Ashcroft pattern

[Jon Ford]

Susi-- you may be referring to the recent Ashcroft hearings about civil 
liberties curtailment. I saw some of that on TV and I thought he came off 
poorly--stiff and dogmatic, blind to the gaping holes and contradictions in 
his statements. Unfortunately , the most recent polls show that a very large 
majority of "average joes" don't care about civil liberties for other 
would-be terroriosts, as long as they can keep on buying weapons to defend 
themselves against attack by  swarthy evil foreigners.

Jon


>From: susan gilbert <ssg@efn.org>
>To: Jon Ford <jonmfordster@hotmail.com>
>CC: austin-ghetto-list <austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net>
>Subject: Re: Is there a pattern here?
>Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 22:43:41 -0800
>
>this is a total non sequiter or however you spell that, but , ashcroft 
>seems
>to say that you are either with'em or against  'em  and pseudo terrorists
>to boot; and that it is of no importance if gun dealers sold weapons 
>capable
>of bringing down airplanes, because the congress wanted it that way. how 
>can
>this line of reason be sold to the ordinary joe, somehow this has been the
>problem, at least for me, not being able to figure out why most everyone
>doesn't see the trick,  if only i had a hammer, i would hammer these old
>walls down.   alas and alak, susi
> > From: "Jon Ford" <jonmfordster@hotmail.com>
> > Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 15:58:23 -0800
> > To: rcbaker@eden.infohwy.com, austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
> > Subject: Re: Is there a pattern here?
> >
> > 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
> >
>
>


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