Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ccivax.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!rochester!ritcv!ccivax!rb From: rb@ccivax.UUCP (rex ballard) Newsgroups: net.flame Subject: Re: HOW TO DEAL WITH A JERK Message-ID: <291@ccivax.UUCP> Date: Thu, 3-Oct-85 20:28:39 EDT Article-I.D.: ccivax.291 Posted: Thu Oct 3 20:28:39 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 6-Oct-85 09:04:53 EDT References: <372@wuphys.UUCP> <3165@nsc.UUCP> <238@pyuxii.UUCP> <3179@nsc.UUCP> <1170@mhuxt.UUCP> Organization: CCI Telephony Systems Group, Rochester NY Lines: 108 > > In article <238@pyuxii.UUCP> tw8023@pyuxii.UUCP (T Wheeler) writes: > > >Miss Sefton- This is a flame. I see that your philosophy of > > >life is to GET RID OF anyone who disagrees with your view. > > >If you think that getting Mr. Black fired is a way to stop > > >dissent with your views, them you are a low life scumbag. > > > T.C., at least, was able to keep from suggesting that we all get together > to try and have Laurie fired. > > > > I find it really amazing that the net can sit by and let someone like Don > > Black spout fascist racism, and come down hard on anyone who disagrees with > > it. > > Laurie was the only one who suggested > that we try and get someone one the net fired because we find their personal > and political philosophies vile and disgusting. > > > That is an amazing double standard. If Black can say what he likes, > > then everyone else (including laurie) should be given the same right, even > > if it happens to disagree with your own pet theories. > > She *does* have the same right. We also have the right to disagree with > her. Not without being called Nazi sympathizers by Chuq, I guess: > > > Or are all those > > wonderful people supporting Black's right to be an idiot simply using free > > speech as a quiet way of supporting the words and the meanings? > > I guess we can assume from your passionate (and intensely insulting) > defense of Lauri that you agree with her. You think that attempting to > have someone whose views you find disagreeable fired is a right and legitimate > Going to call > AT&T and try to get me fired? > Jeff Sonntag > ihnp4!mhuxt!js2j SHADES OF THE BLACKLIST!!!!!!!!!!! Remember the late 50's and early 60's when writers, actors, teachers, and just about anybody would be "BLACKLISTED" for simply associating with anyone who had "Less than reactionary views"? If you "made the list", you could not only get fired, you could also find it difficult to get work anywhere! I've known a few BLACKLIST victims, they still carry the scars. I have read Lauri's follow up article, saying in essence "It was all a Joke", unfortunately, when I "tuned in" to net.flame, I thought your article was referring to a salesman or unscrupulous business practice of DEC! Like maybe they were requiring users to buy ULTRIX to keep service contracts or something - (don't start getting ideas). Can you imagine the possible stirr if I had even asked if there were "Problems" with DEC? Rumors can fly around very fast! Net.politics, net.flame, net.religeon... are "subscriptions services", no one is required to read it! I read/post to net.micro because it is part of my job to "stay informed" in this area. I read/post to these other nets because I enjoy it. These nets are a good way of exposing yourself to new viewpoints, but what is the good of only reading viewpoints which mirror your own? I don't agree with everything any of you say, but the exposure to new ideas is informative, even useful. It is nice to be able to get information that is unedited and unbiased. It's even nice to be able respond immediately with a "knee jerk" reaction every now and then. Don Black doesn't seem to think that all 12 million people killed in the concentration camps were Jewish, he's probably right. Don Black didn't say there were NO Jewish people killed in the camps! (even he is not totally ignorant). Don Black believes that Christians become OT descendants of Israel at babtism, so do Mormans. I suppose in the sense of being "Adopted" that might be true. He says that the "Jews" may not be the only descendants of Israel. The "first Exodus" of the "Israelite leaders" prior to the birth of Moses has been a point of speculation since the Hieroglyphs were first decoded. That by itself does not make him a "NEO-NAZI"! Using that as a basis for "Eliminating the UN protectorate of Israel" as a jewish state is a little silly though. I suppose we should give U.S. land back to the "Nephites and Lamanites" (Morman name for American Indians)? Israel may be "opressive" and "uppity" at times. Compared to some of the other goverments we support (Chile, El Salvador,...) it is practically a "libertarian state"! The fact is that in 1938, no country would take "Jews" packed on boats by the Nazi's. The establishment of a "Jewish state" was considered the only way to assure that "Jews" have a place to emigrate to. The U.S. should have taken "Jews" back in 1938. They should have taken Haitians in 1978, and Afgans in 1985, to mention a few, but the words inscribed on the Statue of Liberty seem to need a few "changes". So I don't agree with Don Black. That's OK, I can say so! Wasn't it a "Right Winger" named Rutlidge who turned down a commission and enlisted as a private who said: "Mister Adams, I don't agree with anything you say, but I'll fight to the DEATH your right to say it" If you don't agree with someones opinion, post rebuttals, send mail, post politely worded articles "Ridiculing his position", even call him an "air-head" or whatever, but respect the anonymity of his opinions and his employer, he's probably not even posting on "company time". The Fireman Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com