humanities.philosophy.objectivism

On Feb 28, 6:25 pm, Bill C
wrote:
> "Potroast" wrote in message
>
> news:5541e771-8fcb-4fa7-830b-47eadf0ba2b3@n77g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> > For anyone interested in facts (not blindly pursuing bigoted final
> > solutions from Herr Peikoff and Herr Brooke)
>
> WTF is this genocide of Peikoff's you're referring to?

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2635

First off....9/11 was NOT an attack organized by any government. While
they certainly have no incentive to encourage love for America...
"they" didn't attack America....only a small minority did. By
expanding that into collective punishment it only made the situation
worse not better. (not the first time that mistake has been made
either http://tinyurl.com/2locok)

We live in a smaller world today than yesteryear. Borders are
largely turning into bureaucratic formalities. There is no such thing
as perfect security in the real world. When it comes to terrorism
America isn't really in a situation the rest of the world hasn't been
all along but geography conveniences largely offset that reality up to
now. We can't continue to let terrorist actions act as catalysts for
rights removals and wars though (like the enabled act, the Reichstag
fire, and WW2). Doing so in a nuclear world will only lead to us
destroying ourselves. Starting preemptive wars to attempt to do that
are immoral. It's just another way of saying "I attacked first".

Since Peikoff seems to avoid defining a moderate Muslim and
doesn't provide a specific metric of success... one misbehaving Muslim
in any nation could be construed as being supportive of terrorism.
Thus his definition of "state sponsored terrorism" is the same as
calling EVERY Muslim state terrorist which effectively means he is
saying he'd keep killing until he gets most of them (at least Bob is
honest about it). Granted he would probably keep a handful around at
pets to make himself not feel like a meanie that he just slaughtered
20 times the number of people Hitler did. And if he leaves a few
around technically it's not genocide....just as the Nazis would have
probably have kept a few Jewish people around for moral comfort for
their actions.

>Why the Peaceful Majority is Irrelevant By Paul Marek
>FrontPageMagazine.com | 3/1/2006

70% of America originally supported the Iraq war. I'd say that stat
makes it very clear that vast majority aren't peaceful. (aka the hawk
view is nothing original if being special is the concern here)
Besides, the title makes no sense. If the peace element isn't relevant
why would buddy waste a second writing about them?

While most people aren't pacifists neither do they like the idea of
getting their hands wet either. (including most Oists that talk about
supporting wars but appear too cowardly to join even though their are
troop shortages) Because there are so many issues in the world the
peace element is largely dormant most of the time, but when the stakes
rise enough for them to become activists..... look out........history
shows they will politically slaughter those in office (thus indirectly
gaining control over the weapons)

Nazis used to decry my sort once and eventually sent them to
concentration camps (although you only need to visit Burma and Tibet
to find the mentality at work.) This is why I generally welcome any
attacks on the peace element. It works in my favor politically (at
least in the western world that has had it's fill of local despots)
Peikoff/Brooke can bark and cry all they want but their dirty little
hands are far far away from "the button". And if peaceful sorts from
my generation have anything to say about it.... they will both go to
their grave bitter defeated men...but old ones.

>Why the Peaceful Majority is Irrelevant By Paul Marek
>FrontPageMagazine.com | 3/1/2006....
> Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by the fanatics. Peace-loving
> Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.

Outright lies. Putting aside areas currently occupied by foreign
military presence, peaceful Muslims aren't silent. You just have just
been covering your ears and in your blind hatred label them blanket
enemies instead of encouraging them. (refer back to point about how
Peikoff neglects to define a moderate Muslim)

http://tinyurl.com/ywv92s

The peace tide is now in high gear but this wasn't the case five
years ago when subtle (and not so subtle) death threats were pretty
common for me. I stuck with it even though it wasn't popular at the
time. Now consider I am a white western atheist that has had to endure
all sorts of harassment and threats on my life because of it.

I can only imagine how the same group of "enlightened and tolerant"
people would have reacted if my skin were brown and my name had been
Muhammad.