From: matt@smoke.brl.mil (Matthew Rosenblatt)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: Hate Speech Okay, says the Supreme Court
Summary: Civil rights laws & the North (WARNING: Contains Zionist ranting)
Keywords: _rak kach_
Date: 28 Aug 92 18:16:15 GMT
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Lab, APG MD.

In article <1992Aug27.144832.1907@Princeton.EDU> 
egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ed Nilges) writes:

>I don't claim that attitudes have completely changed in the south, only
>that the center of American racism has moved North, partly because of
>the effect of civil rights legislation in teaching the south that racism
>is wrong.  [Ed Nilges]

Which civil rights legislation?  The fair housing laws?  The public
accomodations laws?  The laws against discrimination in employment?
These are Federal laws in force throughout this fine nation -- laws
enacted to remedy the ugly legacy of racism, the "badge of slavery."
If these civil rights laws have operated to teach the South that racism
is wrong, have they not operated just as much to teach the North the
same thing?  

>>(As if Said wasn't an anti-Semite, himself...)  [Ted Frank]

>Along with Noam Chomsky, I suppose.  Lessee, if one is not a right-wing
>Likud supporter then one is an antisemite, whether one is a Jewish
>linguist or articulate Palestinian moderate.  Again, Tedster, whyncha
>follow Israel's lead and abandon this idiot intransigent posture?  
>[Ed Nilges]

1)  I have seen no posting here in misc.legal by Mr. Frank to
    indicate that he holds any such "intransigent posture" as Mr.
    Nilges attributes to him and to the Likud Party.

2)  Mr. Nilges, in article <1992Aug26.211853.24886@Princeton.EDU>,
    has referred to Israel as a

    >. . .  militaristic, theocratic state in what used to be
    >Palestine . . .

    The position of the Likud Party, although "intransigent" in 
    the sense of "not one inch!", was quite mild when compared 
    to the policy that a *really* militaristic, theocratic state 
    ought to be pursuing:

          "When ye pass over the Jordan into the land of Canaan,
           then ye shall drive out all the inhabitants of the
           land from before you, and destroy all their figured
           stones, and destroy all their molten images, and
           demolish all their high places.  And ye shall drive
           out the inhabitants of the land, and dwell therein;
           for unto you have I given the land to possess it.
           . . . But if ye will not drive out the inhabitants
           of the land from before you, then shall those that
           ye let remain of them be as thorns in your eyes, and
           as pricks in your sides, and they shall harass you
           in the land wherein ye dwell.  And it shall come to
           pass, that as I thought to do unto them, so will I do
           unto you."  [Numbers 33:50-53,55-56]

     "And they shall harass you in the land wherein ye dwell."  Is 
     that not a prediction of the _intifada_ that came about as a 
     result of years of Labour's and Likud's decidedly non-militaristic, 
     non-theocratic policy toward the "inhabitants of the land"?  If
     the Likudniks had truly been militaristic and theocratic, instead
     of passing a special law to bar the leader of the Kach Party (HY"D!)
     from running for office (he spoke "Hate Speech," don't you know?), 
     they would have made him Prime Minister at the head of a National 
     Unity Government.  And then there would have been no more _intifada_, 
     nor even any need to "drive out" anyone: the Intifadistas would
     have been on aeroplanes headed for Palestine, Texas, as fast as
     they could sign up for tickets.

3)   An "intransigent posture" is exactly what the residents of 
     California would demand and get from even the most liberal, 
     Democratic administration if Mexico ever demanded "compromise" 
     over the issue of its "lost provinces" in the American Southwest.
     "Let's compromise, and give them San Diego County."  Sure.  And
     next year, they'll be asking for Los Angeles, then Hemet, then
     Monterey and Carmel by the Sea and Ukiah and Willits and Mount
     Sanhedrin itself.  Even a "President George McGovern" would hold
     firm to, "not one inch!"

					-- Matt Rosenblatt
                                        (matt@amsaa.brl.mil)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TRUTH     JUSTICE     FREEDOM     YIDDISHKEIT     IVY     THE AMERICAN WAY
Xref: sparky misc.legal:16595 alt.politics.correct:5177 alt.censorship:7217