a regular component that consists of
   long-term historical trends. Here we are concerned with the long-term
   trends.
   
   100. FIRST PRINCIPLE. If a small change is made that affects a
   long-term historical trend, then the effect of that change will almost
   always be transitory-the trend will soon revert to its original state.
   (Example: A reform movement designed to clean up political corruption
   in a society rarely has more than a short-term effect; sooner or later
   the reformers relax and corruption creeps back in. The level of
   political corruption in a given society tends to remain constant, or
   to change only slowly with the evolution of the society. Normally, a
   political cleanup will be permanent only if accompanied by widespread
   social changes; a small change in the society won't be enough.) If a
   small change in a long-term historical trend appears to be permanent,
   it is only because the change acts in the direction in which the trend
   is already moving, so that the trend is not altered by only pushed a
   step ahead.
   
   101. The first principle is almost a tautology. If a trend were not
   stable with respect to small changes, it would wander at random rather
   than following a definite direction; in other words it would not be a
   long-term trend at all.
   
   102. SECOND PRINCIPLE. If a change is made that is sufficiently large
   to alter permanently a long-term historical trend, then it will alter
   the society as a whole. In other words, a society is a system in which
   all parts are interrelated, and you can't permanently change any
   important part without changing all other parts as well.
   
   103. THIRD PRINCIPLE. If a change is made that is large enough to
   alter permanently a long-term trend, then the consequences for the
   society as a whole cannot be predicted in advance. (Unless various
   other societies have passed through the same change and have all
   experienced the same consequences, in which case one can predict on
   empirical grounds that another society that passes through the same
   change will be like to experience similar consequences.)
   
   104. FOURTH PRINCIPLE. A new kind of society cannot be designed on
   paper. That is, you cannot plan out a new form of society in advance,
   then set it up and expect it to function as it was designed to do.
   
   105. The third and fourth principles result from the complexity of
   human societies. A change in human behavior will affect the economy of
   a society and its physical environment; the economy will affect the
   environment and vice versa, and the changes in the economy and the
   environment will affect human behavior in complex, unpredictable ways;
   and so forth. The network of causes and effects is far too complex to
   be untangled and understood.
   
   106. FIFTH PRINCIPLE. People do not consciously and rationally choose
   the form of their society. Societies develop through processes of
   social evolution that are not under rational human control.
   
   107. The fifth principle is a consequence of the other four.
   
   108. To illustrate: By the first principle, generally speaking an
   attempt at social reform either acts in the direction in which the
   society is developing anyway (so that it merely accelerates a change
   that would have occurred in any case) or else it has only a transitory
   effect, so that the society soon slips back into its old groove. To
   make a lasting change in the direction of development of any important
   aspect of a society, reform is insufficient and revolution is
   required. (A revolution does not necessarily involve an armed uprising
   or the overthrow of a government.) By the second principle, a
   revolution never changes only one aspect of a society, it changes the
   whole society; and by the third principle changes occur that were
   never expected or desired by the revolutionaries. By the fourth
   principle, when revolutionaries or utopians set up a new kind of
   society, it never works out as planned.
   
   More...




From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Sat Apr 20 12:25:44 PDT 1996
Article: 13348 of alt.society.revolution
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!multiverse!en.com!in-news.erinet.com!bug.rahul.net!rahul.net!a2i!genmagic!sgigate.sgi.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.unabomber,alt.society.anarchy,alt.society.revolution,misc.headlines,talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: The Unabomber Manifesto 2/14
Date: 20 Apr 1996 05:49:40 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 267
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4l9ttk$fqc@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.society.anarchy:26483 alt.society.revolution:13348 misc.headlines:21909 talk.philosophy.misc:34304

   22. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would
   have to invent problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse
   for making a fuss.
   
   23. We emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate
   description of everyone who might be considered a leftist. It is only
   a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism.
   
   OVERSOCIALIZATION
   
   24. Psychologists use the term "socialization" to designate the
   process by which children are trained to think and act as society
   demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in and
   obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning
   part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists
   are oversocialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel.
   Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many leftists are not such
   rebels as they seem.
   
   25. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can
   think, feel and act in a completely moral way. For example, we are not
   supposed to hate anyone, yet almost everyone hates somebody at some
   time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not. Some people are
   so highly socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally
   imposes a severe burden on them. In order to avoid feelings of guilt,
   they continually have to deceive themselves about their own motives
   and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality
   have a non-moral origin. We use the term "oversocialized" to describe
   such people. [2]
   
   26. Oversocialization can lead to low self-esteem, a sense of
   powerlessness, defeatism, guilt, etc. One of the most important means
   by which our society socializes children is by making them feel
   ashamed of behavior or speech that is contrary to society's
   expectations. If this is overdone, or if a particular child is
   especially susceptible to such feelings, he ends by feeling ashamed of
   himself. Moreover the thought and the behavior of the oversocialized
   person are more restricted by society's expectations than are those of
   the lightly socialized person. The majority of people engage in a
   significant amount of naughty behavior. They lie, they commit petty
   thefts, they break traffic laws, they goof off at work, they hate
   someone, they say spiteful things or they use some underhanded trick
   to get ahead of the other guy. The oversocialized person cannot do
   these things, or if he does do them he generates in himself a sense of
   shame and self-hatred. The oversocialized person cannot even
   experience, without guilt, thoughts or feelings that are contrary to
   the accepted morality; he cannot think "unclean" thoughts. And
   socialization is not just a matter of morality; we are socialized to
   conform to many norms of behavior that do not fall under the heading
   of morality. Thus the oversocialized person is kept on a psychological
   leash and spends his life running on rails that society has laid down
   for him. In many oversocialized people this results in a sense of
   constraint and powerlessness that can be a severe hardship. We suggest
   that oversocialization is among the more serious cruelties that human
   beings inflict on one another.
   
   27. We argue that a very important and influential segment of the
   modern left is oversocialized and that their oversocialization is of
   great importance in determining the direction of modern leftism.
   Leftists of the oversocialized type tend to be intellectuals or
   members of the upper-middle class. Notice that university
   intellectuals [3] constitute the most highly socialized segment of our
   society and also the most left-wing segment.
   
   28. The leftist of the oversocialized type tries to get off his
   psychological leash and assert his autonomy by rebelling. But usually
   he is not strong enough to rebel against the most basic values of
   society. Generally speaking, the goals of today's leftists are not in
   conflict with the accepted morality. On the contrary, the left takes
   an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then accuses
   mainstream society of violating that principle. Examples: racial
   equality, equality of the sexes, helping poor people, peace as opposed
   to war, nonviolence generally, freedom of expression, kindness to
   animals. More fundamentally, the duty of the individual to serve
   society and the duty of society to take care of the individual. All
   these have been deeply rooted values of our society (or at least of
   its middle and upper classes [4] for a long time. These values are
   explicitly or implicitly expressed or presupposed in most of the
   material presented to us by the mainstream communications media and
   the educational system. Leftists, especially those of the
   oversocialized type, usually do not rebel against these principles but
   justify their hostility to society by claiming (with some degree of
   truth) that society is not living up to these principles.
   
   29. Here is an illustration of the way in which the oversocialized
   leftist shows his real attachment to the conventional attitudes of our
   society while pretending to be in rebellion against it. Many leftists
   push for affirmative action, for moving black people into
   high-prestige jobs, for improved education in black schools and more
   money for such schools; the way of life of the black "underclass" they
   regard as a social disgrace. They want to integrate the black man into
   the system, make him a business executive, a lawyer, a scientist just
   like upper-middle-class white people. The leftists will reply that the
   last thing they want is to make the black man into a copy of the white
   man; instead, they want to preserve African American culture. But in
   what does this preservation of African American culture consist? It
   can hardly consist in anything more than eating black-style food,
   listening to black-style music, wearing black-style clothing and going
   to a black-style church or mosque. In other words, it can express
   itself only in superficial matters. In all essential respects most
   leftists of the oversocialized type want to make the black man conform
   to white, middle-class ideals. They want to make him study technical
   subjects, become an executive or a scientist, spend his life climbing
   the status ladder to prove that black people are as good as white.
   They want to make black fathers "responsible," they want black gangs
   to become nonviolent, etc. But these are exactly the values of the
   industrial-technological system. The system couldn't care less what
   kind of music a man listens to, what kind of clothes he wears or what
   religion he believes in as long as he studies in school, holds a
   respectable job, climbs the status ladder, is a "responsible" parent,
   is nonviolent and so forth. In effect, however much he may deny it,
   the oversocialized leftist wants to integrate the black man into the
   system and make him adopt its values.
   
   30. We certainly do not claim that leftists, even of the
   oversocialized type, never rebel against the fundamental values of our
   society. Clearly they sometimes do. Some oversocialized leftists have
   gone so far as to rebel against one of modern society's most important
   principles by engaging in physical violence. By their own account,
   violence is for them a form of "liberation." In other words, by
   committing violence they break through the psychological restraints
   that have been trained into them. Because they are oversocialized
   these restraints have been more confining for them than for others;
   hence their need to break free of them. But they usually justify their
   rebellion in terms of mainstream values. If they engage in violence
   they claim to be fighting against racism or the like.
   
   31. We realize that many objections could be raised to the foregoing
   thumbnail sketch of leftist psychology. The real situation is complex,
   and anything like a complete description of it would take several
   volumes even if the necessary data were available. We claim only to
   have indicated very roughly the two most important tendencies in the
   psychology of modern leftism.
   
   32. The problems of the leftist are indicative of the problems of our
   society as a whole. Low self-esteem, depressive tendencies and
   defeatism are not restricted to the left. Though they are especially
   noticeable in the left, they are widespread in our society. And
   today's society tries to socialize us to a greater extent than any
   previous society. We are even told by experts how to eat, how to
   exercise, how to make love, how to raise our kids and so forth.
   
   THE POWER PROCESS
   
   33. Human beings have a need (probably based in biology) for something
   that we will call the "power process." This is closely related to the
   need for power (which is widely recognized) but is not quite the same
   thing. The power process has four elements. The three most clear-cut
   of these we call goal, effort and attainment of goal. (Everyone needs
   to have goals whose attainment requires effort, and needs to succeed
   in attaining at least some of his goals.) The fourth element is more
   difficult to define and may not be necessary for everyone. We call it
   autonomy and will discuss it later (paragraphs 42-44).
   
   34. Consider the hypothetical case of a man who can have anything he
   wants just by wishing for it. Such a man has power, but he will
   develop serious psychological problems. At first he will have a lot of
   fun, but by and by he will become acutely bored and demoralized.
   Eventually he may become clinically depressed. History shows that
   leisured aristocracies tend to become decadent. This is not true of
   fighting aristocracies that have to struggle to maintain their power.
   But leisured, secure aristocracies that have no need to exert
   themselves usually become bored, hedonistic and demoralized, even
   though they have power. This shows that power is not enough. One must
   have goals toward which to exercise one's power.
   
   35. Everyone has goals; if nothing else, to obtain the physical
   necessities of life: food, water and whatever clothing and shelter are
   made necessary by the climate. But the leisured aristocrat obtains
   these things without effort. Hence his boredom and demoralization.
   
   36. Nonattainment of important goals results in death if the goals are
   physical necessities, and in frustration if nonattainment of the goals
   is compatible with survival. Consistent failure to attain goals
   throughout life results in defeatism, low self-esteem or depression.
   
   37, Thus, in order to avoid serious psychological problems, a human
   being needs goals whose attainment requires effort, and he must have a
   reasonable rate of success in attaining his goals.
   
   SURROGATE ACTIVITIES
   
   38. But not every leisured aristocrat becomes bored and demoralized.
   For example, the emperor Hirohito, instead of sinking into decadent
   hedonism, devoted himself to marine biology, a field in which he
   became distinguished. When people do not have to exert themselves to
   satisfy their physical needs they often set up artificial goals for
   themselves. In many cases they then pursue these goals with the same
   energy and emotional involvement that they otherwise would have put
   into the search for physical necessities. Thus the aristocrats of the
   Roman Empire had their literary pretensions; many European aristocrats
   a few centuries ago invested tremendous time and energy in hunting,
   though they certainly didn't need the meat; other aristocracies have
   competed for status through elaborate displays of wealth; and a few
   aristocrats, like Hirohito, have turned to science.
   
   39. We use the term "surrogate activity" to designate an activity that
   is directed toward an artificial goal that people set up for
   themselves merely in order to have some goal to work toward, or let us
   say, merely for the sake of the "fulfillment" that they get from
   pursuing the goal. Here is a rule of thumb for the identification of
   surrogate activities. Given a person who devotes much time and energy
   to the pursuit of goal X, ask yourself this: If he had to devote most
   of his time and energy to satisfying his biological needs, and if that
   effort required him to use his physical and mental faculties in a
   varied and interesting way, would he feel seriously deprived because
   he did not attain goal X? If the answer is no, then the person's
   pursuit of goal X is a surrogate activity. Hirohito's studies in
   marine biology clearly constituted a surrogate activity, since it is
   pretty certain that if Hirohito had had to spend his time working at
   interesting non-scientific tasks in order to obtain the necessities of
   life, he would not have felt deprived because he didn't know all about
   the anatomy and life-cycles of marine animals. On the other hand the
   pursuit of sex and love (for example) is not a surrogate activity,
   because most people, even if their existence were otherwise
   satisfactory, would feel deprived if they passed their lives without
   ever having a relationship with a member of the opposite sex. (But
   pursuit of an excessive amount of sex, more than one really needs, can
   be a surrogate activity.)
   
   40. In modern industrial society only minimal effort is necessary to
   satisfy one's physical needs. It is enough to go through a training
   program to acquire some petty technical skill, then come to work on
   time and exert the very modest effort needed to hold a job. The only
   requirements are a moderate amount of intelligence and, most of all,
   simple obedience. If one has those, society takes care of one from
   cradle to grave. (Yes, there is an underclass that cannot take the
   physical necessities for granted, but we are speaking here of
   mainstream society.) Thus it is not surprising that modern society is
   full of surrogate activities. These include scientific work, athletic
   achievement, humanitarian work, artistic and literary creation,
   climbing the corporate ladder, acquisition of money and material goods
   far beyond the point at which they cease to give any additional
   physical satisfaction, and social activism when it addresses issues
   that are not important for the activist personally, as in the case of
   white activists who work for the rights of nonwhite minorities. These
   are not always pure surrogate activities, since for many people they
   may be motivated in part by needs other than the need to have some
   goal to pursue. Scientific work may be motivated in part by a drive
   for prestige, artistic creation by a need to express feelings,
   militant social activism by hostility. But for most people who pursue
   them, these activities are in large part surrogate activities. For
   example, the majority of scientists will probably agree that the
   "fulfillment" they get from their work is more important than the
   money and prestige they earn.
   
   41. For many if not most people, surrogate activities are less
   satisfying than the pursuit of real goals (that is, goals that people
   would want to attain even if their need for the power process were
   already fulfilled). One indication of this is the fact that, in many
   or most cases, people who are deeply involved in surrogate activities
   are never satisfied, never at rest. Thus the money-maker constantly
   strives for more and more wealth. The scientist no sooner solves one
   problem than he moves on to the next. The long-distance runner drives
   himself to run always farther and faster. Many people who pursue
   surrogate activities will say that they get far more fulfillment from
   these activities than they do from the "mundane" business of
   satisfying their biological needs, but that is because in our society
   the effort needed to satisfy the biological needs has been reduced to
   triviality. More importantly, in our society people do not satisfy
   their biological needs autonomously but by functioning as parts of an
   immense social machine. In contrast, people generally have a great
   deal of autonomy in pursuing their surrogate activities.
   
   More...




From bn857@freenet.toronto.on.ca Wed Apr 24 10:51:06 PDT 1996
Article: 17972 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.skinheads
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeeder.servtech.com!news1.io.org!torfree!freenet.toronto.on.ca!bn857
From: bn857@freenet.toronto.on.ca (Milton Kleim)
Subject: The Turner Diaries
Message-ID: 
Sender: bn857@torfree.net (Milton Kleim)
Reply-To: bn857@freenet.toronto.on.ca (Milton Kleim)
Organization: Toronto Free-Net Inc., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 23:40:09 GMT
Lines: 18
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:26344 alt.politics.nationalism.white:17972 alt.skinheads:19849


The most controversial book ever published in America!

_The Turner Diaries_.  By William L. Pierce, Ph.D.

A truly unique novel about a possible future of North American society.
This work is like nothing you've ever read...and it will change your 
perception of politics and society forever.

Order your copy today!  Only $8.95 postpaid from:

National Vanguard Books
Dept. INT
P.O. Box 330
Hillsboro, WV  24946
USA

-- 


From bn857@freenet.toronto.on.ca Wed Apr 24 12:16:09 PDT 1996
Article: 16412 of misc.activism.militia
Sender: bn857@torfree.net (Milton Kleim)
Approved: militia-request@atype.com (fac2f279011ff99c05b1afff8855976e)
From: bn857@freenet.toronto.on.ca (Milton Kleim)
Organization: Toronto Free-Net Inc., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Return-Path: 
Reply-To: bn857@freenet.toronto.on.ca (Milton Kleim)
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!xmission!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!olivea!grapevine.lcs.mit.edu!atype.com!militia-request
Newsgroups: misc.activism.militia
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 96 23:48:18 GMT
Message-ID: <830303298$5115@atype.com>
Subject: The Turner Diaries
Lines: 19



The most controversial book ever published in America!

_The Turner Diaries_.  By William L. Pierce, Ph.D.

A truly unique novel about a possible future of North American society.
This work is like nothing you've ever read...and it will change your 
perception of politics and society forever.

Order your copy today!  Only $8.95 postpaid from:

National Vanguard Books
Dept. INT
P.O. Box 330
Hillsboro, WV  24946
USA

-- 


From bn857@freenet.toronto.on.ca Wed Apr 24 13:48:01 PDT 1996
Article: 95317 of alt.politics.correct
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.correct,alt.society.resistance,alt.society.revolution
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!pravda.aa.msen.com!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeeder.servtech.com!news1.io.org!torfree!freenet.toronto.on.ca!bn857
From: bn857@freenet.toronto.on.ca (Milton Kleim)
Subject: The Turner Diaries
Message-ID: 
Sender: bn857@torfree.net (Milton Kleim)
Reply-To: bn857@freenet.toronto.on.ca (Milton Kleim)
Organization: Toronto Free-Net Inc., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 00:04:27 GMT
Lines: 18
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.clinton:226590 alt.politics.correct:95317 alt.society.resistance:4282 alt.society.revolution:13393


The most controversial book ever published in America!

_The Turner Diaries_.  By William L. Pierce, Ph.D.

A truly unique novel about a possible future of North American society.
This work is like nothing you've ever read...and it will change your 
perception of politics and society forever.

Order your copy today!  Only $8.95 postpaid from:

National Vanguard Books
Dept. INT
P.O. Box 330
Hillsboro, WV  24946
USA

-- 


From bn857@freenet.toronto.on.ca Wed Apr 24 16:12:54 PDT 1996
Article: 13393 of alt.society.revolution
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.correct,alt.society.resistance,alt.society.revolution
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!pravda.aa.msen.com!cssun.mathcs.emory.edu!swrinde!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsfeeder.servtech.com!news1.io.org!torfree!freenet.toronto.on.ca!bn857
From: bn857@freenet.toronto.on.ca (Milton Kleim)
Subject: The Turner Diaries
Message-ID: 
Sender: bn857@torfree.net (Milton Kleim)
Reply-To: bn857@freenet.toronto.on.ca (Milton Kleim)
Organization: Toronto Free-Net Inc., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 00:04:27 GMT
Lines: 18
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.clinton:226590 alt.politics.correct:95317 alt.society.resistance:4282 alt.society.revolution:13393


The most controversial book ever published in America!

_The Turner Diaries_.  By William L. Pierce, Ph.D.

A truly unique novel about a possible future of North American society.
This work is like nothing you've ever read...and it will change your 
perception of politics and society forever.

Order your copy today!  Only $8.95 postpaid from:

National Vanguard Books
Dept. INT
P.O. Box 330
Hillsboro, WV  24946
USA

-- 


From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Thu Apr 25 14:35:19 PDT 1996
Article: 32674 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.emf.net!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Four Quick Questions for Milton Kleim
Date: 25 Apr 1996 02:43:52 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 93
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4lmot8$6q@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <4l6h8j$6kp@panix2.panix.com> <317d387f.8810132@news.srv.ualberta.ca> <4lm4q1$hs6@panix2.panix.com>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:26472 alt.politics.nationalism.white:18092 alt.revisionism:32674

Kevin Filan (rakshasa@panix.com) replies to John Morris:

>>>	I'm going to be getting married in late October to a woman whom I
>>>love very dearly.  One little problem (well, maybe from your standpoint:
>>>it's not a problem at all to me, nor to my friends, relatives, or
>>>acquaintances) -- Diane is African-American, while I'm European-American. 

>>I would submit that Mr Kleim CANNOT answer your questions because to
>>answer truthfully might constitute a death threat however remote.

> 	The folks in the National Alliance and Aryan Nations have made it 
> quite clear that they consider "race mixing" to be a crime which should 
> be punished by death.  Indeed, Pierce's _Turner Diaries_ goes into some 
> detail regarding "The Day of the Rope" and the punishment (lynching) to 
> be alloted to "race traitors."

I don't use novels as the source for my worldview.

> 	I was wondering if Mr. Kleim, who has generally been truthful in 
> my dealings with him, considered this an appropriate response.  If not, I 
> would be interested in hearing just _what_ he thinks should be done with 
> me, with Diane, and with our (as yet unconceived) children.  (Failing 
> that, I would be interested in hearing from some other "White 
> Separatists" as to what I deserve for the "crime" of falling in love with 
> a Black woman...)

Well, Kevin, I'm not really concerned whether you choose to turn your back
on your heritage, on those ancestors who suffered and died to make your
existence today possible.  Your abandonment of your duty to the biologial
continuum of our Race is a decision you are free to make, but of course
you will not be allowed to share in the evolution of your Race.  From a
time-transcending view, you, due to your decision to deny your responsi-
blity to your People, are now inconsequential in the universal scheme of
things.  Provided you keep your actions to yourself, do what you will. 

>>Just over a year ago, Mr. Kleim indicated the "legal means" by which
>>Jews would be dealt with in his brave new National Socialist world:

>>   Well, it's quite simple.  We will establish an investigative
>>   service, which will review claims against Jews.  If there is
>>   evidence for charges, a trial will be set for the individual in
>>   question.  A special tribunal will be created to try those charged
>>   with "Crimes Against the Aryan Race," "Crimes Against Peace,"
>>   genocide, and profiteering.  Conviction on offense number one and
>>   number three will carry a mandatory death penalty.  The other two
>>   may be punished by expropriation of property and/or servitude, or
>>   death.

>>Mr. Kleim subsequently revised this doctrine to include not just Jews
>>but all "race traitors." Given that it is already well known that the
>>National Alliance and othe Nazi organizations regard the mere
>>proximity of non-"Whites" to "Whites" as a genocidal act and regard
>>"miscegnation" as a genocidal act, you, Mr. Filan, would be subject to
>>a mandatory death penalty for "Crimes Against the Aryan Race" and
>>"genocide."

Much has been made by the fools and liars of the fanatical interracist
crusade about my statement.  Do they fail to realize -- or are they just
being typically dishonest -- that my statement is merely an "adoption" of
the proclamations of the International Military Tribunal against German
leaders, only with a PRO-Aryan perspective and aimed at those types who
concocted the "Nurnberg 'trials'"?   My statement proposes no new criminal
statute other than those already enforced against the Germans and others;
just the names have changed.

Provided Kevin keeps his betrayal of his ancestors and his unborn genera-
tions to himself, then he is not covered under either "Crimes Against the
Aryan Race" or "genocide."  However, were he to promote abortion among
Aryans, deliberate psychological measures against Aryan children designed
to reduce our birthrate, or other genocidal actions, then he and whomever
else could be tried for the crimes outlined in my statement. 

It goes without saying that Kevin and his mate will neither be welcome nor
permitted in the Aryan Confederation.

> 	An odd description of "genocide;" is the "White Race" so fragile 
> that the mere proximity of "Non-Whites" could lead to its extinction? And 
> how does my setting up house with a Black woman encourage "race mixing?"  
> (We're no crusaders; hell, I'd _discourage_ people from interracial 
> dating in the name of "political correctness").  Even here, in a 
> comparatively diverse and tolerant city like New York, interracial 
> couples are _far_ outnumbered by intraracial (White-White, Black-Black) 
> couples. 

Morris' description, is, to be kind, slanted from the truth.

If you regard your marriage as your own personal business and do not wish
to "replicate" your actions among Aryans, then you have nothing to fear
>from  me, Kevin.  My concern is the security of the biological heritage of
the Aryan Race, NOT "vengeance" against race-traitors.

-- Milton



From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Thu Apr 25 21:07:14 PDT 1996
Article: 32720 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!lamarck.sura.net!ra.nrl.navy.mil!news.math.psu.edu!news.cse.psu.edu!uwm.edu!news.inc.net!imci5!pull-feed.internetmci.com!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Four Quick Questions for Milton Kleim
Date: 25 Apr 1996 20:36:36 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 56
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4lonok$hg0@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <4l6h8j$6kp@panix2.panix.com> <317d387f.8810132@news.srv.ualberta.ca> <4lm4q1$hs6@panix2.panix.com> <4lmot8$6q@freenet-news.carleton.ca> 
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:26491 alt.politics.nationalism.white:18110 alt.revisionism:32720

Jamie McCarthy replies to me:

>> Provided Kevin
>> keeps his betrayal of his ancestors and his unborn genera-
>> tions to himself,
>> then he is not covered under either "Crimes Against the
>> Aryan Race" or "genocide."
 
> Liar.

Yes, we know you're a liar, McCarthy.

> Let's look at "Free Speech" Vol. II, No. 1, the newsletter of American
> Dissident Voices.  Specifically, let's look at the article "Racemixing -
> Worse Than Murder." What's that bold headline under the title?  Oh,
> there it is:
 
>    Murder is Homicide; Racemixing is Genocide

Are you alleging that *I* wrote this article?

[excerpt from _Free Speech_ by an unknown author deleted]

> In short, Milton Kleim is lying about the point of view of his movement.

No, dip shit, I wasn't speaking "for the 'movement'."  I was speaking for
MYSELF.

> "Race-traitors" like Mr. Filan would be among the first to hang if "The
> Day of the Rope" ever arrived.

Not by my order.

>> However, were he to promote abortion among
>> Aryans, deliberate psychological measures against Aryan children designed
>> to reduce our birthrate, or other genocidal actions, then he and whomever
>> else could be tried for the crimes outlined in my statement. 

> Oh my!  "Promoting abortion among Aryans" is a crime, one punishable by
> death?  That's funny, I could _swear_ this was the same Mr. Kleim who
> gets all righteous about freedom of speech. 

I wasn't referring to disseminating KNOWLEDGE about abortion, but
about engaging in activities CALCULATED to encourage abortion among
high-quality Aryan women.  This is an extrapolation of one point of the
United Nations' Genocide Convention; *I* didn't make it up.

> "Freedom for me, but not for thee."

Did you vote YES on rec.music.white-power?  If not, then you are a
hypocrite and a liar.  But hey, we already knew that.

> But then what did we expect from a National Socialist?

But what can we expect from a paid operative of the Jews?



From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Fri Apr 26 10:48:57 PDT 1996
Article: 18166 of alt.politics.nationalism.white
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!news.wildstar.net!serv.hinet.net!nctuccca.edu.tw!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.revisionism,alt.discrimination,alt.skinheads,alt.politics.nationalism.white
Subject: Re: _National Socialism Primer_
Date: 25 Apr 1996 21:21:15 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 20
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4loqcb$icr@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <4lfjue$jfb@freenet-news.carleton.ca> <4lj4nj$26o@hackberry.zilker.net> <4lk2qd$4o0@freenet-news.carleton.ca> <4lmk9f$igg@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA> <4logon$6dk@hackberry.zilker.net>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:26556 alt.revisionism:32826 alt.discrimination:45953 alt.skinheads:20226 alt.politics.nationalism.white:18166

Mike Curtis replies to Laura Finsten:

>>No no no, Herr Unterfartenundfumenfuhrer, Ingo Hasselbach who used to be
>>the leader of the NeoNazis in Germany.  Ingo Hasselbach who tells it like
>>it is in his book "Fuhrer Ex".

> Thanks Laura. I missed Herr Griswold's reply. Hasselbach a Jew! That's
> rich!! I wonder if Griswold realizes that Hasselbach's clarification
> on the term Aryan basically destroyed his so called primer. :)

#1: The _National Socialism Primer_ is MY work (posted with permission, of
    course.  :-).

#2: Hasselbach does NOT speak with ANY authority on the matter of racial
    science, especially the definition of "Aryan."  He was a German 
    skinhead leader, a politician in essence, with little or no under-
    standing of the history of our Peoples or the history of Homo sapiens
    sapiens in general.




From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Sat Apr 27 06:43:48 PDT 1996
Article: 32923 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Four Quick Questions for Milton Kleim
Date: 27 Apr 1996 02:19:34 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 47
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4ls07m$ild@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <4l6h8j$6kp@panix2.panix.com> <317d387f.8810132@news.srv.ualberta.ca> <4lm4q1$hs6@panix2.panix.com> <4lmot8$6q@freenet-news.carleton.ca>  <4lonok$hg0@freenet-news.carleton.ca> 
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:26635 alt.politics.nationalism.white:18229 alt.revisionism:32923

Jamie McCarthy replies to me:

>> > Oh my!  "Promoting abortion among Aryans" is a crime, one punishable by
>> > death?  That's funny, I could _swear_ this was the same Mr. Kleim who
>> > gets all righteous about freedom of speech. 

>> I wasn't referring to disseminating KNOWLEDGE about abortion, but
>> about engaging in activities CALCULATED to encourage abortion among
>> high-quality Aryan women.

> You make my point for me.

No, imbecile, I don't.  Promoting a crime is not "freedom of speech."

>> > "Freedom for me, but not for thee."

>> Did you vote YES on rec.music.white-power?

> You'll have to wait for the results, buddy.

We'll take that as a NO.

>> But what can we expect from a paid operative of the Jews?

> The reader should know that Mr. Kleim accuses me a few times every year
> of getting paid to marginalize people like him -- and a few times every
> year I correct him, pointing out that I have not gotten one dime for my
> racism- and Holocaust-related activities on the net.

Who believes this BS?  Oh, McCarthy the little idealist.  Suuurrrre.
I'm surprised Engler hasn't awarded him some sort of Michigan-equivalent
of Mcvay's award for political stooges.

> In fact, over the past four years, it's cost me hundreds of dollars for
> books, library fines, and so on.  And even at minimum wage, the time
> I've invested would come to five figures.

And you call ME a liar?

Bullshit McCarthy, bullshit.  What IS your motivation: fame?  or just money?

> So once again, Mr. Kleim is lying:  knowingly, and repeatedly lying.

Pot.  Kettle.  Black.  

Where have I heard that before?



From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Sat Apr 27 13:16:30 PDT 1996
Article: 33137 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.jumppoint.com!news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Four Quick Questions for Milton Kleim
Date: 25 Apr 1996 21:15:26 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 117
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4loq1e$i9k@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <4l6h8j$6kp@panix2.panix.com> <317d387f.8810132@news.srv.ualberta.ca> <4lm4q1$hs6@panix2.panix.com> <4lmot8$6q@freenet-news.carleton.ca> <4lo3mg$cci@panix2.panix.com>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:26726 alt.politics.nationalism.white:18305 alt.revisionism:33137

Kevin Filan replies to me:

>>Well, Kevin, I'm not really concerned whether you choose to turn your back
>>on your heritage, on those ancestors who suffered and died to make your
>>existence today possible.  Your abandonment of your duty to the biologial
>>continuum of our Race is a decision you are free to make, but of course
>>you will not be allowed to share in the evolution of your Race.  From a
>>time-transcending view, you, due to your decision to deny your responsi-
>>blity to your People, are now inconsequential in the universal scheme of
>>things.  Provided you keep your actions to yourself, do what you will. 
 
> 	Could you explain this "duty to the biological continuum of our
> Race?"  (I'm not being sarcastic: I'm genuinely curious.  The fact that I
> am "White" has never been really important to me one way or the other).  

I doubt you can understand it.

The fact that you ARE White is representative of the reality that untold
WHITE ancestors practiced endogamous pairing, keeping the bloodline to
this day Aryan, and allowing you to be here today.  Doesn't it strike you
as odd (considering your "anti-racist" beliefs) that you ARE White,
instead of a mixed-race mongrel (as your offspring will be), after
thousands and thousands and thousands of years of possible racial mixing? 
The unique traits that Aryans possess are dependent upon continued
endogamous breeding.  You have chosen to follow a different genetic path
that millions of your ancestors did not follow.  And there is no
"correcting" your "mistake" after it has occurred. 

Why do people believe that certain endagered species are worth preserving
in their characteristic form, but not White people?  Why do people accept
that "pure bred" horses and dogs are more valuable than mongrels, but
refuse to accept the same principle for human "pure breds."

> I'm also curious as to where the "evolution of my Race" leads.  Is there 
> any scientific reason why _Homo Sapiens Superior_ must be entirely of 
> European ancestry? (Given that Europe is a comparative _latecomer_ to the 
> "civilization sweepstakes," I'm especially curious on this one).

No one is saying that "Homo sapiens superior" is necessarily European.  I
certainly am not.  However, the most cognitively capable breed of human
has throughout history been one of the "Caucasian" type, whether it was/is
European Aryan, Mediterranean, or an extinct White race.  For the greatest
part of history, a "Caucasian" race has been in the vanguard of creating
higher culture. 

While your fiancee, a member of the characteristically second-least
advanced human type, may be of relatively high intelligence and of a
wonderful character, this does not excuse the fact that you, a member of
the MOST advanced human type, are merging yourself with the gene pool of a
less advanced form of human, despite the _individual_ traits (which are
UNcharacteristic of the Negro) of your fiancee. 

As for the evolutionary future of the Aryan race, Nature has seen fit to
create MANY types of humans, each with their own qualities and short-
comings.  These types evolved because their gene pools were endogamous,
and these types will disappear if that endogamy ceases.  Humans, in
particular Aryans, have the ability to consciously assist Nature in her
task toward evolving humanity towards our greatest physical and spiritual
potential.  Interracist lies to the contrary, miscegenation REVERSES in
almost all cases what Nature has taken THOUSANDS of years to do, namely
create biological diversity among humans, largely in the non-visible
realm. 
 
>>Much has been made by the fools and liars of the fanatical interracist
>>crusade about my statement.  Do they fail to realize -- or are they just
>>being typically dishonest -- that my statement is merely an "adoption" of
>>the proclamations of the International Military Tribunal against German
>>leaders, only with a PRO-Aryan perspective and aimed at those types who
>>concocted the "Nurnberg 'trials'"?   My statement proposes no new criminal
>>statute other than those already enforced against the Germans and others;
>>just the names have changed.

> 	If you find evidence of a large-scale plan to destroy the European
> peoples through various genocidal actions, planned famines, mass
> shootings, etc., I do hope you sentence the perpetrators accordingly.  

Genocide does not only occur through famine, shooting, and other overt
actions.  Covert actions can be just as deadly, as the past fourty years
have proven.  The ENDS, not the means, and the motives, are how we
identify genocide. 

>>Provided Kevin keeps his betrayal of his ancestors and his unborn genera-
>>tions to himself, then he is not covered under either "Crimes Against the
>>Aryan Race" or "genocide."  However, were he to promote abortion among
>>Aryans, deliberate psychological measures against Aryan children designed
>>to reduce our birthrate, or other genocidal actions, then he and whomever
>>else could be tried for the crimes outlined in my statement. 
 
> 	I support a woman's -- any woman's -- right to safe and legal 
> abortions.  (Incidentally: you may want to consider that in pre _Roe v. 
> Wade_ days wealthy White women usually had far less problem procuring an 
> abortion than poor non-White women).  I'd like to see "every child a 
> wanted child."  If this means I am "promoting abortion among Aryans," 
> then I'm guilty. 

As explained earlier to McCarthy, abortion in itself, particularly
dissemination of information about abortion, is not genocide per se.  But
taking active measures to encourage abortion among Aryan women IS
genocide. 

> 	What sort of "psychological measures against Aryan children 
> designed to reduce our birthrate" are you speaking of? If you mean 
> teaching children about birth control and "safer sex," then I again plead 
> guilty.  But I am NOT targeting these measures specifically at "Aryan 
> children" -- I would like to see every child be not only wanted but 
> well-educated. 

No, I'm not speaking of sex education, unless it involves deliberate,
calculated efforts to legitimize homosexuality in the eyes of Aryan kids.

What I was referring to is deliberate efforts, conscious, calculated
efforts, to instill a sense of guilt in White children for supposed
"crimes" committed by their ancestors and/or alleged unique "tendenicies"
among Aryans to "commit racism," with the goal in mind of suppressing
racial consciousness among Whites only, and with the long-term goal of
increasing miscegenation. 



From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Tue Apr 30 23:39:21 PDT 1996
Article: 33681 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.jumppoint.com!news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism
Subject: Re: Four Quick Questions for Milton Kleim
Date: 27 Apr 1996 02:09:28 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 55
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4lrvko$ifr@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References: <4l6h8j$6kp@panix2.panix.com> <4lmot8$6q@freenet-news.carleton.ca>  <4lonok$hg0@freenet-news.carleton.ca> <4lquln$38b@panix2.panix.com>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:27050 alt.politics.nationalism.white:18623 alt.revisionism:33681

Kevin Filan replies to me:

> Specifically, do you consider voluntary "racemixing" to be tanamount to
> genocide?   

No I do not.  Many of the causes -- artificially generated conditions and
encouragements -- of racial treason ARE genocide, though.

>>> "Race-traitors" like Mr. Filan would be among the first to hang if "The
>>> Day of the Rope" ever arrived.

>>Not by my order.

> 	O.K. -- let's rephrase this.  Suppose the White Separatist
> movement comes to power and some of its more enthusiastic followers begin 
> "Day of the Rope"-type proceedings against what they classify as "race 
> traitors." What would you be willing to do to ensure the safety of 
> myself, Diane, and our children? 

You're assuming I'd have the power and authority to make such a guarantee.

Assuming my worst fears are not realized -- an apocalytpic race war -- and
provided I were in a position of power and authority -- Minister of
Defense or Chancellor, perhaps -- yes, I'd offer you free passage to any
place outside the Aryan Confederation if you were inside its boundaries at
the time.

If the "worst case scenario" were to occur, where a racial civil war
occurred, then I would not be concerned with ANYONE'S personal safety.  My
efforts aim to avoid that scenario, but certain elements will not make any
reasonable consessions to the pro-American, pro-Aryan camp which would
assure that scenario does not arrive. 

>>I wasn't referring to disseminating KNOWLEDGE about abortion, but
>>about engaging in activities CALCULATED to encourage abortion among
>>high-quality Aryan women.  This is an extrapolation of one point of the
>>United Nations' Genocide Convention; *I* didn't make it up.
 
> 	What would you consider an "activity calculated to encourage 
> abortion among high-quality Aryan women?"

Some of the more pernicious "ZPG" campaigns, insisting that Aryan women
should forego children because "there are too many starving children
already" would be an example of this.

>>> But then what did we expect from a National Socialist?

>>But what can we expect from a paid operative of the Jews?

> 	Do you have any evidence that Mr. McCarthy is in fact "a paid 
> operative of the Jews?"

Do you have any evidence that he is able to sustain his activities WITHOUT
outside funding from those who benefit from his efforts?



From bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA Tue Apr 30 23:39:21 PDT 1996
Article: 33968 of alt.revisionism
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!freenet-news.carleton.ca!FreeNet.Carleton.CA!bb748
From: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.skinheads
Subject: Re: The Turner Diaries
Date: 1 May 1996 01:08:55 GMT
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Lines: 12
Sender: bb748@freenet3.carleton.ca (Milton Kleim)
Message-ID: <4m6dj7$op7@freenet-news.carleton.ca>
References:  <4ltu2c$891@news1.panix.com> <4m00f1$ccf@umbc9.umbc.edu> <4m280o$sgi@news1.panix.com> <4m54tk$9p2@umbc9.umbc.edu> <4m647e$fnf@news1.panix.com>
Reply-To: bb748@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim)
NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet3.carleton.ca
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:27259 alt.politics.nationalism.white:18780 alt.revisionism:33968 alt.skinheads:21210

Andrew Mathis spews:

>>But thank God, you can still publish a book in this country and claim it, can 
>>you?

> As long as it doesn't advocate the violent overthrow of the gov't.
> Turner Diaries clealry does.

OK, Mathis.  Tell us how and where a novel "advocates the violent
overthrow of the government."  Quote from _the Turner Diaries_ exactly
which passages allegedly do this.

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor