Hate Mail


Contact Us


Hate Mail - 2011 Disclaimer:
We reserve the right to print any email that we receive.
We make no corrections for grammar or spelling.

Our Commentary is in Red.

Updated 16 November 2011

16 November 2011

Stuart Hamilton wrote:

I stumbled upon your website googling an anonymous quote:

"And they call me a Marxist"

Your website was on the very first page, and I delighted in sifting through it. You have done your homework, and it shows.

Unfortunately, I'm afraid my use of your website was not quite as you had intended, and I'm sure you don't mind at all. From one political writer to another we both understand the importance of unfettered access to accurate information, and I say thank you for doing all the ground work for us.

All of these "targets", these "subversive" people and organizations all in one comprehensive resource, my little "terrorist minions" over in data entry are having field day organizing your work into a searchable database we can use to network other activists.

Always remember, my good man (or woman): One nation's terrorist is another nation's freedom fighter.

It is funny how so many people like to use that weak saying, "One nation's terrorist is another nation's freedom fighter" as though there is no right or wrong and every opinion and political belief is right and deserves equal consideration. This phrase is used when the person uttering it needs the actions in question to be dismissed or excused. There is always the need to blame the victim that was minding their own business and living a life as a law abiding citizen and enjoying the freedoms of life. The desire to believe that the victim deserved what happened to them at the hands of the "freedom fighter" is all so important to the person that is desperate to believe that quote. The difference in a freedom fighter and a terrorist is easily determined by what freedoms are to be gained and what freedoms are to be lost by the actions in question.

Maybe you are talking about the Muslims that have targeted anyone for death that hold non-Islamic beliefs or anyone that publicly says anything they view as insulting against their religion and celebrated death to them as a righteous act. The educated and seriously religious Muslims the comprised the entire makeup of the 19 hijackers on 11 September 2001 were not freedom fighters. It is clear who the terrorists are here. They were not freedom fighters... they were terrorists.

Maybe you are speaking of the eco-terrorists that firebomb new neighborhoods and houses because they do not like people living in new houses or have some complaint about urban sprawl. They use terror tactics to scare the families of people they do not like or have some political disagreement.

Perhaps you consider the idea of "One nation's terrorist is another nation's freedom fighter" refers to the animal rights activists that believe in vandalizing farms and medical research facilities and destroying years of medical research is a noble cause. These animal rights terrorists target their families that have done nothing wrong. Are these the tactics of a freedom fighter or a terrorist?

Those people that can refer to terrorists as freedom fighters do not see the right and wrong in these situations whereby they commit the crimes to prove a point, but we do. There are many people that want to see these terrorists as freedom fighters and worship them as such so they do. We do not. We know they are terrorists by their actions and their intentions.

Let us take a look at the definition of true freedom.

Freedom - The right of the individual to exist, live, and prosper for their own sake...

Freedom for some should not come at the price of taking freedom from others. Perhaps what needs to be stated are what freedoms these people are actually fighting to gain and who's freedoms they are taking away in the process.

What is it that the people you consider to be freedom fighters do to spread freedom?


31 October 2011

murat tuncay wrote:

Hello, i stumbled upon your website, though i forgot how, i just wanted to to include my opinion. I served in the Turkish military and was stationed in Afghanistan. i was one of about 1500 or so turkish troops. and your beliefs about islam is mind boggling. a brainwashed afghan with an ak47 is alot less dangerous then people like you who run this website. i know i cant change your opinion and you have the freedom of expressing them but your lack of knowledge about the rest of the world is what gives the Americans a bad name around the world. I can even say people like you are actually doing more damage then good especially to men and women who serve overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan, because you are brainwashing certain individuals who in return disrespect the local population damaging the effort to win hearts of the locals. I hope you realize this only keep your bullsh*t to yourself.

So you think that what we have stated is not true? This website is dedicated to the truth and recording history. And to you, this effort is all bullsh*t. That certainly explains a lot about you. You do not want us telling or remembering the truth. You certainly do not want anyone to point out the historical facts. If we are lacking knowledge, please show us the error of our ways. You have that opportunity, which so far you have not exercised. If you are going to state that we are lacking knowledge, you have to say what we have written is incorrect, so please, correct us.

There is no one that wants Islam to be a religion of Peace and Love more than us. Imagine how much better the world would be if that were true. Instead, the biggest threat to individuals is a well-educated radical Muslim that can recite the Koran by memory. He is more likely to kill in the name of Islam and Allah to help him get into Paradise. If you really think about it, this is about as selfish an ideal as any religion could endorse. Why are 1.3 billion Muslims standing against this attitude? The only people that can change the fear non-Muslims have of Muslims are the Muslims themselves. Non-Muslims cannot make Islam a religion that is willing to live in peace with non-Muslims. Only Muslims can do that and they can do that by actually making Islam a "Religion of Peace", not just saying that Islam is a "Religion of Peace".

All we have done is to cite the facts. The history of Islam is clear. Obviously, the hatred in Islam is not what every Muslim believes. We understand this fact. However, perhaps you would care to tell us where we are wrong. What facts did we inaccurately cite? What quotes from the leaders of Islam did we misquote? You take the time to write to us explaining of your opinion of how we are wrong, but you do not dispute a single fact on the website.

As far as us being dangerous, we have not killed, injured or harmed another individual. We have not threatened anyone. All we have done is to collect facts that we believe accurate illustrates the true nature of Islam and you have done absolutely nothing to refute any information contained within the website.

Is the information we have on the website incorrect? We have a theory. Aside from testing, we believe that the next nuclear weapon detonated in the United States by Islamic terrorists in the name of Islam and there will be very little morning within the Islam community. If fact, we believe there will be cheering around the world much like on September 11, 2001 there was cheering and celebrating in Islamic countries after hearing of the hijacked airlines being flown into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

We do applaud your efforts in fighting terrorists in Afghanistan alongside US troops and troops from other Western countries. We know not all Muslims are terrorists. We know not all Muslims are looking to kill non-Muslims. We do not dispute this at all. But we also know what the leaders of Islam say. We have the quotes. We see and hear the hatred toward America and Israel and this rhetoric cannot be ignored. If this makes us the cause of Islamic hatred around the world, we will just have to tolerate the hatred from those claiming to be Peaceful, Loving, and Tolerant of others.


E-mails from Farooq Qadri
1 of 2

31 October 2011

Farooq Qadri wrote:

Here are some examples of peaceful Islam u should research and Publish on ur Website Please.

You can use the word "beloved" all you want, but if you listen to the rhetoric and see the actions, it is clear that Islam is not a religion of "Peace and Love". You offered three examples of how you perceive Islam as peaceful. We offered over 15,000 specific examples of how Islam is NOT a religion of Peace, Love, and Tolerance.

It is obvious that you will believe nothing that we say. You, as it is with all other followers of Islam that write us, never dispute a single fact on this website. Muslims often vilify us, but they never dispute a single fact we have published on the website. Muslims often ignore the historical facts on this website, but they never dispute them. The actions of Muslims based on the teachings of the Koran and of the Islamic leaders define the religion and the true nature of its existence. We have cited thousands of examples and you do not dispute a single one. You only try to reiterate your position on how Islam is a peaceful religion. Stating that Islam is a peaceful religion does not make Islam a peaceful religion. People that worship a religion that is not Islam only need to live under Islamic rule to see how intolerant and short life can be especially if they try to practice or offer any form of public display of their religion.


E-mails from Farooq Qadri
2 of 2

01 November 2011

Farooq Qadri wrote:

You offered over 15,000 examples of how Islam is NOT a religion of Peace, Love, and Tolerance.

That is correct, that is exactly what we have offered and in both of your two e-mails you have not disputed a single fact in spite of the desire to advance the notion that Islam is above all, a religion based on Peace, Love, and Tolerance. We do not see it and so far, you have not offered anything of substance that contradicts the facts we have presented.

Islamic world constitutes Aprox.1/3 of Humanity,If your examples are correct then how can be Peace,Love and Tolerance possible in this world?Please explain simply.

It is not quite 1/3 of the world's population. There are approximately 1.3 billion Muslims in the world. There are approximately 6.5 billion people. That equates to less than 1 in 5 rather than 1 in 3. You do make a good point about Muslims living in peace with non-Muslims. It is going to be hard with the attitude that comprises so much of the Islamic leadership. Allow us to offer you these quotes from the leaders of Islam that should be preaching peace and love, but instead we get quotes like the following.

"At the end of the day, innocent people, when we say innocent people we mean Muslims...if you are non-muslim then you are guilty... I must have hatred toward everything not-Islam."
-- Imam Anjem Choudary

Here we have an Imam openly preaching intolerance of anything non-Islamic.

"They may say one thing to you in front of CNN but I can assure you behind your backs... they are standing with their Muslim brother and sisters... It is an Islamic obligation."
-- Imam Anjem Choudary

Based on Imam Anjem Choudary's admission that you cannot trust what a Muslim says, how are we to expect peace when apparently it is acceptable to lie in order to achieve Islamic goals?

"Jerusalem belongs to us, and the whole world belongs to us!"
-- Shaykh Safwat Hegazy, Egyptian member of the Muslim Brotherhood in a recent video threatened all non-Muslims

"I am telling you that my religion [Islam] doesn't tolerate other religions. It doesn't tolerate. The only one law which needs to be spread, it can be here or anywhere else has to be Islam."
-- Cleric Abdul Nacer Benbrika in an interview with ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) in November 2005

"What makes Allah happy? Allah is happy when non-Muslims get killed."
-- Abu Hamza al-Masn, former leader of Supporters of Shariah

It does not sound like the leaders of Islam want to live in Peace, Love, and Tolerance with anyone of a non-Islamic religious preference.

"The honor of Islam lies in insulting the unbelief and the unbelievers (kafirs). One who respects kafirs dishonors Muslims."
-- Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi, in a publication by Islamic Jihad

"Israel has a people's army and a draft and therefore they should be considered legitimate targets. They are part of the occupying power, and Palestinians consider them targets for suicide bombers as well as other means."
-- Mohamed Elmasry, Imam and President of the Canadian Islamic Congress

According to Imam Mohamed Elmasry, it is acceptable to kill any Israeli. Maybe you could explain to us how peace, love, and tolerance is supposed to exist with this set of values.

"The Jews preached permissiveness and corruption, as they hid behind false slogans like freedom and equality, humanism and brotherhood... They are cowards in battle... they flee from death and fear fighting... They love life."
-- Saudi Sheikh Abd Al-Muhsin Al-Qassem in Al-Madina

"True Islam permits neither elections nor democracy."
-- Sufi Mohammed, Muslim Cleric

This is where freedom, equality, humanism and love for each other are totally incompatible with Islam.

"As far as the matters of religion are concerned we know for sure that only Islam is the true religion in the eyes of God. In 3:85 it is mentioned that God will never accept any religion other than Islam. As far as the building of churches or temples is concerned, how can we allow this when their religion is wrong? And when worship is also wrong? Thus we will surely not allow such wrong things in our country."
-- Dr. Zakir Naik, Islamic speaker and writer on the subject of Islam

"If a Muslim becomes a non-Muslim and propagates his/her new religion, then it is as good as treason. There is a Death Penalty in Islam for such a person."
-- Dr. Zakir Naik, Islamic speaker

"Every Muslim should be a terrorist."
-- Dr. Zakir Naik, Islamic speaker

"Oh Allah, strike the apostate rulers,
Oh Allah, kill them one after the other, sparing none."

-- Abu Musab al Zarqawi, 7 January 2004

How is Peace, Love, and Tolerance going to exist with a religion that allows advocates this level of intolerance and hatred of non-Muslims? We do not see any of the 1.3 billion Muslims speaking against this rhetoric. If you want to see more quotes and you have the courage to read and understand the truth, read "Quotes From The Islamic World".

I agree that there are few thousand khwarij (out of islam) in Islamic World carrying weapons which spread terror within and outside the Islamic world,bringing bad name to Islam as a Religion.It does not mean that whole of the Islamic world indiscriminately is terrorist and intolerant to other faiths and Religions of the world.

If what you say is true, then why do we not see the remaining 1.3 billion Muslims shouting down these people? Why do we not see 1.3 billion Muslims standing against the "few thousand" terrorists that commit acts of terrorism in the name of Islam? Why is it not publicly condemned by the entire Muslim population instead of celebrated as acts of greatness and heroism? These terrorists are true Muslims that have studied Islam for years to the point some can recite the Koran by memory. They have a clear understanding what the Koran teaches.

So there is dire need of inter-Faith dialog to remove misconceptions about Islam and other Religions of this Globe,for security and Peace of Our Generations.

What dialog do you think should be the subject matter? Are we going to discuss acts of terrorism committed by Muslims in the name of Allah and Islam compared to terrorist acts committed by other religions in the name of their religion? Will the subject of the extreme hatred between Sunni Muslims and Shi'a Muslims be part of this dialog? Or are you going to speak of how Islam is a religion of Peace and Love when the Koran never once speaks of Allah's love for non-Muslims, but it speaks of Allah's cruelty toward and hatred of non-Muslims more than 500 times?

Please Analyze the facts about Khawarij,who provides funds and weapons to them,and who is the largest Producer of weaponry in the world also raging wars in the name of creating Peace,Democracy,Human rights etc. Sir,I am not here to Dispute your Facts,I am drawing your attention to resolve misconceptions regarding Islam and Islamic World.Please try to understand my views Positively.
Just a Muslim

At the risk of being accused of putting words in your mouth, it would seem you are talking about the United States when you speak of raging wars in the name of creating Peace, Democracy, Human rights, etc... Your argument could certainly be made for the United States entering World War II against Japan and Nazi Germany. But for the sake of this argument, let us just focus on the war in Afghanistan and Iraq. This is common knowledge, but it seems you missed the facts as they were taking place. The United States and other western nations entered a war against Iraq in 1991 because Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi Army invaded Kuwait. The United States and other countries came to the rescue of the small nation of Kuwait. At the end of the first Gulf War, a Ceasefire Agreement was signed and Saddam Hussein was able to remain in power if he complied with the terms of the Ceasefire Agreement. There were many violations so the war continued. It was not our idea to go back in to Iraq. We would just have settled for peace with Hussein still in power. He and his sons could have just continued torturing and killing his own citizens with impunity. His power would still be intact, but he chose to violate the agreement he signed.

We went into Afghanistan to fight the Taliban after the attack on the United States on 11 September 2001. Perhaps you remember this act of terror. It was in all the newspapers and on television and radio. This war was to eliminate the terrorist threat that so many Muslims seemed to embrace. How many Muslims condemned the terrorist acts the Taliban and Osama bin Laden planned and committed? Muslims were dancing in the streets upon hearing the news... you know because of their peaceful nature and love for non-Muslims.

It is strange how you do not dispute any of the facts and yet you speak of misconceptions regarding Islam and the Islamic world. What misconceptions do you wish to discuss? What misconceptions are there? What is it that we do not understand?


E-mails from Jimmy Caldwell
1 of 2

28 September 2011

Jimmy Caldwell wrote:


I just wanted to take a moment to extend sincere gratitude for you website. While not an exhaustive list, the names of individuals and organizations that your site catalogues, helps to provide a good starting point.

Although any thoughtful individual would disagree with you short sighted and immoral ontological perspective, you have done the service of helping to identify some of the heroes that need continued support.

Thank you

It is hard to believe that you would support the people that take the law into their own hands and destroy the property of others. These are the same tactics used by the KKK and other White Supremacists when they targeted someone and for the very same reasons. How would you feel if someone decided to destroy your property because they did not like you? We know you will not answer that question. We consider these people criminals; you consider them to be heroes. The others on this website openly side with Anti-American forces with the intent of weakening America with Communist/Socialist/Marxist values they want to force on everyone else… more of your heroes. However, we do appreciate that you acknowledge that we have accurately presented the facts for the historical record. We know this because you have thanked us for the website content. The important thing is that we make sure no one forgets who these people are and what they did.

Most people that worship these people hate us for printing what we do as if we are printing inaccurate facts or taking quotes out of context. At least you are honest enough to realize we are printing the truth. It is strange how you refer to us as immoral, yet you endorse the same destructive tactics used by the Brown Shirts of Nazi Germany in the 1930s. You have a strange sense of morality.


E-mails from Jimmy Caldwell
2 of 2

07 November 2011

Jimmy Caldwell wrote:


Thanks for your unexpected and well articulated response.
It would be a pleasure to debate any idealogical position with you.
To take the law into one's own hands and destroy the property of others was your first point of incredulity. Well, the bush administration did this when they invaded Iraq.
Against the legal authority of international dictates they decided to destroy the property of millions and take the lives of many innocent men, women and children.

You did not say if you were speaking about the Bush 41 or the Bush 43 Administration. During the Bush 41 Administration, we went to the rescue of the small nation of Kuwait after Iraq invaded that country. It is unclear if you are opposed to this action or not. This conflict ended, or so we thought, with a Ceasefire Agreement signed by all nations involved.

During the Bush 43 Administration, we engaged in military action because of violations of the clear and deliberate Ceasefire Agreement. If you remember, the weapons inspectors were not allowed access to investigate as they needed to do to see that Iraq's WMD program had been dismantled in accordance with the conditions of the Ceasefire Agreement. It was known that Iraq had and used chemical weapons after the Ceasefire Agreement was signed. This was in all the newspapers and all over the television and radio.

Destroying my property due to dislike or hate may be a tactic of right wing groups, but to destroy the properties of those who are being destructive is a morally defensible position.

Destroying property due to dislike or hate is a tactic of Left-Wing groups as we have shown on this website. It is morally and legally wrong either way and we do not support either one. Do you not see the difference in the attitude in this "Right-Wing" website and your Left-Wing heroes? Is it not funny to you how we are the ones that believe in obeying the laws living in a civilized manner and treating others with respect as opposed to your views whereby you try to find a moral rational to destroy other people's property.

So based on your statement and morals, the people that have destroyed other people's property are now legitimate targets and any destructive actions against them are morally defensible. Did we understand that right? That appears to be what you just stated. Or are they exempt from the laws that others are forced to follow?

How would a political ideology that gives more power to the common person be considered weakening?

Do you believe that everyone should share in that ideology? Are the Right-Wing groups you speak of allowed to take advantage of this moral right of empowerment?

What you seem to fail to understand is that your rights of power end when you destroy my property.

How does a political ideology that gives so much power to the individual that it is morally justified for one person to attack another person and destroy their property? Is this what you consider freedom? Is this what you consider civilized behavior? Is this the way you want people to live?

I do not acknowledge that you accurately present "facts", just that you help to list individuals, websites or groups that help to struggle against the tyranny and oppression that the american oligarchists continue to project onto the world.

You seem to acknowledge that we have the right information. You went out of your way to thank us for listing the people and groups. We clearly presented their accomplishments which caused you to acknowledge them as heroes to the cause(s) you support. You claimed our website was a good starting point indicating that our facts were indeed accurate.

Smedley Butler was a great american and a great Marine. It is difficult to be both, but he was. While I'm sure that you haven't read his work, I would encourage you to do so out of an appeal to your patriotism.

Thanks again,


We are not sure how you measure the greatness of a Marine and an American, but it is not hard to be both. The first point that you need to focus on is the willingness to be respectful of others. The people you proudly consider "Heroes" do not have this respect. They also selfishly care about no one other than themselves as can be seen in their actions to others they disagree. As you can see from our reply, you are clear on where we stand on this matter. You do not see us attempting to use the same morals that you exemplify to take action against these people. The reason is because we respect the property of others and we respect the laws of civilized society.

As an American that has proudly served in the Marine Corps, we are very familiar with Smedley Butler and based on the beliefs you have shared with us, we probably have been knowledgeable of Smedley Butler long before you were born. Seeing as how you decided to mention him by name, how do you think Smedley Butler would feel about destroying someone else's property as the people you refer to as "Heroes"? We ask mainly because you just do not see many Quakers involved in these acts of terrorism.


E-mails from Joe Breece
1 of 4

18 September 2011

Subject: F*ck you

Joe Breece wrote:

You guys are dumb. I hope you all die

While your well thought out e-mail shows the true nature of your beliefs, you actually did not offer anything but the hysterical emotional ranting of irrational thinking whereby you offer absolutely nothing of intelligent or rational thought. Even though we know it is pointless to ask, what is it on this website that you dispute?

It is always good to hear from people that hate us and wish death upon us, especially those that do not show the intelligence to dispute or contradict a single thought on the website. However, it was good to hear from you. Please feel free to write us again to offer any other ideas you may want to share with us.


E-mails from Joe Breece
2 of 4

20 September 2011

Subject: Re: F*ck you

Joe Breece wrote:

I suppose wishing death upon you was an ignorant remark on my part, and I truly do not wish any harm upon anyone. However the only thing I dispute is the idea you have of putting these persons personal contact info on your website. By putting their info out there you are giving the knowledge some psycho needs to commit an act of violence to their lives. I feel it is a high school play that is unnecessary and childish. You have the write to say what you want but I feel there is a moral code that you should not cross and by putting this info out there, you have crossed that line.

You "suppose" wishing death upon us was ignorant? Your first e-mail was very telling of your true nature… and yes, your first e-mail was ignorant on every level. However, you did write the e-mail showing your true feelings and sent it when you were ready to share the extent of your thoughts with us. You resorted to insults as your only intellectual weapon. Even the subject line of your e-mail showed the level of your intellect. You took the time to write us sharing your intellectual thoughts and reasoning abilities and you have done so. You have clearly stated that you do not dispute the content for being incorrect; you just do not like our existence. This is not surprising, in fact, it is usually the case.

We know people hate us for telling the truth. Many people do not want to hear the truth because it causes them to have to face the reality of the world. They have to accept things that contradict their lives and/or their political beliefs and they hate anyone that tells them their beliefs are based on something they do not like. We understand this, but that does not change the facts.

If you think that the information we put on the website is something new, the Radical Liberals we write about do the same thing and have done so for decades. That is why we do it. We are using their playbook and we know they do not like it one bit, but we are only giving credit where credit is due. Here is the one major difference. People like us do not vandalize people's homes or terrorize people. People like us do not take the law into our hands to dish out a punishment as we see fit. That is the difference; we are not the criminal, they are.

We will make note of your reference to the people that commit acts of violence against the people they hate such as medical researchers at UCLA. You referred them as psychos. We completely agree. They are dangerous and we have no problem alerting people of the danger, which is what we have done and by your own words, you have some problem with this. You have not condemned any of the actions of these people, but you wish the death of the people that write about them.

You would have no problem supporting these people. We know this by the tone of your first e-mail. Your wishing our demise is what you want and what you believe. If you take a look at our website, you will see that we have never threatened anyone. We have never wished to kill anyone. We have never tried to stop anyone from speaking. We have clearly printed that we want people such as yourself to keep talking and spouting what they truly believe. Your e-mails are a perfect example. We place your e-mails as received on the website for all to see. At no point have we ever tried to prevent anyone from speaking the truth about what they believe. In fact, as you can see, we are willing to show the world what you have to say and give you full credit for your words.

You have clearly stated your beliefs about us, but you have not stated any of your beliefs about any of the groups or people we have written about on this website. Of the groups and people we have on this website, are there any that you think we got right?


E-mails from Joe Breece
3 of 4

20 September 2011

Subject: Re: F*ck you

Joe Breece wrote:

Just because I wrote down the first thing that came to my head doesn't mean those were my true feelings.

Then why did you write it? These are your words and thoughts that you wished to share with the world. This was the information you wanted us to hear and understand. Are you in a habit of voicing your opinions without thinking? Do you not understand that words actually have meaning? You made the statement. You obviously thought about what you were writing while sitting at your keyboard and organizing your thoughts. Do you normally throw out insults without thinking? At no point do we think you would actually try to kill us, you just do not like our existence and the fact we actually have an opinion.

If I truly wished death to you I would do it myself, and as far as the idea that these people put contact info of their enemies is not entirely true. Not all have done this.

We have no doubt that if you decided to kill us, you would make the attempt and you would do it to stop us from exercising our First Amendment Right of Free Speech. It does not matter that we have done absolutely nothing to you it is just that you do not want us to speak.

Not all of these people and groups have listed the addresses of their targets. Here is the thing; nothing we have said is untrue. Their addresses are published for all to see in the White Pages. Any information we have is in the public domain easily accessible for anyone to find. We have just collected it and assembled it on this website. As stated earlier, this website is a historical record so people will not forget.

The old saying two wrongs don't make a right comes to mind.

We have done nothing wrong or illegal. It is more to say we can play the same game you can. If you want to make your targets worry that you know where you live, we can reciprocate. You can say and do whatever you want, but we will remember these actions in the historical record.

Atleast these people stood for something, something that they believed would benefit the greater good of humanity. You are simply repeating hat the news has already stated with the idea that someone will take this info and act upon these people in a negative way. You are the ignorant ones for as you said "doing what they already did." Think for yourselves and do something that will help the world rather than acting like a high school kid talking about others and hiding behind a computer screen.

We know what they stand for. All of their good intentions do not matter. Their actions and methods are what concern us. If they want the laws changed, there are ways to do that without acts of terrorism.

It is clear you have completely failed to understand what we stand for and what is important to us. We stand for Freedom. We stand against Terrorism, Socialism, Communism and the agents against Freedom. If you had read the website with an open mind, this would have been ever so apparent. It is clear you did not do that. You only wanted to see hate and therefore, that is what you saw.

This website has collected news stories and printed them for the record. If you read the Home Page, you will see that this website is a record of groups and people maintained for the posterity citing their activities. You do not have to like it, but it is all factual. Without a record, historical events and the groups and people involved will be forgotten. We do not want that to happen.

Something you may not have considered, by placing specific names with addresses, it prevents any confusion with another person of the same name.

We have never incited any violence nor have we ever wanted to stop anyone from saying anything. In fact, we want these people to keep saying what is on their minds. It is important to know what these people want to do and how they want to do it. That is the record we have chosen to keep.

So you think that recording history as any history book or newspaper does is acting like a high school kid talking about others. Perhaps you need to be introduced to the United States Constitution.

As far as how I'm related to these people I'm not. They also didn't hurt anyone. In all of their cases they simply damaged property. Something that can be replaced but since you're probably a money hungry greedy capitalist you think its a big deal. I agree and support these people 100% they did what others were afraid to do. I hope someday everyone could think freely like they do without worrying what someone like you might say or do.

We never mentioned anything about you being related to anyone on this website. We do not know how you came up with this statement.

That is your argument, no one was physically harmed. Who is going to replace the damaged property? What gives someone the right to destroy someone else's property? Does your neighbor have the right to destroy your property because they do not like you? What about the impact on the rest of the family and the children. Do you really think that can be ignored? What happens when some is hurt or killed? It has almost happened. In the attempt to firebomb the home of Lynn Fairbanks, terrorists of the ALF placed a firebomb at the home of one of her neighbors, a 70 year-old woman. Luckily, the bomb failed to explode. You can read all about this act of terrorism on the ALF Page along with the other acts of terrorism committed by the ALF.

Here is moral question that we have never gotten an answer from someone that holds the belief that it is ok because no one was hurt. If it is morally right for "Animal Rights Activists" to attack and destroy property in the name of animal rights, the environment, global warming, etc..., is it morally right for someone to target and commit an act of violence or destruction against the same activist for whatever reason they view as justifiable?

So your opinion is that because I do not want the property that I worked hard to acquire destroyed makes me a "hungry greedy capitalist"? Well, guess what. Everyone here firmly believes in Capitalism. We stand for freedom, independence, and self-reliance. Capitalism is a major part of that philosophy. While you have not actually stated it directly, it appears you hold some version of a Marxist or Socialist philosophy.

Dependency Communism

Capitalism is the most natural form living. It has been around since the beginning of mankind. While you never did actually state what your political preference was, it is clear Capitalism is not it. In that light, allow us to leave you with a final thought.

"Capitalism allows for an ever increasing standard by which success is measured. Socialism, on the other hand, allows for an ever increasing standard of dependency."


E-mails from Joe Breece
4 of 4

21 September 2011

Subject: Re: F*ck you

Joe Breece wrote:

First I never said I hated you nor did I say I felt like you should die. I just made a comment, something people do all of the time without having a second thought about it.

Allow us to quote you again. "You guys are dumb. I hope you all die." That was your first e-mail. Perhaps you should consider thinking more before you speak. Your comment was pretty clear.

I never said any of your info was false and the fact that you brought that up leads me to believe that some of it is false. You're also not speaking therefore the First Amendment has nothing to do with an internet forum. The First Amendment was written in the 1700's with vocal announcement in mind not people sitting in a room typing their thoughts. I also never said I don't want you to speak I simply disagree with the methods you have of expressing your opinion.

So you are not disputing any of the content on the website, yet you clearly stated in your first e-mail, "You guys are dumb." This comment implies that information on the website is incorrect. If you find the information correct, how could we be "dumb"?

You know absolutely nothing about the First Amendment or the United States Constitution. It is comments like this that is the reason we place your e-mails on the website for everyone to read.

As far as voicing opinions without thought, yes I do. It shows that I'm not afraid to say what comes to mind. As far as your existence goes I don't consider you to have one. All I see is a website, an inanimate object that does nothing, and I have no idea who I'm speaking to which means I cannot connect with you in order to understand your thinking.

What it shows is that you speak without thinking.

These people never came after you so I don't see why you feel the need to give put their info out there. You say you disapprove of their actions yet you state that you can play the same game they can. If you truly disapprove of them then why stoop to their level?

We addressed this in the last e-mail. Perhaps you should read it again. This sounds like another example of speaking without thinking.

If you dislike their methods then why not go after everyone who uses these methods? The military kills people in the Middle East everyday yet you don't have military generals, captains, even normal average soldiers info on your website. These men kill people for a paycheck and you consider them heroes but when a multimillion dollar house is burned down you think those who acted are terrorists and ruining the world.

If you cannot see the difference, explaining it would be a futile effort.

You say you stand for freedom? You clearly don't know what true freedom is. John Locke said that in order to have a government and have your freedoms protected you must give up complete and total freedom. Communism isn't bad unless it is in control by a bad person ex. Hitler, Stalin, Ho Chi Minh.

So your view is if you want freedom, you have to give up all of your freedom? Is this what you learned in school? It is clear you have no idea what freedom is.

You're not recording any history. You're simply restating what has already been stated by newspapers and history books. What does the Constitution have to do with that anyways? The Constitution doesn't say freedom of copying it says freedom of speech and if you spoke freely then it would be a whole other story.

Your lack of education is astounding. This response from you is so telling of your agenda how can we not place this e-mail on the website for all to see? We are recording events that actually happened. By definition, that is history. The First Amendment to the Constitution gives me the right to do this. Perhaps the phrase "Freedom of the Press" is a term you might have hear in the past. It is clear you have no idea how it is relevant, but that does not really matter.

The property is not important. It is a thing, a thing that can be replaced. And what about the impact most of these things have on the environment, animals, human beings health and well being? These people are destroying inanimate objects that are negatively effecting the world. If my neighbor can proove its negatively effecting the world then yes they do have that right because the planet is something we share and have equal input on how to treat it. Almost is exactly what it is, almost. No one has died so their actions are no more dangerous then the many daily activities we do such as driving, something that kills millions of people every year. The 70 year old woman simply got lucky. If she had died then that whoild have been unfortunate however she didn't therefore she is not a statistic but an eyewitness to an act of what you call terrorism.

Property is not important? Where did you get that idea? The right to own property is one of the cornerstones of Freedom.

Yes they can commit whatever act of violence they wish if they can justify it, and if they can't then so be it. Morality is something that was created to give people a conscious and think twice before acting. But if you think twice then you aren't thinking freely, you are thinking about what others will think. The fact that you don't want your property destroyed isn't what makes you a greedy capitalist. The fact that you want the property in the first place is what makes you a greedy capitalist. You say you rely on self reliance yet over 3/4's of everything in America comes from another country. You're not independent if 90% of what's in your home is from China and you're not free because you acknowledge the centralized government that makes all the decisions for you. As far as what you assume is a Marxist or socialist idea thaybis not my belief, I am an anarchist. I believe there is no need for any kind of government. Governments aren't needed neither is society. People need to learn how to survive on their own and learn how to appreciate what they have rather than what they wish they had. I believe the government is the main reason for people living like this.

We know you are an Anarchist by the way you view Communism as positive. We know this is probably useless, but you should consider reading the editorial "Forms of Government". We are so happy you sent this e-mail to us. Your e-mail explains so much about your core beliefs and your education.


27 June 2011

Mike Hislop wrote:

How can you say those things about a Hummer? Dont buy it because Americans are dying in Humvees, thats idiotic. They have a contract with the US Army, to which every major American car company submitted bids on. SUV drivers are murders for resulting in more deaths when hitting a car? Thats not the SUV's fault, its the retard driving it, probably talking on their cell phone. You wanna bitch about something, but all you have to backup your wacko ideals are statistics. Your not worth more of my time than this, in fact it would be faster to point out what you are correct about than what your mistaken about.

Allow us to break down this e-mail one sentence at a time.

How can you say those things about a Hummer?

What "things" did we say that you disagree? We have never said that no one should purchase a Humvee. If this is the vehicle that a person wants or needs to purchase and they have the financial ability, they should be able to purchase such a vehicle as with any other vehicle.

Dont buy it because Americans are dying in Humvees, thats idiotic. They have a contract with the US Army, to which every major American car company submitted bids on.

You are right... that is totally idiotic on so many levels. We did not make that statement. CodePINK made that statement in the article on their website entitled "Top Ten Reasons Not To Buy A Hummer". We just commented on the CodePINK article.

Do you recommend the Humvee as a vehicle or do you hate its existence?

SUV drivers are murders for resulting in more deaths when hitting a car? Thats not the SUV's fault, its the retard driving it, probably talking on their cell phone.

So you admit that SUVs are safer automobiles in an accident. We agree as do the millions of SUV owners that are driving their automobile of choice. Why is it that people like yourself hold such negative feelings toward SUVs and their owners are so quick to blame them for the lack of accident survivability of cheap, lightweight high-mileage vehicles that fold up in the slightest encounter with another vehicle? That should upset you... the lack of survivability of the cars you want to replace SUVs with their safety within the confines of their solid construction. Instead, all you can do is to insult their decision to purchase a vehicle that will keep everyone safe in a collision and accuse them of murder because you dislike what they drive.

You wanna bitch about something, but all you have to backup your wacko ideals are statistics.

We are not the ones complaining and the statistics we have are accurate.

Your not worth more of my time than this, in fact it would be faster to point out what you are correct about than what your mistaken about.

You really have not said where we are mistaken. You have not stated any statistics where we are wrong. You tried to give us credit for the statement whereby Americans are dying in Humvees, but we did not make that statement.


18 May 2011

Steve A Waldrop wrote:

Jf you had bothered researching your article better,you would see where there are $197,000,000.00 in wrong-ful death,violations in civil rights,&Justice Department lawsuits,not to mention Youtube posted video's of his deputies mis-treating & beating arrestee's,who haven't been found guilty, & just could not make bond to get out.If this is your sort of hero,I'd hate to see your sort of enemy..

Steve A Waldrop

In every prison, inmates are always complaining about conditions and if the inmates could sue and be financially rewarded for their imprisonment, you would see a lot more lawsuits. Here is a suggestion, if these inmates would not break the law, they would not end up in the custody of Sheriff Arpaio.

It is obvious that you do not understand why we like him so we will try to explain it to you. When forced to give the inmates cable TV, he allowed two channels to be viewed, the Weather Channel and the Disney Channel, thereby fulfilling his cable TV requirement. He took away coffee because it is a luxury not a dietary requirement. He started requiring inmates to work for their room and board by forming chain gangs to work on city projects at a much cheaper cost to the taxpayer. Law abiding taxpayers are required to earn a living, so why should we expect any less from the inmates? This is not a resort where meals are provided for free.

If you think that Sheriff Arpaio is breaking the law, perhaps you should inform the District Attorney or the States Attorney's Office and demand an investigation and his immediate resignation.

If you are unfamiliar with elected public office, please allow us to remind you that the position of Sheriff is an elected office. Apparently the voters of Maricopa County have no problem with the treatment of the county’s inmates that have been committing crimes against the citizens of their community for years. What you fail to understand is that prison is not supposed to be a vacation spot. It is not supposed to be fun. It is not supposed to be a place of fine dining or luxurious accommodations.

If you do not like the way prisoners are treated, you should seriously consider running against Sheriff Arpaio in the next election. Here are some ideas for your campaign. To set a foundation for your campaign, you should first present to the County government a solid plan to give prisoners better treatment and implement a plan of rehabilitation based on kindness, love, and concern combined with catered meals prepared by the finest chefs in the county or you could resort to All-You-Can-Eat buffet style meals. You could turn incarceration in to a veritable paradise instead of a center of punishment as to spare the feelings of the misunderstood inmates that find themselves in county jail completely innocent of any crime.

You make the accusations that for no reason at all Arpaio’s deputies are harming inmates. We would love to see the video of deputies targeting and attacking an inmate that was minding his own business, not harming anyone, and obeying the rules of the prison.

It is funny how so many people openly hate the sheriff whose job it is to actively engage and subdue criminals and have so much sympathy for those criminals that have no respect for the law and for other people i.e. victims of their crimes. It is easy to see where your sympathies lie and how much support you have for the law enforcement community that are Constitutionally obligated to enforce the law and keep the peace.


E-mails from Julia Vogt
1 of 2

05 May 2011

Julia Vogt wrote:

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,

when I was googeling the name of the activist Gary Yourofsky, I was very suprised to come across your website. I have to say, that I find it very disturbing.

Why were you surprised to come across this website when you did a search for Gary Yourofsky? You did the search and we have the information. It is only logical that you would have found this website. Or course, we are happy you took the time to visit our website.

Why do you find it disturbing that a historical record exists?

I find it very dangerous, to call people like Mr. Yourofsky terrorists. Of course, people like him have to make themselves heard and therefore have to speak in a radical way. If you don't disturb people in a way you cannot grab there attention, especially when you are trying to make the public see that they are being lied to by their very own government. The speech I saw, given by Mr Yourofsky did absolutely not include anything that would deserve being called a terroristic action. His way of speaking actually reminds me of the way American reverends preach at church. And for some reason nobody thinks anything is wrong with that.

We are only keeping a record of Gary Yourofsky’s activities. He proudly speaks about his crimes committed in the name of his political activities. The law does not matter to him as can be seen from his beliefs. It is his actions and criminal behavior that defines him. It is his actions that are so bothersome. American reverends do not advocate or support destruction of those that hold different beliefs.

Burning down stores and homes are absolutely no ways of making yourself heard. But judging whole organizations as terrorists, because some individual commits crimes, is also not a way to start a serious debate.

When these groups openly advocate actions like these as opposed to speaking against criminal behavior, these groups will be associated with the terrorists they support with their actions and rhetoric.

Your website is nothing but extremely fundamentalistic and dangerous. I am sorry to break this to you, BUT also capitalism has turned out, that it it NOT the best economic sollution for this world. Or do you not care, that your very own government is ginving trillions of dollars to support banks, and people who have invested money in order to have a pension are living in the street? And NO this has not happened because your current president is a democrat. Also a republican president would have had to do this sooner or later.

Perhaps you should take another look at the Home Page and you will see that this website is a record of people and groups. Their actions should not be forgotten. This website is a historical record of events, activities, people, and groups. We do not advocate any illegal activities either directly or indirectly. This website is not a sounding board for terrorism or vigilante actions. We would not expect anyone to retaliate or resort to violence against any of these people of groups except in self-defense.

Capitalism IS the best economic solution for the world. How many wars have been fought between two capitalist countries? People living under capitalist societies have the higher standards of living as opposed to living under Socialist/Communist form of governments. Perhaps you could tell us what form of government you think is better.

We do care about the excessive spending that is the current situation that our government has placed this country and we certainly are against it probably more so than you are because it is our taxes that are being wasted.

It is people like you, who do harm with their fundamentalistic, american - centristic and capitalistic point of view.

What harm is it exactly that we do? When your country is in trouble (it does not matter which country that is), who is the first country that comes to your aid… it is America with all of its flaws… and rarely is this help really appreciated beyond the emergency.

The United States is not the ONLY nor is it the greatest country in the world.

It probably depends on how you define “the greatest country”. Which country has freed more people from the grip of terror, Fascism, Socialism, and Communism? Which country is responsible for ending Communism in much of Europe? Which country is responsible for the destruction of the Berlin Wall? Which country is the first to send aid to floods, earthquakes, and victims of other such disasters? Which country invented the internet that you are sending this e-mail on complaining about how poor America is? Which country saved most of Europe from the grip of the Nazis? Which country fed the German people in Berlin with the Berlin Air Lift? Which country helped China from the strangle hold of the Japanese in the 1930s and 1940s? Which country helped rebuild Japan after being dragged into a war it did not want? Which country helped to rebuild all of free Europe after World War II? Which country has fed the world with the excess food production when other countries are unable to feed themselves, especially those countries with Socialist governments? Which country has been THE Beacon of Freedom for well over 100 years? Which country is the most generous when it comes to foreign aid? If you are having trouble with the answers, allow us to give you the answer… It was the United States of America. We have offered you reasons in the above questions why we think that America is the best country in the history of the world, but we would love to hear what country you believe to be the best country and the reasons why?

While America is not the ONLY country, it is the first country called upon when help is needed.

I am happy to live in a country, where I don't need a car but have public transport available to get around. Where I am not scared to get shot in the street, because every idiot is allowed to carry a weapon. Where I am not forced to eat genetically modified food, because it is LEGAL to label non-modified products. Where I am not told by radical Christians I will burn in hell, because I don't share their believes.

We noticed that you never did offer your country of citizenship.

You do not need a car here in America. Nothing says you are required to have a car. It is the high standard of living we have in this country allows most of the population to afford an automobile. Almost every mid to large city has some form of public transportation. There are buses, subways, and trains. A fact that most people do not realize is that America has the richest poor people in the world. Most "poor" people in America have a car, a place to live, a television, and a cell phone. Most are well fed to the point of being overweight. No one in this country starves to death. For those that need shelter, there are many shelters that are run by the Christians you hold in such low regard. The government even pays people not to work via unemployment benefits. This touches on the excessive spending you alluded to earlier.

You will find most crime exists is in cities where private gun ownership is banned. Guns owned by law abiding citizens are rarely used in crimes just like knives, chainsaws, and other items that can kill someone owned by law abiding citizens are rarely used in crimes. But it is good to hear that you live in a country where there is no crime... or at least that is the impression we get from your e-mail.

You can eat whatever food you wish. No one forces anyone to eat anything they do not want. Organic food is sold at practically every grocery store in this country. There are actually grocery stores that sell ONLY Organically grown foods.

If you do not like talking to radical Christians, you do not have to. If you really want to stay away from Christians, you are welcome to immigrate to Saudia Arabia (assuming you do not already live there). Christianity is banned there and you do not have to worry about any Christians telling you anything.

Most of the explanations on your web page, why you don't share certain opinions, such as Vegetarianism, not going by car etc. are really lazy and not based on any scientific ground. Plus, I honestly think a lot of these "opinions" are just made up, to make people believe that environmental or animal rights activists are crazy.

If you want to be a vegetarian, go ahead, if you want to walk or ride a bicycle, go you are free to do so. We are not sure what you mean by the rest of this. Our opinions are what we believe and they are not opinions about scientific subject matter. They are based on the facts at hand. If you do not like them, you are free not to accept them. It might help if you were more specific about which opinions you are referring to as being not based on any scientific ground.

And Islam is not a peaceful religion? How about all of these preachers in your churches that tell the smallest children, that they will burn in hell, if they don't share their opinion? An extremely peaceful preactice...

If you said that to a Mullah in Iran, you would be placed in prison. You might disagree with a Christian Preacher about his opinions, but you do not see any Christian Preachers using their churches to incite terrorist actions against the Infidels of the world. What religion do you see as the religion of most terrorists? The answer is Islam. It is not Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Atheism, or any religion. What religion has sworn death to Jews around the world? Again, the answer is Islam. What religion has sworn death to America? Yet again, it is Islam. If you want to see quotes of the "Peaceful" intentions of Islam, please feel free to look at "Quotes From the Islamic World".

If you wonder, why noone of the people quoted on your HATE MAIL link never bothered to really engage in a discussion with you, you should try to set up a serious website, that is not only based on fanatic views.

Best regards, from just another country in the world,

Julia Vogt

It sure seems that people have engaged in discussions with us as we have many e-mails from people that certainly have something to say. Their comments seemed to be heartfelt and a true indication of their beliefs.


E-mails from Julia Vogt
2 of 2

07 May 2011

Julia Vogt wrote:

Thanks for your reply. It actually made me laugh in a lot of parts.

If you are interested in my citizenship, I am Austrian. I also had the pleasure of living in the US for a while, where I found it quite dificult at the age of 15 to get around without a car, although I lived pretty much at the center of the city. I was not able to walk, or to ride a bike, because it was simply to dangerous, since there was no infrastructure to do so. Also there where no buses. As a matter of fact, opposed to Austria, the public transport system in the US is very poor.

It would have been nice if you had actually provided the name of the city in America where you spent time. It is hard to address your statement without that information. There are very few large cities where there are no buses available for public transportation. One of the reasons that public transportation might be better in Austria is because it is so badly needed because of the expense of owning an automobile there. We know that gasoline is much more expensive throughout Europe so the cost of an automobile and the higher standard of living that is gained by owning an automobile is beyond the reach of ordinary average Austrian citizens than it is in America.

And for the record, every 15 year old girl in America finds it quite difficult to get around without a car and there is no shortage of whining about it either.

Poeple don't have do starve in the US? That's great! In Austria they don't either. But in Austria it would absolutely NEVER happen, that people who have saved up money for their retirement are left alone by the government, because they have lost everything through the crisis. In fact this could not even happen, because our system is entirely different.

What makes you think that starvation would happen in America before it would in Austria? America provides substantially more food than it consumes.

One of the reasons that your government is able to provide so many benefits to you is because you do not have to worry about supporting a large military to defend yourself. Austria has the United States to provide immediate assistance for you and your country in the event of an attack or invasion. Make sure you understand that statement, if any country ever attacked Austria, America would be the first on the scene to help defend the citizens of Austria. The same can be said for most, if not all of Europe. America is always there to help. As an American, it is part of our nature.

We would love to hear more about Austria’s retirement system. Please feel free to elaborate.

Here opposed to your country, everyone has social security. For some reason people like you define that as "socialist and evil!".

Everyone in America has the right to collect Social Security if needed regardless whether they paid into the program or not. Senior citizens all collect at 65 years of age. Children can collect Social Security anytime then need. In America, there are all manner of welfare programs that provide housing, food, medical care, and education for anyone in need.

We never said or implied that Social Security was evil. We all know this is something you want to believe, but it is a totally inaccurate statement.

If I don't like Christians I should move to Saudi Arabia? Wow, that is a smart response! I am not against Christians as such. I am against people who claim to know the truth, when it comes to religion. I find it dangerous to be fundamentalistic, no matter whether you are a Christian, Muslim or whatever other religion. I have never seen a fundamentalistic buddhist nowadays but in the past, they also had their wars on the name of religion. Just as Christians too. Or have you never heard of the crusades? If you haven't here is a link to inform you about them: And in fact your country also engages in war and criminal activities, for the inofficial religion of the US, such as oil.

We always like it when any talk of Christianity brings up the Crusades. That ended 700 years ago and that is the best example you can cite. Well if you want to talk about history, war, and criminal activities, we can provide a much more current example of the fine government Austria represents. How much time do you want to devote to the Nazis and their compassion to others? The Nazis were extreme believers in Animal Rights. They just did not think that certain humans were worth anything.

We will not go into detail about Kurt Josef Waldheim and his proud service as an intelligent officer in the Wehrmacht during World War II, the National Socialist German Students' League (NSDStB), a division of the Nazi Party, and his membership of the mounted corps of the SA also known as Brown Shirts.

As to the oil argument, the United States gets most of its oil from Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela aside from what we provide for ourselves. Guess where the oil comes from in Europe… the Middle East. The free flow of oil that America is fighting for to keep flowing goes to you.

If you remember history, the Gulf War in 1991, you will remember it was to remove the Iraqi Army from their invasion of Kuwait (another country that required America to save them from an invading force). This was Iraq’s attempt to control the free flow of oil to… wait for it… Europe and other parts of the world serviced by Middle Eastern oil.

If every religion in the world lived their true religious believes, we would not have any problems with each other. But unfortunately some think they no better than the others, although they have not talked to God, Jesus, Allah or Budhha in person.

Can you cite us examples of Christian or Buddhist terrorism? We can certainly cite you a few examples of Islamic terrorism, but we cannot find any Muslims in any great numbers standing against of their Muslim brothers committing these acts of terrorism. Since 11 September 2011, there have been over 17,000. If you are having trouble finding a good list of Islamic Terrorism, please let us help you with a detailed list.

The US is the first country to help with floods and catastrophies? Yeah, especially in your own country, where your own government has not been able to properly help the victims of Katrina. And it is certainly not the first and only one to helpy with international catastrophies. Also many European countries, especially Germany and France are usually pretty quick with offering their support. And also Austria, although we are a small country.

What country gets aid to another country faster than the United States? We are usually getting aid to foreign countries in need of aid within less than 24 hours. The process begins as soon as the disaster takes place.

Who do you think sent all of the help to the victims of Katrina? How much aid did Austria send or for that matter any of the European countries?

Allow us to educate you about New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina. For years, the Federal government offered money to New Orleans and Louisiana to help reinforce the levies around the city. New Orleans and Mayor Ray Nagin refused the money because it did not allow the money to be spent for anything other than the levy improvements. The money was offered and rejected by New Orleans and the State of Louisiana.

On Friday, 26 August 2005 Mayor Nagin advised the people of New Orleans to keep a close eye on the storm and prepare for evacuation. The storm had already hit Florida a few days earlier. He made various statements encouraging people to leave, without officially calling for an evacuation throughout Saturday, 27 August 2005, before issuing a call for voluntary evacuation that evening. He did not order a mandatory evacuation because of concerns about the city's liability for closing hotels and other businesses. He was more worried about the money that would be lost in tax revenue rather than the safety of the citizens. Mayor Nagin continued to announce that the city attorney was reviewing the information regarding this issue and once he had reviewed the city attorney's opinion he would make a decision whether to give the order to evacuate the city. He could have gotten the hundreds of school buses to help evacuate, but he did not, instead, he allowed the buses to be flooded and destroyed.

Hurricane Katrina and the disaster that followed was the fault of local agencies, not the Federal government. Other cities were hit by the storm, but did not suffer the problems that New Orleans suffered because of the ineptitude of local government. Afterward, aid was sent in the billions and New Orleans is being rebuilt. Of course, you probably know this. How much money and aid did Austria send to help the victims of Katrina that you seem to share so much concern?

One of the issues that made the problem worse is the location of the city. Much of New Orleans is actually below sea level which complicates the problem.

The US brought down the Berlin wall???? Learn history! The US did not have anything to do with it. Or maybe you also believe it was David Hasselhoff? Here an introduction:

Did you bother to read the above link in your e-mail? Maybe you just did not understand what it said. If you really know why the Berlin Wall was dismantled and the East German government was destroyed thereby enabling the reunification of Germany, it was because of the efforts of President Ronald Reagan, President George Bush, and America destroying Communism in Russia, East Germany, and much of Europe. A Free Market economy and Capitalism replaced the East German Socialist system and the people of East Germany were finally free after over 40 years of Socialist oppression. This was a direct result of the efforts of America. You should take your own advice and "Learn History!"

Do you remember the beginning of it all when President Reagan made the famous speech?

"We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace. General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization, come here to this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"
-- President Ronald Reagan in a speech at the Brandenburg Gate near the Berlin Wall on 12 June 1987. This statement was directed at Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to destroy the Berlin Wall.

The Communist countries lost the cold war and Socialism and Communism was seen as the failure that it is. We are surprised you did not hear about it. It was in all the papers.

Why I find people like you dangerous? Because you preach the hate. And everyone who preaches to hate, has fundamentalistic point of views and does not believe that tolerance will get us further, is in my eyes dangerous.

Where have we preached hate? We have said nothing nor have we implied or suggested that any harm should come to anyone on this website. In fact, we have clearly stated that all of these people on this website should be allowed to keep spouting their rhetoric. We will keep printing it for all to see. At no time have we ever tried to silence anyone. The same cannot be said for many of the people that hate us. All we have done is to keep a record of these activities and events and for some reason you believe that is preaching hate.

If you really look with an open mind, you will see that we are the ones displaying tolerance. We do not try to stifle anything you or anyone else has to say, in fact, we are printing your e-mail verbatim but somehow you are unable to show us the same consideration.

Maybe you do not understand our point of view. Allow us to enlighten you. We stand against Terrorism in all forms. We stand against Communism as we believe it is a form of slavery that takes freedom from people. We firmly believe in Capitalism because it is the natural way that people interact and have always done so since the beginning of civilization. Have you ever heard of the economic law of Supply and Demand? Have you ever heard of earning what you have? Working for a living is a fundamental concept of productivity. The more people not working, but living off the labor of others lowers productivity and everyone suffers. At some point, the number of people not working will exceed the number of people working and then you have a problem.

I put enough energy in this "discussion" for my taste and do not wish to continue it.


Julia Vogt

You never did state what you thought was the best economic solution for the world. All you said in your first e-mail was that capitalism was NOT the best economic solution for this world. If you wish to continue this discussion and educate us as to your economic theories about the inadequacies of Capitalism, we request that you explain in detail what economic system you believe is better than Capitalism and a Free Market economy.


03 May 2011

Adrian Green wrote:

You are biased sons of bitches, whomever you may be. You try to break down every statement made by someone and you make some of the most ridiculous comments.

We address each and every e-mail in its entirety with a respectful, intelligent, and honest response. We never find the need to resort to insults or personal attacks. What comments seem to be the cause of your anger?

Honestly mate, I’m in the US ARMY and I feel better protecting quite a few of the people and organizations on your list than I do fighting for you.

You do not sound like you are in the Army. Do you not see that it is people like us that have proudly served in the armed forces and support the military with its operations around the world? It is people like us that are very much pro-military and always have been.

So you claim that you do not feel better fighting for a bunch of people that support the military and have served proudly in the military? That seems strange. Exactly what organizations do you feel comfortable fighting for? Do you feel more comfortable with the likes of CodePINK? Perhaps you like Socialist Party USA. These are just two of the groups we dislike. Many others can be found on the website on the Links Page under Anti-American, Racist, and Terrorist Links. Are these groups among those that have earned your support and admiration?

You can put me on your "Hit List" too and consider me a threat to the citizens of the United States too for having a brain and using it. You’re such a joke it’s not even funny.
See you in hell.

Why do you want to be considered as a threat to the citizens of the United States? Perhaps if you would actually take the time to explain what comments you disagree with on the website, we could have a real dialog and you could explain why you think we are wrong about whatever it is we wrote that upset you so.


E-mails from gil kedar
1 of 3

30 April 2011

gil kedar wrote:

If you call Gary Yourofsky a terrorist, you are probably web site of red neck Nazi assh*les

We refer to Gary Yourofsky based on his actions, deeds, and rhetoric. Of course, right on cue with "Are You A Liberal", you can only refer to is as Nazis without actually disputing anything we have said. You do not have any intelligent argument to counter the facts. All you can do is hurl insults and personal attacks. It is all you have. You do not have a good argument. You do not even have a good excuse.

What information on this website did you find untrue?


E-mails from gil kedar
2 of 3

01 May 2011

gil kedar wrote:

if you call a man a terrorist just because he puts a mirror in front of your face to show you how cruel you are, than I really don't need to read the bullshit you have on your web site.
I assume for people like you animals, black people, gays and jews (excuse me if i forgot anyone) are expendable, or you are just a part of the animals based food industry. ether way you disgust me.

So far, you have not stated how or where we have been cruel to anyone or anything. Did you ever consider placing a mirror in front of Gary Yourofsky? Did you take the time to read what Gary Yourofsky said? Apparently he thinks that there are some people that are expendable. Do you not find it cruel that he wishes that the medical researchers that are desperately trying to find cures for diseases to die from those same diseases? Thousands of medical researchers and medical research companies in America are trying to help people by finding cures and Mr. Yourofsky wants to see them dead for their efforts. Is this your definition of "Compassion"? Is this what you think we should all strive to achieve? Is this your vision of a better world?

If you want to label us as terrorists, is it not appropriate to at least cite an example of our terrorist actions or rhetoric? We have clearly done that with the examples we have cited and we have done so in great detail. You have not cited a single example of terrorist actions we have committed. All we have done is to record and publish historical data and evidence showing what others have said and done and you do not seem to like it. It is not that you dispute what we have written, it is that you just do not like that fact what we have written it so you resort to calling us names and insulting us. Your hatred and disgust is on display in every word you utter.

You are so busy making irrational assumptions based on hysterical emotions that you fail to make any intellectual point. It is probably pointless to state that your assumptions are completely wrong because that will not matter to you as it violates what you want to believe about us.

We have never said anything derogatory against any of the groups you listed. In fact, we have never said that anyone was expendable. Allow us to present a question to you... Do you think we are expendable?

We are not really sure what you mean by "a part of the animals based food industry". We do enjoy a good steak and roast chicken. Is eating meat considered being "a part of the animals based food industry? If it is, you must find 90% of the population disgusting.


E-mails from gil kedar
3 of 3

01 May 2011

gil kedar wrote:

writing in big red letters does not make you right nor smarter.

We answer in red to differentiate our response with your statement. We find it helps to keep the e-mail in an orderly and easy to follow format.

people who make experiments on animals are evil.

How would you discover new medicines and treatments? What are the alternatives that replace animal experiments? We have asked this many times, but we never receive an answer. We are all for a better method for discovery.

pharmaceutical inddustry which financing these experiment don't give a shit about your health, in fact they need you to be ill so you buy more of their "medications".

There are always going to be sick and injured people and thank goodness these companies are around to make and discover new and better medicines. When you are sick, do you use any of their products i.e. medicine? Do any of your friends or relatives? Have you, your family, or friends ever been vaccinated?

it is well known today that most researches based on experiment made on animals worth nothing.

Then why do they do it? Feel free to cite a specific example of unnecessary research and please show your proof. Conjecture or hatred of the industry is not proof. As you allured to earlier in this e-mail, companies are interested in profits and they are always looking for areas to cut. If they could eliminate the cost of animal research, they would if only to increase their profit margin.

and even if some of them do worth anything,it still does not give us the right to abuse animals.

Do you believe veterinarians are good people? Do you believe in helping animals with drugs to cure sickness? Where and how do you think these animal drugs are developed?

if you think it is right to do so, than the next step is support slavery, maybe rape, concentraition camps etc.

That is an amazing leap. Who in the medical research industry supports any of what you just stated? Apparently, you were unaware that slavery, rape, and concentration camps were illegal.

because in your oppinion mankind has the power so it's our right to do it.

Is it our right to find cures for the problems that afflict mankind? How much better would the world be if these medical researchers never existed? Polio, small pox, measles, malaria, and many other diseases would still linger in much greater numbers than they do now. Do you want to end cancer? How are you going to do that? What about AIDS? Will animal research help find a cure?

same as when white people had power over black people, it was right to discriminate them. same as when the Germans considered jews to be inferior, it was ok to slauter them, and put them into gas chamebers.

No, it was not right and it was people like us that stopped these atrocities. We served in the military and it is in the finest tradition of the military that ended the examples you cited.

if you cannot see the connection it's a shame, if you don't want to see it, well, that's a crime.

It is too bad you cannot see the difference in killing a human being and killing a mosquito.

If we are to believe that mankind is part of nature, then we should have the same right as other animals. Do we have the same right as any other predator? Do we have the same right as the lion to hunt the antelope on the Serengeti? Do we have the same right as the Eagle to catch and eat a fish? Do we have the same right as the purple martin to hunt, kill, and eat what consists of its natural diet?

Here is a quote you will not like.

"In the natural world, every living thing, be it plant or animal, exploits every other living thing that exists on the planet in order to survive just one more day regardless of the degree of separation. Like it or not, that is nature."

Explain what you see as wrong with that quote.

and yes, 90% of population who eat meat are disgusting.

You seem to have a very elitist attitude. They way you look down on people that do not share your values would explain the disgust and hatred you have for the majority of people.

If the 90% of Americans that consume meat are wrong, what should be the punishment for this segment of the population whose diet includes meat on a regular basis? Your disgust must have a penalty in mind.

Allow us to state for the record that your e-mails certainly show the level of education you have obtained and quite frankly, it is truly a delight to have this opportunity to engage in dialog with someone as enlightened as you are and who can put together an e-mail as intelligently well written as you have.


Back to the Top

Total Website Count

©Copyright 2005 - 2016