Re: Why Hitler is a Hero

From: Mark Fergerson (nunya_at_biz.ness)
Date: 12/23/04 

Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 12:27:10 -0700

Tom Potter wrote:

<snip>

> I suggest that "Mark Fergerson" sympathies (Prejudices?)
> can be seen by reading excerpts from some of his posts.

   You bet. I'm highly prejudiced toward survival. Anything
that threatens it must be dealt with as harshly as it
threatens survival.

> Do the Muslims really think they can nuke Israel and India
> and not devastate the entire Middle East? Do they really
> think the U.S. and her allies won't stomp the hell out of
> them even if they manage a perfect pre-emptive strike? Will
> the rest of the world stand by and let it happen, knowing
> full well they'll have to come in afterward and clean up the mess.

   What part of that do you dispute?

> Because we're rich, and they're not. Because
> we're free, and they're not. Because primitive is
> better than civilized (according to Liberals).
> Because we (the West) had a Renaissance, and they
> didn't. Because they think they're the only ones
> qualified to define "evil" by their
> misinterpretation of Islam.

   What part of that do you dispute?

> There is no point in "getting back"; revenge is a
> pathetic, primitive, fundamentalist idea. As far as I'm
> concerned, eliminating Islam (not Muslims) is simple
> self-defense. Islam is flat-out dangerous to everyone
> _including_ its adherents.

   What part of that do you dispute?

> Note what happened to territory the
> Palestinians Arabs _used_ to live in; it
> was ceded to Egypt and Jordan. So who
> should "return" which land to the
> Palestinians?

   What part of that do you dispute?

>>Exactly what has Isreal done?

> Mark L. Fergerson wrote:
>
> Tried to selectively kill the most bloodthirsty of the
> "Palestinian" leaders, tried to build walls to keep the
> bombers out, and so on, none of which works because the two
> sides have two entirely different objectives.

   What part of that do you dispute?

> The Israelis want the "Palestinians" to stop trying to
> kill all of them and build something resembling a society,
> but the "Palestinians" are solely interested in
> exterminating the Israelis.

   What part of that do you dispute?

> Jan Panteltje wrote:

>>>unfortunately its not likely to happen. Little things like the clearly
>>>observable FACT that decades of repressive behaviour towards the
>>>palestinians has NOT resolved the problem, but made it WORSE, seem to have
>>>escaped the notice of successive israeli governments. so much for "an eye
>>>for an eye" being of any practical use.

> Mark L. Fergerson wrote:
>
> Um, Israel is backed up against the Mediterranean. What
> impenetrable barrier are the "Palestinians" backed up against?

   What part of that do you dispute?

> And as can be seen,
> Mark Fergerson" favors the annihilation of Muslims,
> and he actively propagandizes that position.

   Wrong. I wrote (and you quoted above):

> As far as I'm
> concerned, eliminating Islam (not Muslims) is simple
> self-defense.

   Do you not see the difference?

> Of course, those killed and maimed
> in the process will be Muslims,
> and American Blacks, Rednecks and Latinos,
> NOT the people who instigate conflict and war
> for power and riches.

   Of course you don't.

   Mark L. Fergerson

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Why Hitler is a Hero
    ... that threatens it must be dealt with as harshly as it ... What part of that do you dispute? ... eliminating Islam is simple ... > Mark Fergerson" favors the annihilation of Muslims, ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Moslems Are Crack-Pot Employees
    ... >Dell workers walk off job over prayer dispute ... >Muslims taking dispute to mediation, ... >Nashville, said the workers walked out of the company's Nashville plant ...
    (alt.religion.islam)
  • Moslems Are Crack-Pot Employees
    ... Dell workers walk off job over prayer dispute ... Muslims taking dispute to mediation, ... Nashville, said the workers walked out of the company's Nashville plant ...
    (alt.religion.islam)