Who?

[Kozak]

Who is the coward that deleted my posts? Why would you do that? Are you offended because there is someone here on the site that isn't a new-age bullshitter? Is there something wrong with me having the belief that I should follow the religion of MY ancestors, and not those of a foreign people?

Speak, or I will blackflag this site.

[Kozak]

Oh, I get it. You're all just a bunch of pussies. When someone shows an independent voice from the herd, you have to ban him/her. Instead of actually allowing this site to grow, you nominate independent-minded members for deletion.

[Kozak]

Apparently I posted hate speech:

I highly disagree. Humans are separated by racial groups, and even further, subraces and tribal differences. Every race developed differently over time. Just because an Asian is human doesn't make him part of your race. There are many reasons why he looks a hell of a lot different than you do. The difference is much deeper than his skin. Also, religions are different for many reasons, not just simply by opinion.

When it comes down to Slavic and Germanic ethnic groups, it's a question of subraces. The Caucasian race is not very different when it comes to subraces. All areas occupied by Slavs and Germanics share the same subracial groups. Nordics, Dinarids, Baltids, and Alpinids. The differences between these groups hardly varies. It's a rather simple science my friend.



I am not your friend and please don't try to associate me with your pseudosceintific nonsense regarding Race Theories.

The quoted statement is highly offensive and may qualify as hate speech.Admin and Mods will be reviewing/discussing this post with regard to further action.

Locked pending revue.

I never said anything that advocated hate speech. I only advocated love for one's own people.

[Kozak]

Only a fool could come up with the "argument" that I am posting "pseudoscientific nonsense". He didn't even try to provide any support to say that I was wrong.

[Kozak]

Classifying me as a troll, eh? Dumbasses. This only goes to show that you're avoiding a challenge/problem instead of confronting it.

[Nahemah]

I would be that coward.

Not all that smart, Mr.NeoNazi,to call one of the admin of a forum you got banned at A coward,now is it? LOL.

I am a She,by the way.
Guess what? You are banned again.You and others of your ilk are not welcome on this site.
Stay in your niche at Skadi and Stormfront,like the good little evolutionary dead end you are and stop trying to bother the big boys and girls.

Is that plain enough for you?

Did you think stopmping in here,making threats would get you readmittted?

Seriously?

Did you?

Come on now,really?

Did you?

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

Hope this is plain enough for you ......FUCK OFF!!!

And:

I do not need to defend against your Pseudoscientific Race theories,that garbage is not even considered worthy of explanation by anyone with more that one brain cell functioning and as you were the one making the contentious assertions,the burden of proof lay with you.

The post we banned you for that you reinserted above, well,all the explanation anyone with sense could need is in it,lol.

We are not cowards,we are just not Racist scumbags like you.

And,by the way,threatening PMs to me do not scare me and will also not gain you readmittance to this forum.

Racist commentary is a blatant breach of the TOS you signed up to,when you joined the forum.

[Vashta]

I support the decision to ban.

Terms of service explicitly state no discrimination. This goes for race, belief, age, gender, sexuality, mental ability, and any of the countless other topics covered by UK discrimination laws.

We won't have hate speech on this forum, if you can't comply with that, there are plenty of other forums that won't ban you for it, I suggest you find yourself one.

[Stukov]

I support the decision to ban.

Terms of service explicitly state no discrimination. This goes for race, belief, age, gender, sexuality, mental ability, and any of the countless other topics covered by UK discrimination laws.

We won't have hate speech on this forum, if you can't comply with that, there are plenty of other forums that won't ban you for it, I suggest you find yourself one.

While I do support the idea that this is a private forum and the owner has the right to set whatever rules they desire, I do have to disagree that what he stated as "hate speech". However, I understand that it may fall under "hate speech" under UK law, so understand that you being from the UK have to abide by it, so my disagreement is with the UK law.

My reason for this was that he wasn't calling anyone any racial slurs or anything derogatory merely expressed his view on racial differences. It is an opinion, I rather disagree with such an opinion, but I think he does have a right to say it in the manner in which he said it. (I'm going off what he quoted below which I had read elsewhere, don't know if he had said something else) I believe we owe it to the truth to debate topics, even if they are unpopular, or wrong - to prove how wrong they are through debate and not censorship.

Again, just a respectful disagreement and understanding this is a private board and the owner makes the rules and enforces them as they wish.

[Nahemah]

My reason for this was that he wasn't calling anyone any racial slurs or anything derogatory merely expressed his view on racial differences. It is an opinion, I rather disagree with such an opinion, but I think he does have a right to say it in the manner in which he said it. (I'm going off what he quoted below which I had read elsewhere, don't know if he had said something else) I believe we owe it to the truth to debate topics, even if they are unpopular, or wrong - to prove how wrong they are through debate and not censorship.

If you wish a debate on Racism,please do start a thread on it. [thumbup]
It may have to move here,if it get's heated,though.

I disagree strongly,on the 'wasn't calling anyone any racial slurs' part of your statement,Do you wish me to explain why in more detail?

I can,but if you cannot see it for yourself,perhaps you should ask yourself why it is not obvious to you?

This forum is not about censorship,however this member's rights to free expression end where other members rights begin.

This matter could have been dealt with,without you or any other member seeing these posts,they could have been deleted,we have the right to do so as we see fit,it is in the rules and this poster's comments DO break several rules all at one go.

Points worth noting.

Also bear in mind please threatening forum staff is completely unnacceptable,even if it is done through PM.

I moved this here,because I wanted to respond publically,I am no coward.I do not appreciate being threatened or having the forum threatened either,note:

Speak, or I will blackflag this site.

However, it is my job and the other Mods and Admins also,to remain as objective as possible in dealing with TOS breaches and the Laws of the UK wherein the forum is based.

Banning was inevitable here.

I could have not responded at all,indeed,it may have been wiser not to,but I said as I did because I am not hiding anything .

------------------------------------


I will not reveal the content of PM's here,however,it was rather funny to me,that I was called 'outsider' by this ex member, as by the cretinous definitions of Race theory,I have more pureblood in me than the OP does.

That cracks me up,really,it does,lol.

....................................

Now,back to the serious again:

You may disagree if you wish,however your disagreement will not affect the outcome of any Admin or moderator decisions,once they are made. Our rules are clearly stated and all members should be mindful of this: be sure to fully read and understand the terms you are agreeing to, before signing up.

[Stukov]

If you wish a debate on Racism,please do start a thread on it. [thumbup]
It may have to move here,if it get's heated,though.

No, I didn't respond to it in the thread originally as I wasn't really interested in it then, not any more interested in it now.

I disagree strongly,on the 'wasn't calling anyone any racial slurs' part of your statement,Do you wish me to explain why in more detail?

I was referring to this post, as this was the only post I saw of his.

I highly disagree. Humans are separated by racial groups, and even further, subraces and tribal differences. Every race developed differently over time. Just because an Asian is human doesn't make him part of your race. There are many reasons why he looks a hell of a lot different than you do. The difference is much deeper than his skin. Also, religions are different for many reasons, not just simply by opinion.

When it comes down to Slavic and Germanic ethnic groups, it's a question of subraces. The Caucasian race is not very different when it comes to subraces. All areas occupied by Slavs and Germanics share the same subracial groups. Nordics, Dinarids, Baltids, and Alpinids. The differences between these groups hardly varies. It's a rather simple science my friend.

I don't see how that is racist, at least by any reasonable definition I've seen used while I was in college (mind you I'm not saying my definition is any better because it was used in a university setting). At most its an asinine and inaccurate way to describe that people from different regions of the earth have some differences and those people who live near each other (in certain areas) have similarities. It isn't racist to say that people from Europe have lighter skin than and people from Africa have darker skin, it would be racist to say that light skin or dark skin makes one better or worse than other (and melatonin levels hardly makes one better or worse).

In my experience racism requires some sort of value attributed to a person because of their race. I don't see such value attribution to race here, of course it could be lost in context as the quote is a response another post, which I don't recall offhand, so that could completely change depending on what was said before hand.

I can,but if you cannot see it for yourself,perhaps you should ask yourself why it is not obvious to you?

I think that is quite an implication that because I disagree with the amount of "racism" that you see and that because I do not "see what is obvious", that precipitates a judgement of myself by you. If you feel there is something that directly relates to your idea, please put it forward.

This forum is not about censorship,however this member's rights to free expression end where other members rights begin.

I understand and don't wholly disagree.

This matter could have been dealt with,without you or any other member seeing these posts,they could have been deleted,we have the right to do so as we see fit,it is in the rules and this poster's comments DO break several rules all at one go.

I certainly applaud the effort to not deleting things such as this, it shows that you most certainly care about openness and the ability to discuss ideas. I've seen far too many sites with admins/mods that delete things or ban people just because they don't like them. Hell, at the other OF I was banned because I responded to an admin by name - the avatar name. Can you imagine banning someone because they said Nahemah in a post - then proceed to delete every post/topic you ever said? This site is far ahead of many others I've ever been on.

Points worth noting.

Also bear in mind please threatening forum staff is completely unnacceptable,even if it is done through PM.

I certainly don't disagree that threatening is allowable in any form. Again, my response wasn't directed at this as I agree 100% with decision because of this.

I moved this here,because I wanted to respond publically,I am no coward.I do not appreciate being threatened or having the forum threatened either,note:

And you are a better person because of it, not that you need my approval.

Speak, or I will blackflag this site.

I don't understand what that means or what sort of "threat" that is.

However, it is my job and the other Mods and Admins also,to remain as objective as possible in dealing with TOS breaches and the Laws of the UK wherein the forum is based.

As said before, I understand that if the forum servers are in the UK that you and the admin must abide by them or risk having the whole site shut down, and in such, my disagreement would fall on the UK laws, not those forced to uphold them.

I could have not responded at all,indeed,it may have been wiser not to,but I said as I did because I am not hiding anything .

As I said, I think this is far better to have an open forum to where even the bans are discussed and viewed by others. Transparency is an vital virtue of any person or organization with authority.

I will not reveal the content of PM's here,however,it was rather funny to me,that I was called 'outsider' by this ex member, as by the cretinous definitions of Race theory,I have more pureblood in me than the OP does.

Yeah, so then he was banned for the racism in the PMs not on the thread?

That cracks me up,really,it does,lol.

Good you have a sense of humor.

You may disagree if you wish,however your disagreement will not affect the outcome of any Admin or moderator decisions,once they are made. Our rules are clearly stated and all members should be mindful of this: be sure to fully read and understand the terms you are agreeing to, before signing up.

Hmm...did you slip in the "by agreeing to this TOS you agree that all your bases are belong to us", without me noticing it?

[Nahemah]

The difference is much deeper than his skin

Stukov,please tell me you can see what's wrong with this above statement? Especially in context with the rest of the post.

Tihs is what I was refering to,but I get that I wasn't too clear on it,before.Skin colour is surface only and Asian,really,which Asians? All of them? Asia is a Vast Continental Landmass,after all.

As for the Race Theory /Sub races stuff,I 've already said it before : but Tosh,piffle,crap and utter pseudoscientific Neo Nazi propagandist garbage.
It was Old School Nazi,before Neo Nazi,but it's no less insidious because of that.

Oh and "Inter Racial Miscegenation? " I already spoke of why this term is now considered perjorative,but I can expand on it more.

[ but later,just in from work and very tired atm]

I shouldn't have to prove this is Racist garbage,but I will back what I said here and before,purely for clarity's sake.

Lol,not all your bases,no,but some baselines do belong to us. [grin]

[Vashta]

I do agree that we may have banned a bit hastily, but I must also say that looking at the 5 messages Kozak frantically posted above, three to five minutes apart, I still think it was the right decision, in this case.

I've seen some extremely busy forums ruined by posters exhibiting the same behaviour as Kozak: Thinly veiled racism, threatening the forum or its members, calling members and administrators names, the whole "onus of proof" angle, and generally trying his damnedest to start a fight over it.

I believe Kozak was here to incite hatred and disrupt the peace. I believe Kozak is one of those trolls who come solely to promote intolerance, start fights between members, make people feel bad about themselves for no real reason, and generally sour the whole experience.

These trolls start with a controversial stance on a topic, and place the onus of proof on everyone who doesn't believe it to disprove it. However, any attempt to rebut their argument with logic, documentary evidence, or good old-fashioned common sense, are met with counter-arguments that amount to little more than "No u", whether or not you win the debate intellectually, these trolls will draw it out into a war, with misquotes, lies, and pejorative comments. Trolling of that sort breeds frustration, disrupts the peace, and drives away valuable contributors to the community.

And I believe Kozak is one of these trolls.

Hate speech is, also, quite possibly too strong a phrase, but I'm pretty sure it's where this would have gone, perhaps subversively, perhaps overtly. You are absolutely correct that members have a right to discuss topics that may well be considered sensitive, in a mature and responsible manner, and that everyone is entitled to their opinion, even in cases where that opinion is widely regarded as incorrect, but I'm convinced that Kozak wasn't here to have a rational debate on it.

I'm still certain that banning Kozak was the right decision, because if he is the kind of troll I am certain he is, all the rational debate in the world will never ever mean the slightest thing to him, it would only fan the flames, so to speak.

We may disagree on the proportionality of the reaction, and perhaps more, but it does provide food for thought, and perhaps the moderation protocols here could use some debate; it's your community too, after all, and we do want the rules and their enforcement to be as transparent as possible.


Resources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speec ... ed_Kingdom
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=1032102 (Section on contrarian trolls is a nice summary)

[Nahemah]

I agree he is contrarian.

Look at this :

The quoted statement is highly offensive and may qualify as hate speech.

may qualify,not IS,there was an element of doubt which is why I posted in non definate terms.

While there is no point in arguing back,at any length,I wanted to counter point at least a little in explanation, mostly for others to see.

The wording Kozak used is deliberately provocative,designed to inflame,while making those who do not know much about the terms and their derivations,think that thsose responding negatively are being harsh.Divide and rule.

The account holder was temporarily suspended before any further action,as I wanted to check on forum policy before potentially canning him.
When he came back with the above,his motives became a lot more obvious and clear.

Stukov:Black flag ops are a subversive tactic,in this case I do believe it is a form of open invitation to cause trouble for the forum,which invites other trolls to join in.

[Stukov]

The difference is much deeper than his skin

Stukov,please tell me you can see what's wrong with this above statement? Especially in context with the rest of the post.

Well there are differences more than skin between human beings of different, descendents from Africa can get sickle cell anemia and have higher chance for heart disease, descendents from Europe and Asia have 2-3% Neanderthal DNA (recently found out of race mixing), those from parts of Asia (as it is such huge place) have lower chance of heart disease, but higher chance of stomach cancer, Native Americans appear to lack an enzyme to break down alcohol in the liver the same as others, and there are more.

It is just these differences are minute differences and don't make other people different "races", we are all equal and these are all just differences from human beings being isolated over time and the environment causing certain people with certain traits to pass on those traits. We are all humans and until we have something like a major mutation (X-men style) or begin recoding our own genetic sequences (Deus Ex style), it isn't going to change - especially here in the US where we, the melting pot.

As I said before, the statement itself isn't all that abhorrent, but I don't recall what it was he was responding to.

Tihs is what I was refering to,but I get that I wasn't too clear on it,before.Skin colour is surface only and Asian,really,which Asians? All of them? Asia is a Vast Continental Landmass,after all.

Oh I know, Asia IS the largest continent, the only way you can really "define" Asian in any of the research I have read is by DNA which is used to study the movement of ancient humans from Africa (which is the current theory how all humans came from), through this they can basically see at what time and where human migration occurred in ancient times.

As for the Race Theory /Sub races stuff,I 've already said it before : but Tosh,piffle,crap and utter pseudoscientific Neo Nazi propagandist garbage.
It was Old School Nazi,before Neo Nazi,but it's no less insidious because of that.

Yes he used the term "sub-race", however I've used the term bourgeoisie does that make me a Communist? And there is certainly quite a bit of psedoscience in regards to the agenda the Nazi's were doing with research back in the 30's and 40's, but at least in that post of his, he didn't come out and endorse the entire "agenda" that they had (which was very wrong).

Now I am not accusing you of this, it is for you to decide why you do what you do and you are free to come to your conclusion and opinion, but it appears as though you are attributing more to his statements than what actually exists. Could he have implied these sorts of things? Was the Nazi stuff what he really meant? Could be, but he didn't directly say it and looking at what he says objectively, it appears to me as his statements are ambiguous - close to sounding Nazi - but not specifically being Nazi.

The words he used mean certain things to you, you have your own perception and idea what these mean and what they are attributed to, I am merely pointing out , from this one post (which I have said I am referring to), his words may not mean the same things as what you perceive them to be. Obviously you and I are two reasonable people and have read different things from the same words, certainly he could have intended a difference.

Stepping away from this specific incident, in my experience people hear what they want to hear (even if its something they don't like). We often don't hear or listen to what was intended by the speaker, but instead apply our own values, ideas, even biases to whatever statement the speaker says. Even I am guilty of this, even though I'm aware of it and try my best not to do it, and usually it is in areas of personal sensitivity where you have some emotional connection to similar type of speech.

Again, I am not accusing you of this, it is for you to say what and why you are acting, not me or anyone else. It is only my observation (especially from seeing very heated debates in college), that race is a one of these highly sensitive topics with greatly charged emotion.

Oh and "Inter Racial Miscegenation? " I already spoke of why this term is now considered perjorative,but I can expand on it more.

I don't see that term in that post, so unless this is from a PM or from another post? But I have already conceded he may have said racist things elsewhere that I am unaware of. I also have no idea what that is.

I shouldn't have to prove this is Racist garbage,but I will back what I said here and before,purely for clarity's sake.

Well it is for you to decide what what you should or shouldn't do, if you do not wish to speak, I am fine leaving it as agreeing to disagree, reasonable people can disagree.

Lol,not all your bases,no,but some baselines do belong to us. [grin]

Yeah definitely felt we needed some humor somewhere in here.

[Nahemah]

He only reposted part of what he said in the original topic.Sorry,that does appear misleading,but then that was his intent.
Quid pro Quo.

I was responding to all of the content,as it was originally.There was more of a more obvious nature,sorry,tiredness today caused me to forget this was only a partial repost.

I am very familiar with Neo Nazism,I 'm afraid to say,so perhaps I do see more in this than someone who is not.That does not make me wrong,though and I still stand by all my commentary,though I wish I 'd kept the full content visible in the OP topic. [blush]

Although,because I quoted part of his original post there,some of it still remains in the topic ,the term' inter racial miscegenation' is there,:

http://www.occultforum.org/forum/viewto ... 0&start=25

Here's some detail on that term:

http://www.facinghistorycampus.org/camp ... 37004EA259


I think we'd be best agreeing to disagree or we will be here for a long time,picking this apart over and over. [grin]

I also wanted to respond to the below:

I certainly applaud the effort to not deleting things such as this, it shows that you most certainly care about openness and the ability to discuss ideas. I've seen far too many sites with admins/mods that delete things or ban people just because they don't like them. Hell, at the other OF I was banned because I responded to an admin by name - the avatar name. Can you imagine banning someone because they said Nahemah in a post - then proceed to delete every post/topic you ever said? This site is far ahead of many others I've ever been on.

Thanks.
I 've been banned for ridiculous reasons at certain online forums in the past myself,so I understand.We do not want to ban anyone here,unless it's strictly necessary,except those bleeding irritating spammers,lol. [geek]

I certainly would not allow my own biases to let me abuse my authority here.If I feel I am unable to be objective I will not hesitate to refer matters to other staff members.We are all human and disagreements and personality clashes are bound to happen,somwhere along the way.

I do hope folk will say Nahemah,but they can call me whatever they want, as long as it's friendly,lol. [eek]

[Nahemah]

Oh yes and Kozak self defined as belonging to a mix of 'sub races',he mentioned Alpinid and Baltid I believe,with possible another term,Dinaric ,but not sure on that one.

http://www.cyborgsociety.org/n/index.ph ... 15&clang=1

and for balance:

http://nseuropa.org/English/SS%20Race%20Theory.pdf

This is Race theory and those terms he used,in his OP are 'sub races'.

I must admit,It's highly amusing to me how Neo Nazis suscribe to ethnic mixes themselves,but as they are all 'white' in origin, this is acceptable.
[Well,Hitler and co had to justify their own non Aryan features somehow,didn't they?]

Self justification,while excluding all other evidence and only using that based on discredited Racist and Eugenic theories,is better than modern Scientific/Genetic facts,apparently,lovely.As the man himself said,it's 'simple' alright,but not in the context I 'm sure he intended.

I 've put this information up as a general helpful guide.

There is so much more out there online,but I hope this helps clarify for anyone reading,who is wondering about all the terminology.