Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 14:27:54 EST
From: andy <2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Why I think Kach's policies WASTE BANDWIDTH
 <1992Nov18.004605.6160@ennews.eas.asu.edu>
 <92323.0131202893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
 <1992Nov18.134100.2612@ennews.eas.asu.edu>

In article <1992Nov18.134100.2612@ennews.eas.asu.edu>,
makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) says:
>
>        [ Note - I have deleted much here - dlm ]
>
>In article <92323.0131202893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> andy
><2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
>
># In article <1992Nov18.004605.6160@ennews.eas.asu.edu>,
># makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) says:
>
># >In article <92322.1419442893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> andy
># ><2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
>
># ># In article <1992Nov17.022910.24924@ennews.eas.asu.edu>,
># ># makowsky@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (David Makowsky) says:
>
># ># >In article <emc.721961733@ro> emc@doe.carleton.ca (Eli Chiprout) writes:
>
># ># ># A racist will never admit to being one.  He/she will admit to
># ># ># the existence of racists, but his/her policies will never
># ># ># be racist, by definition.  Save your breath and our bandwith
># ># ># ladies and gentlemen.
>
># >        I would like to thank Andy for posting this since it gives me an
># >opourtunity to say something else about Eli's post.  It would seem,
># >according to what he wrote above, that anyone who denies they are a
># >racist is one.  Well, I will not do it, but I wonder what would be if
># >I called Eli a racist?
>
># False logic. Saying that a racist will never admit to being a racist is not
>the
># same as saying that all people who deny being a racist are racist.
>
>        I agree it is false logic.  However, Eli seems to imply that a
>racist will never admit to it.  He does this after making accusations
>that Kach was a racist.  He than dismisses refutations of that claim
>by stating that a racist will never admit to being one, implying that
>Kach is racist despite refutations of that claim.  Therefore my point
>was and still is valid (The false implication breeded the false
>logic.).

I'm sorry, but it is not rational to refute falsehoods with false logic. If
you cannot refute them with real logic, you shouldn't even bother.

You seem to imply that the only people who are racists are those who admit
to being racist, a silly concept. One has to examine the words and deeds
of the organisation or person in question, not their denial of being a racist.
Does Kach promote racial intolerance and racial separateness. Do they
explicitly argue or implicitly imply that one racial or ethnic group are
superiour or have more inherent rights than another? If so, they are racist
if not, they are not racist.

Pat Buchannan denies being an anti-Semite, I doubt you would take that as the
final word on the subject, nor should you.

>
># If all male Jews are circumcised does that mean that all circumcised males  e
>ar
># Jews?
>
>        Well, Eli might imply they are if the denied being Jewish.  But
>that is Eli's implication, not my logic.
>--
>        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
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish