*sigh*

new newsgroup please: rec.games.chess.politics


On 29 Jul 2003 02:57:20 GMT, Mhoulsby -remove- wrote:
From: illspam (NoMoreChess)
Date: 29/07/03 03:49 GMT Daylight Time
Message-id:

.
Nick Bourbaki's lickspittle, Dork Holes-by mumbled:


If you can *prove* (i.e. with evidence which would stand up in a court of
law) that either StanB or Briarroot are *not* white then Bourbaki's argument
is
screwed, and he looks like a jackass (not for the first time).


While my "help" may be quite unnecessary for that, I will point out that my
quote of Nick's statement in no way referred to only Stan Booz and Briarroot,
as Mr. Lickspittle has it. Obviously, this *distortion* is the result of a
lack
of reading skill by Dorkus, who is in a tizzy over his hero having been hoist
on his own petard.




If, on the other hand, StanB and Briarroot *are* white, then that *proves*
that, in this case, Bourbaki's acuity, once again, is the greater...


I have no doubt that Mr. Bourbaki's acuity is far greater than thine own,
but
this is not really an issue. And it hardly matters what race, creed, or
color
Nick's two most annoying critics may be. These guys would be just as
annoying, in nice shades of red, green, or yellow. Or red, white, and blue.

BTW, it was Nick who asserted that *all* the critics and (American)
political
activists here were ganging up on him unfairly because he was an "outsider,"
and it was also Nick who explained that they did this because they were all
white, flag-waving, psuedo-patriotic American racists. I don't agree. Not
entirely, that is.
A few of Nick's critics do not fit that mold. Some of them were not
motivated by Nick's alleged status as an "outsider," and in fact, have no
interest in where he is from. They simply found fault with something he
wrote,
and got carelessly tossed into a bucket with the others by Nick, who
mislabelled them all the same.



Which of these people is *not* caucasian?


I wouldn't know. Do you track such things for Nick? May I suggest some
additional tracking questions:

1.Which of you are not Christians?
2.Which of you are not Republicans?
3.Which of you are not high-rated?
4.Which of you are not Sicilian players?
5.Which of you are over the hill?
6.Which of you suck in the endgame?


Don't worry, Nick and his lickspittle will not use this info for any
purpose
other than their ad hominem attacks,

Give an example of one of these, if you please...

here on these newsgroups. Your
information is perfectly safe, and will never be divulged or sold to others.
Thank you for your cooperation.


Ok then, name *any* of Bourbaki's non-White vociferous vituperative critics...