Is there a pattern here?

[Jon Ford]

Roger, thanks for taking notes on Mike's nasty comments on your postings! 
I'd love to include this exchange in a chapter in the "citizenship" book I'm 
writing--the chapter on "on-line" citizenship. I've sure, though, that Mike 
would never give permission to include the excerpts you have saved from his 
speeches; he comes off as a sorry kind of Internet citizen indeed.

Jon


>From: Roger Baker <rcbaker@eden.infohwy.com>
>To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
>Subject: Is there a pattern here?
>Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 00:04:49 -0800
>
>Being on this list and submitting anything with much intellectual
>traction
>(like Noam Chomsky for example) makes one subject to being called a
>crank,
>unscientific, chickenshit, a ranter, bogus , in bad faith, alienated,
>unobjective,
>in favor of the destruction of Israel, and even a potential target of
>physical
>abuse by herr listmaster  -- as these recent verbatim Eisenstat  quotes
>indicate.
>
>And these are merely from the last several months. (I challenge anyone to
>find anything of comparable venomousness aimed by myself at Mike).
>
>I think anyone who expresses an important opinion on this list that does
>not
>pass Mike's criteria for political correctness has to be prepared to
>put up with such hotheaded commentary, modulated by lapses of calm
>reasonableness and even hard won praise from Mike.  Despite all this,
>there are clear but subtle indications that at some level Mike actually
>likes
>or at least respects me. On a good day.
>
>-- Roger
>
>
>                           ***************************************
>
>
>
>...The angry rhetoric of the quoted paragraph makes Roger's rantings
>seem almost reasonable. And its scatterbrain logic of the rest
>of the letter suggests that its author is a crank who far
>exceeds OUR crank (I mean Roger of course) in crankiness.
>How many cranks does one maillist need?...
>
>ME -- Oct.23
>
>
>...My point exactly. There is a difference between OUR cranks
>and unknown cranks. OURS are fuzzy and lovable (I am thinking
>of Roger and Tary). The others are not. I 4 1 do not enjoy
>seeing angry rhetoric in my Inbox from strangers about how
>evil and guilty America and Americans are...
>
>ME -- Oct. 24
>
>
>...Roger up to now our chief ranter, who IS
>one of us, has learnt to paste in URLs
>when he wants to make a point...
>
>ME  -- Oct. 26
>
>...Your "maybe..." remark is facetious and not serious, as modern
>military action is incompatible with one on one jousting
>like in the Middle Ages. I think your self-proclaimed
>humanitarianism is totally bogus and in bad faith.
>
>We will just have to agree to disagree. My starting point is
>that there are just wars -- 2 examples (for the non-Rogers)
>would be WW II and the recent Kosovo intervention. There are
>many others.
>
>Your view that we should NOT have reacted to 9-11 is thankfully
>confined to the ranks of those like yourself whose main focus of
>life it is to protest, being otherwise disassociated and
>alienated from normal pursuits....
>
>ME -- Oct 28
>
>...Roger, you really ought to quit claiming thousands of innocents
>killed until afterwards (hoping there IS an afterwards), when
>an honest accounting may become possible. The numbers really do
>count. The 38xx missing and 48x identified dead of 9-11 are accurate
>numbers. Get the numbers straight, you as an amateur scientist
>should be able to rise to this degree of objectivity...
>
>ME -- Nov 7
>
>...I would ask Chomsky at this point to guess-timate
>the enormous human toll. We know of 1 death, that
>of the night watchman. Is he suggesting 10, 100,
>1000, 10,000? Like Roger, Chomsky's rhetoric is
>unscientific because he wont specify a guess-timated
>number....
>
>ME -- Nov 16
>
>...Roger Baker sent 2 paragraphs and 2 Web page pointers.
>
>Stylistically it is not clear who wrote these 2 paragraphs.
>Did you, Roger, write them or did you paste them in from
>somewhere else? Please advise.
>
>As for the 2 pointers, one of them is broken. The other
>is to an article by a Robert Fisk who wishes the Jews
>in Israel to be driven out and the land to be reclaimed
>by Arabs. Is that your view as well, Roger? Remind me to
>bring this issue up the next time we meet face to face...
>
>ME -- Dec 4
>
>
>...Your post this morning asked what I was getting
>at in expressing the hope of running into you
>soon. Your ear is excellent. I had written "I
>feel like knocking your teeth down your throat"
>but then I deleted it...
>
>ME -- Dec 5
>
>...Is Roger in favor of the destruction of Israel as Robert Fisk
>is?
>
>I should point out that Robert Fisk is not prepared to
>to admit openly that he is in the favor of destroying
>Israel. Identifying Israel with France's colonial regime in
>Algeria (1840-1960) is his way of saying the unsayable:
>the jews like the French from Algeria must leave Israel
>or die. That is now the position of many or most
>Palestinian Arabs. Is that your view too, Roger? Now
>that you have your English prosody precisely tuned,
>be a man and speak in your voice. In favor of the
>destruction of Israel or not?...
>
>ME -- Dec 5
>
>
>Of course I am not in favor of the destruction of Israel.
>
>Roger,
>
>Thank you for saying so. Now that you have learnt
>to write so elegantly I would humbly suggest you
>look a little more closely at other folks' writings
>that you have been forwarding to us. When you paste
>in remarks that slyly argue for the destruction of
>Israel, please don't be surprised that I take umbrage.
>Fisk's language about Israelis and the Israeli army
>that you chose to forward were dishonest and
>disgusting.
>
>ME -- Dec 5


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp