Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!think!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!harpo!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!mhuxt!mhuxr!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Arthur Pewtey)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Remembering the Holocaust: What have we learned?
Message-ID: <1038@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 1-Jun-85 11:25:32 EDT
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1038
Posted: Sat Jun  1 11:25:32 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 6-Jun-85 20:26:31 EDT
References: <1019@phs.UUCP> <912@pyuxd.UUCP> <262@ihu1n.UUCP>
Organization: The Chartered Accountants Who Want to Be Lion Tamers Association
Lines: 57

> It's quite obvious what I'm talking about.  Just read the segment of my
> article above, that you have thoughtfully included and you'll find
> out.  We're talking about Don Black's threat to the net.  Through his
> postings, I say little to no threat.  I also contend that beating his
> articles to death in an EXCESSIVE manner will do little to no good.
> Further, I contend that your attitude, as well as Rich Rosen's, will
> only confirm "their" notions of the Jew as an obsessive, loud-mouthed
> whiner.  You're not helping to clear up that stereotype much by
> insisting that I confine my discussion to YOUR domain. ["LORD" FRITH]

First of all, I wasn't aware that Brower, whom you were responding to
above, WAS Jewish.  It seems that you are among those who hold this
stereotype you speak of:  if he's an "obsessive loud-mouthed whiner complaining
about bigotry", he must be Jewish.  Given that it would seem that you hold
to a stereotype that people like Black will exploit to turn people into
anti-Semites (read my article in net.abortion/flame on how persuasion now
works as an "art"), I'd say you are unequivocally unqualified to make
statements about what is EXECESIVE in fighting bigotry.

>>> Do you REALLY think we can't see what Don Black is from his postings?
>>> It's not as if what he said was subtle or anything.

>> Hitler wasn't very suttle either.

> I said it to Rich and I'll say it to you... "You're NOT being clever."
> If you have to resort to such simplistic and obvious arguments then you'd
> better suspect something is wrong with what you're saying.  Don Black is
> not Adolph Hitler.  He isn't gaining a following using the same political
> methods and there is no way that he could gain any such power ON THE NET.

If his methods and his words gain one follower ("Hmmm, I never 'realized' that
about the Jews..."), the damage is done.  If his methods and words can be
disposed of and shown for what they are, perhaps others will not follow
in his bootsteps.

> Hitler DID have far more subtle tools at his disposal.  How subtle can
> Don Black be when his only tool is a public bulletin board?  Not very,
> when his arguments are similar to "what death camps?"

And yet people thought that "argument" was a sincere question.  How far away
is he, in that case, from swaying the listener?

> You twit.  It's obvious that I'm NOT repsonding to Don Black's
> articles.  I suggested ONE alternative to handle his postings which
> would be beneficial to THE ENTIRE NetNews community.  People like you
> and Rich Rosen have a lot of gaul insisting that I confine myself to
> YOUR subject matter.

Does that mean YOU have a lot of france (i.e., "gaul") insisting that we
confine ourselves to YOUR subject matter?  This is not the first article
is which you've responded to others referring to them as "people like you
and Rich Rosen".  Obviously I'm not alone in concern and vigilance about
this subject.  Why do you continue to insist that your singular desires to
limit the voices of others on this matter be adhered to?
-- 
"Now, go away or I shall taunt you a second time!"
				Rich Rosen  ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr