Before I reply to material below, I want to ask Dale to take note of the time
of Nima’s recent comment. Nima is up after 2AM, foaming at the mouth,
possibly intoxicated, arguing with folks on the Internet, because unlike us,
he’s totally not a “
loser”. 

At slightly past 2AM, NUR wrote: 
> Yeah, on one maternal side; [...]
> So what is your point? I have never 
> hidden that part. 

Recall the point: I was not citing your Jewish heritage as a knock against
you. Rather I was noting that you accuse others of having Jewish ancestry, as
part of a polemic against them, yet you are of Jewish ancestry. It’s an
example of how many of your 
polemical claims about others are often true of yourself.

NUR wrote:
> No relative of mine in QLD would be 
> seen dead at a Jewish function, 
> particularly as those of them who are 
> fundamentalist Baha'is consider 
> attending such an event in bad form. 

Would this include a relative whom you claimed is no longer a Baha’i?

NUR wrote:
> Ask him to name the relative. 

I just shared your request. My source (who I never claimed is the person you
named) says to tell you the first name of the relevant _close_ relative is one
similar to that of a certain deity once popularly worshiped in Rome. They
think you should know 
what that refers to... *shrug*

[Side note: my source also said they know and respect the relevant relative,
and thus has no interest in dragging their name through the muck of your
infantile Internet flamewars. By the way, it’s the same relative who my
source had previously said is 
older than you, yet looks much younger than you (as evidence that you come
from great genetic stock, but your drug abuse has taken a bad toll on you).]

I wrote:
> > I recall you once pejoratively called 
> > Noman Nasir a “chosenite Freemason”. 

NUR wrote:
> He also calls himself that. Your point?

Again, the point was one about your own projection. You used that phrase as a
slur against Noman, yet you are of Jewish ancestry and claim to be a Freemason.

I wrote:
> > you also claimed to receive a revelation
> >  from Baphomet, 

NUR replied:
> I claimed no such thing. 

I guess I have to yet again explain your own book to you. Note the following:

(a) On page 34 of your self-published book, "Liber Decatriarchia Mystica," you
declared that Basphomet is Metatron.

(b) On page 88 of the same book, you declared Fatima to be both "the Creatrix"
and "the Shekinah".

(c) On page 107 of that work, you claimed to have received a new revelation
from Fatima/"the Shekinah," and you said she appeared in a form resembling
Angelina Jolie (seriously!).

(d) Also on page 107, you state that Metatron is "the Supreme Manifestation of
the Shekinah".

In short, if we put it all together, you claimed to have received a new (and
inimitable) revelation from Baphomet in the form of Angelina Jolie. 

NUR wrote:
> if offends your Catholic sensibilities that 
> I received a revelation from Baphomet, 
> then so be it -- I did. Fuck your corrupt, 
> pedophilic Papism. 

Thank you. That’s another statement worth documenting. So, again, you accuse
others of Satanism, yet praised Crowley and claimed to receive a new
revelation from Baphomet (in the form of Angelina Jolie!).

I asked:
> > Interesting. So do you now admit that you 
> > called for Jonbesh e Sabz to militarily 
> > overthrow the IRI? Do you presently wish
> > they had done so? 

NUR wrote:
> Yes, I did. What of it? 

Well, first and foremost, it speaks to the theme of your projection. You
accuse others of supporting color revolutions, yet you called for Jonbesh e
Sabz to overthrow the IRI.

On a side note, it also is basically a confession that you lied to Daniel
Mabsout when he confronted you on that question (right around the same time
you got kicked out of the unrelated Shiᶜa ᶜIrfan group for lying about
people).

NUR wrote:
> You kikes 

Didn’t you deny using racial slurs earlier in this thread?
  
I asked:
> > Does Dale know about you receiving 
> > financial help from your parents right up 
> > until around when you were forty years old 

NUR replied: 
> And on what evidence do you base this on? 

Someone who knows your family told me.

NUR continued:
> My father had already died when I turned 
> 40 [...] my father died in 2012.

Didn’t you turn forty in December of 2011? But notice I said you received
financial help up until around when you were forty. My source said little
doodool tala stopped receiving checks in 2011.

NUR wrote:
> at 40 I had my own financial support. 

Would that be welfare or your wife or both? But either, yes, I heard you were
cut off in 2011, so just before you turned forty.

NUR wrote:
> I was a business partner in a family business
> for over a decade

I was told you certainly long benefitted from family business, but calling you
a “business partner”? Eh... heh...

NUR wrote:
> you [...] are always welcome to solicit 
> records from the ATO (Australian Tax 
> Office) and ASIIC proving it.

Likewise, if you claim you have had actual jobs, you are invited to let us
peruse your tax records (American, Australian, or German). Note: not required,
rather merely invited.

NUR added:
> There is money from them. 

Yes, and why was the support turned back on? Is it the case that a certain
family member thinks you need to “grow up,” but also realized it’s not
just about you any more; rather a certain innocent young person needs to be
supported?

Not racist NUR closed with this eloquent sentence:
> I can see how it would trigger kikes. 

Ah... projection.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
 * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)