Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site trwatf.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!trwatf!root
From: root@trwatf.UUCP (Lord Frith)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Remembering the Holocaust: What have we learned?
Message-ID: <1005@trwatf.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 19-Jun-85 13:50:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: trwatf.1005
Posted: Wed Jun 19 13:50:04 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 21-Jun-85 05:32:17 EDT
References: <1019@phs.UUCP> <912@pyuxd.UUCP> <262@ihu1n.UUCP>
Reply-To: root@trwatf.UUCP (Lord Frith)
Organization: TRW Advanced Technology Facility, Merrifield VA.
Lines: 65

In article <5328@fortune.UUCP> brower@fortune.UUCP (Richard brower) writes:

>> [Lord Frith]
>> Because like Rich Rosen, you aren't satisified with the domain I was
>> discussing... you want to hammer your own ideas home with no concern
>> for my article, although that is what you claim to reply to.

> The title of this article has been "Re: Remembering the Holocaust: What
> have we learned?", since before I started on the subject.

The title of an article does not necessarily moderate it's content.
Just because someone else decides to change (or retain) the title of an
article, do you think this adequate justification to condemn me for
things I didn't say?  Or to condemn me for subject matter I never
covered and don't intend to?  If you don't think the subject line
appropriate then choose another.

> First, I didn't see anything here that indicated RR wanting you to quit
> posting per se.

Neither do I see anything in my articles demanding the end to freedom of speech
on the net or explicitly labeling you as a Jew.  Where is the evidence to
support the following assertions by Mr. Rosen?.....

> [Rich Rosen]
> In my opinion, your opinions are not among that few, and I think I've offered
> my reasons in support of that.  In response, you talk of how in your opinion
> we should all shut up because you don't like what you hear,

> [Rich Rosen]
> And for as long as people ARE free to do so, YOU can be ignored in your
> desire to see us all be silent.

> [Rich Rosen]
> I think I'm "proving" to you what you already choose to believe.  You don't
> like people speaking out about those who would foist tyranny upon us.  Well,
> good for you.

> You are the person who refered to me as a Jew with no evidence.  And
> tried to equate Jewishness with being loud and ranting.

I never.. ever... EVER... claimed that you were a Jew.

Please GO BACK and READ the article CAREFULLY.  I claimed that other
people on the net DO perceive Jews as being a boat-load of loud-mouthed
whiners.  This is a said fact... but that's the way the world is.  I
did not refer to you soley in this paragraph.  Note that I said "people
like you and Rich Rosen."  Had I meant "Jews like you and Rich Rosen" I
would have said so.

> Since the rest of your article goes off to discuss how much I am off the
> subject and adds nothing of substance, I'll just say, read the subject line.

Non-sequitur.  In this case I'll simply change the subject line instead
of the content of the article.  You and Rich Rosen do not dictate the
subject matter of articles via your choice of a subject line.  Nor
can you moderate my freedom to choose whatever topic of conversation
interests me simply because the topic was - long ago - about the
Holocaust.
-- 

UUCP: ...{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!trwatf!root	- Lord Frith
ARPA: trwatf!root@SEISMO

"Give a man a horse... and he thinks he's enormous"