NAGQ-OAE CHARGED WITH NAZISM!

BOLI AND DA'S OFFICE LAUNCH INVESTIGATIONS!
BLOG FAME SOARS TO NEW HEIGHTS!

(NOTE: Per our recent policy change,
we will no longer correct Lisa's customary
substandard English usage and errata.)

On her NAGQ blog, Lisa Iacuzzi issued the following proclamation.

This letter is in regards to a blog dedicated to the hate of NAGQ called notagoodqueer-oae.blogspot.com. This owner and authors of notagoodqueer-oranythingelse blog is going to be charged with a hate crime and the author is a tenant or a group of tenants who reside at the Rose.

So, in Lisa's world view, presenting facts in opposition to slanderous and libelous fabrications constitutes a hate crime. But into what category does this push Lisa Iacuzzi's racist hate attacks on black and gay women? Let us see.

(Regarding “this owner and authors” of the highly acclaimed NAGQ-OAE blog -- try points farther south. Make that a LOT farther south.)

Currently, this blog is being investigated by the Bureau of Labor and Industry and has been sent to the district attorneys office.

We at NAGQ-OAE are thrilled at the acclaim our blog has generated, and can only express our hope that BOLI and the DA's staff will find the facts presented herein informative and amusing, as opposed to the stew of lugubrious fabrications cooked up by Lisa Iacuzzi.

We further extend our congratulations to Lisa for her achievement in learning to spell “bureau” correctly, and our warmest wishes for further success in her continuing English language education.

This kind of behavior will not be tolerated and all those responsible will be held accountable.

Ah well, “this owner and authors” of NAGQ-OAE have faith that the American people prefer fact to fabrication. Most Americans, anyway. Just not those in the highest echelons of our government, who prefer to eschew needy Americans in favour of tonguing the bungholes of racist, misogynistic, antisemitic and dictatorial oil sheikh governments.

Racist....misogynistic....antisemitic.....dictatorial.....Do these words harken to Lisa Iacuzzi's past behaviour? Certainly Lisa hates blacks and women – particularly gay women – and her threats are a tad dictatorial, to-wit: “Join me or suffer!” “Support me or suffer!” “Go to court against me, I'll cut your legs off!” The antisemitic part falls to a couple of Lisa's supporters, one of whom, author of the second of the following two notes, who vets some of Lisa's wambly ramblings; if a Lisa piece is intelligible, you can be sure she ran it by Paul Hamilton. The first note is from blogger LEOPARDI, or Leo, another of those poor souls who have swallowed Lisa's stochastic diatribes, hook, line, and bullcuzzi.

Another response from the gay community is blogger Leopardi who about the mob at the Rose whose blog is mimicking NAGQ blog with HATE!

LEOPARDI SAID:
NAGQ's assertions of being lynched by a homophobic mob seem to demonstrate credence to NAGQ"S claim that the environment is hostile to queer people. While it is clear, based on the incidents you report that you have a cause for frustration, your comments, sadly, validate the core assertions by Lee. Let me remind you that no matter how challenging the individual conflicts you have with a particular person, there is no excuse for resorting to the kind of insensitive language you use in your posts about Lee. The entire tenor of your post revels in a heterosexual norm that confirms Lee's complaint that you create an oppressive climate. Your language may not only be offensive to Lee personally, but when you choose to broadcast these views publicly, you are engaging in hate speech against a large group of gays, lesbians, and trans-gendered people in the Portland area. I am not asserting whether or not your claim is just. However, I am unimpressed by your claim thus far. I don't doubt that institutes such as the justice system support you. They have always been on the side of the powerful. I would submit that Lee has done you a tremendous service. She has given you a way to tell yourself that there's nothing wrong with you. My question to you is this: when Lee is gone, who will you hate? Leo 08 December, 2007 10:44
http://notagoodqueer.blogspot.com/2007/12/hate-at-reach-cdc.html

Let us take a few of these comments for response. First, the obvious:

“...when Lee is gone..”

Gone? When is Lisa planning to leave? Two days after her release from jail, she was back in the vicinity, where she attempted to assault a (Native American) tenant. Since then, she has been haunting the area, stalking tenants, creeping to the building's windows at night and causing disturbances, strolling up and down in front of the building, and otherwise lurking in wait for tenants, to engage them in her usual childish verbal confrontations, age-appropriate to the kindergarten bully Lisa is. All this after a stipulated court order in which Lisa agreed to come no closer than one mile.

“...you are engaging in hate speech against a large group of gays, lesbians, and trans-gendered people in the Portland area. I am not asserting whether or not your claim is just.”

Of course Leo won't assert whether or not “your claim” -- singular, rather than the more accurate plural – is or is not “just.” He just doesn't care. Moreover, it might prove difficult to show how the presentation of facts in opposition to Lisa's fabrications is “engaging in hate speech against a large group of gays, lesbians, and trans-gendered people”. Lisa is one woman, whereas the targets of her hateful antics from the inception of her tenancy were, and remain, gay women and black women.

Nothing has been said of Lisa's hate speech and false charges of criminal behaviour directed against African Americans. Presumably Lisa's calling a disabled black teacher a “nigger” was not “engaging in hate speech,” nor is Lisa telling a black grandmother, in the hearing of her nine-year-old grandchild, “All you nigger bitches do drugs””engaging in hate speech.” Of course, Lisa's false accusations that African American tenants are engaged in perpetrating welfare fraud and drug dealing, with the assistance of Portland Impact, are NOT “engaging in hate speech;” Lisa wrote them, so it's engaging in libel.

“Your language may not only be offensive to Lee personally..there is no excuse for resorting to the kind of insensitive language you use in your posts about Lee.”

How is presenting FACTS in opposition to Lisa's lies “insensitive”? Certainly language used in presenting facts is offensive to Lisa, for it is established fact that she hates facts. It's also a fact that she can't relate the same incident twice without contradicting herself. And is the “insensitive language” used by NAGQ-OAE contributors any more insensitive than Lisa's calling African American women “nigger bitches”? Was Lisa engaging in kind and sensitive language when she threatened gay women to “Join me or suffer!”, or “Support me or suffer!”, or threatened to cut off others' legs if they appeared in court?

Apparently, it's “insensitive” and “engaging in hate speech against a large group of gays, lesbians, and trans-gendered people in the Portland area” to take someone to task for her lies, her libels, her threats of physical harm, and her racist hate speech. But it's NOT “insensitive” or “engaging in hate speech” when Lisa calls African American women “nigger bitches” and falsely accuses them of “selling their welfare cards to get drug money.”

“Your comments, sadly, validate the core assertions by Lee.”

Lisa's “core assertions” have been invalidated by Lisa herself.

“NAGQ's assertions of being lynched by a homophobic mob seem to demonstrate credence to NAGQ"S claim that the environment is hostile to queer people.”

When, exactly, was Lisa Iacuzzi “lynched by a homophobic hate mob”? Or by any mob? And what, exactly, are gay women are doing in the mob? When a building owner is forced to hire security guards to protect tenants against ONE resident, it takes the most flexible of mental contortionists to concoct from it a Kafkaesque phantasmagoria of that one person being “lynched by a homophobic hate mob.”

No need for security guards existed until Lisa's vicious antics created that need. And it was gay women at The Rose who requested them.

Lisa's paranoiac fantasies notwithstanding, the environment is no more hostile to “queerpeople” than it is to blacks or Jews. It was Lisa Iacuzzi herself who bent her efforts to create that hostile environment of which she complains so strenuously – after she filed her BOLI complaint, that is, from which she expects to garner $30,000 or $1,000,000, as she has crowed, and “end up owning 988 Reach units.”

Lisa has also been banned from the Speakeasy Tavern next door; maybe the homophobic hate mob of gay women effected that, too? In fact, Lisa's “homophobic mob” is nothing more the “bible thumping African American gang” of her earlier tales. She quickly abandoned that, as soon as she got wind of the letter sent to the NAACP detailing her racist hate speech and actions

At the risk of being thought “insensitive” and “engaging in hate speech against a large group of gays, lesbians, and trans-gendered people in the Portland area,” NAGQ-OAE feels that Lisa's being "lynched by a homophobic hate mob" (of gay women?) ought to be filed under the same heading as pickled aliens in Area 51, the Face of Elvis on Mars, the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, and Lisa's self-awarded “MA@PSU”.

-------------------------
From Paul Hamilton:
You are suffering on behalf of those of us who have made a deal with the devil to live (for now) in this dysfunctional system. You have the strength right now to be on the front line of this struggle. I believe in you and I know that your work is supportive of our community. I have been appalled in investigating the situation the level to which those who have expressed hatred to you have resorted in order to demean-- themselves. Their web site mirroring yours is an example the violence of a lynch mob. It is not just an unhealthy situation, but one in which I now understand you had a very real concern for your safety. Lord of the Flies comes to mind. I have never seen a web site created whose sole purpose is the expression of hatred for a person. The only precedent is Nazi Germany or the Columbine massacres. It is a case study in the psychology of evil. The difference between your web site (operated by a single person) documenting, in occasional posts, claims against the apartment complex-- and a mob of people gathered in an orgy of hatred against a single individual -- is a difference between a freedom of speech and a lynch mob going to hang and torture a queer. Again, despite the horror that you face with homelessness looming over you, I feel that you have escaped the truly alarming prospect of escalating cruelty at the hands of people who enjoy telling themselves how normal they are through their combined hatred of one person. Their web site alone is a clear issue of hate speech directed at a single target. Its sole purpose is cruelty. If it was directed towards someone in power like the president of the United States, it would be warranted. But, to create such a web site targeting someone who is powerless is an example of the kind of casual bigotry that created the crematoriums in Nazi Germany. Their characterization of your hair as being "buzzed", is very much like the Germans dehumanizing the Jews in World War II so that they could gas them. As awful as it is, I think you need to just get the hell physically away from that group of people. I am creating a PDF copy of their Blog so that I can archive it. Then, perhaps we can respond, point for point, to the character assassination that they have undertaken towards you. I wish I could tell you to be strong. I still have family left to visit. . . so, despite my financial problems, I will have some kind of holidays. I can say-- hones tly-- that I will defend you the best way I can. Take Care, Paul

As with Leo's post, let's take a few of Paul's comments.

“I know that your work is supportive of our community.”

It would be interesting to learn how Lisa's bullying and racist hate speech are supportive of the gay community. As for “work,” has Lisa engaged in any, beyond her usual freeloading, recently?

“Their web site mirroring yours is an example the violence of a lynch mob.”

It would also be interesting to learn how a blog setting forth facts in opposition to garbled fictions equates with the violence of a lynch mob, as seen here:
http://markbey.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/bodylg.jpg

“I have never seen a web site created whose sole purpose is the expression of hatred for a person. The only precedent is Nazi Germany”

Only a non-Jew, and a rather ignorant one, could produce such a grotesque exaggeration.

“Their web site alone is a clear issue of hate speech directed at a single target. If it was directed towards someone in power like the president of the United States, it would be warranted.”

In short, Paul Hamilton actually condones “hate speech directed at a single target” -- IF it's someone he doesn't like. But it's “lynch mob” violence, and indefensible, if it's someone he likes (or thinks he likes). This is ethically relativistic and indicates a elasticity rather like the Nazis' Master Aryan Race.

You were Aryan if you were Japanese, especially after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor and British bases throughout the Pacific. You were Aryan if you were Farouk of Egypt, Amin al-Husayni and the Palestinian Arab Higher Committee, Rashid Ali of Iraq. You were not Aryan if you were Abdullah of Jordan, a British ally. The British were Aryans, if muddled ones, whereas Americans were “weak and feeble” mongrels, “dominated by Negroes and Jews.” Paul Hamilton's justification of “hate speech” is elastic like that.

“an example of the kind of casual bigotry that created the crematoriums in Nazi Germany.”

Again, a statement that only an ignorant and insensitive non-Jew could concoct.

“Their characterization of your hair as being "buzzed", is very much like the Germans dehumanizing the Jews in World War II so that they could gas them.”

With this profoundly grotesque comparison, Paul Hamilton tips over from the comments of an ignorant and insensitive non-Jew into borderline Holocaust denial.

“Fluids from diseased animals were injected into humans to observe the effect. Prisoners were forced to exist on sea water to see how long castaways might survive. Gynecology was an area of great interest. Various methods of sterilization were practiced—by massive X-ray, by irritants and drugs, by surgery without benefit of anesthetic. As techniques were perfected, it was estimated that a doctor with 10 assistants could sterilize 1,000 women per day. The “experimental people” were also used by Nazi doctors who needed practice performing various operations. One doctor at Auschwitz perfected his amputation technique on live prisoners; after he had finished, his maimed patients were sent off to the gas chamber.” WWII: History of the Second World War; The Death of a People, ed. D.S. Thomas et al., p 152

Equating the piddling little altercations Lisa herself provoked, then embroidered upon, to the brutal extermination of millions is a form of Holocaust denial, and that IS antisemitism.

And who was it who issued the threat – among her many others -- to “cut off your legs”?

“Perhaps we can respond, point for point, to the character assassination that they have undertaken towards you.”

Perhaps they can. We at NAGQ-OAE are not going wait with collectively bated breath, as we doubt Lisa et al will, or can, produce any point-by-point response based on facts. It seems that in the narrow views expressed above, attacks on gays and blacks are legitimate, so long they are directed solely against women, and Lisa Iacuzzi is the perpetrator. Lisa's racism and misogyny, apparently, aren't even blips on the indignation radar.

Now, about those BOLI and DA investigations, which Lisa claims “are underway”, and NAGQ-OAE contributors being “charged with a hate crime” ....

BRING 'EM ON.

Besides, Lisa loves the attention.

NAGQ-OAE
Cad fawr a fu o'r pan ddwyre haul hyd pan gynnu. A gwedi elwch tawelwch fu.