From: makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Subject: Re: Kahane's philosophy
Reply-To: makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky)
Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe AZ
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 18:48:39 GMT

In article <2511@itexjct.jct.ac.il> warren@itexjct.jct.ac.il (Warren Burstein) writes:

# In <1993Jan4.062659.24889@ennews.eas.asu.edu> makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) writes:
 
# wb: Perhaps someone might think that Binyanin actually intends what he
# wb: says.  What is to prevent this from happening?  What happened to Avot
# wb: 1:11?
 
# dm: 	So what?  That person would still be responsible for his actions,
# dm: unless he was so mentally unfit as to require being committed.
# dm: However, if this was the case than even had Binyamin not made the
# dm: statement nothing much would have changed as I previously pointed
# dm: out.
 
# Avot 1:11 as I understand it means that a scholar ought to be careful
# about what he says, because people might take him literally.  While
# Avot is not halacha, its advice ought to be treated with more respect
# than "so what?"

	I was not referring to your reference to Avot, but rather your
other comments.  As it is, in certain emotional states, people are
often not careful.  That does not mean any blame can be attached to
them.

# dm:	As for Binyamin personally, making those statements is certainly a
# dm:lot healthier than actually acting them out.

# me: Well yes, actions that simply run the risk of inciting someone else to
# me: murder are to be preferred to murder.  Better yet is silence.
 
# dm: 	You are making it real difficult for me to avoid using an ad
# dm: hominem attack.  Silence may have been better.  However, even better
# dm: than that would have been your silence in just about everything you
# dm: have written about Kach or members of the Kahane family.  At least
# dm: Binyamin was not repeating lies.
 
# But David, why should you even try to avoid an ad hominem attack?  You
# understandably are upset about my views, so let it all hang out!
# Don't even think of restraint, we'll all understand that you don't
# mean anything that you say.  Wait a sec, how are we to know if at some
# future point you do actually want to be taken seriously?
 
	If I even thought there was one iota of a chance someone might
think you had a proper analogy I would explain why it is not.

#  me: From your point of view David, would it not be a desecration of the
#  me: memory of his father for an act of murder to be attributed to his
#  me: purported followers?

# dm:	Yes.  However, only an anti semite would pin something like this
# dm:on Binyamin unless Binyamin had something more to do with it than
# dm:uttering a very understandable feeling.
 
# me: I sincerly hope that I shall be spared the opportunity to so demonstrate
# me: my antisemitism.
 
# dm: If you seriously believe this than you have already demonstrated it.
 
# I seriously believe that a person (irregardless of that person's
# religion or so on) who encourages crimes bears some moral
# responsibility (without diminishing that of the actual perpetrator) if
# those crimes are in fact committed by someone who is influenced by the
# first person.  If this is antisemitism, I am proud to be an
# antisemite.

	That is not anti semitism, but it is stupidity.  However, since
spreading lies is a sin, and since you have spread lies and the like
about Kach and members of the Kahane family, does that mean you bear
responsibility when others pass on these same lies?

	By the way, how would you like it if I included the last part of
your last sentence in a .sigand referenced it to you and this
article??  I would not do it, but it would be on a par with some of
what you have written about Kach and members of the Kahane family.
--
	There are three types of people in the world.  Those that are good
at math and those that are not.

makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu