Re: [LeftLibertarian2] Fwd: Show Reminder - Amy Peikoff - Don't Let It Go Unheard-Yaron Brook on Foreign Policy/Israel
- Yeah. Her opinion on that subject wasn't exactly dispassionate. Which is to say that it was largely "hash."Jeff
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 7:36 PM, Roderick Long <berserkrl@...> wrote:Here's Ayn Rand, both in favour of and opposed to killing innocents, depending on which innocents are at stake:R.
From: Dan <dan_ust@...>
To: "LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com" <LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 1, 2013 10:57 AM
Subject: Re: [LeftLibertarian2] Fwd: Show Reminder - Amy Peikoff - Don't Let It Go Unheard-Yaron Brook on Foreign Policy/IsraelOh, right. Memory got mixed up. I've heard or read Brook's other rantings foreign policy that made me confuse him with Peikoff. Actually, to be sure, the more mainline view in the Objectivist movement seems to be for an aggressive foreign policy where killing innocents is, well, always the fault of the other side. At least, that was my reading of even the Kelley faction's Roger Donway's foaming at the mouth over Iran a number of years ago. (IIRC, he was all aghast at the hostage-taking back in 1979, without considering why or by whom the hostages were taken, the overall context (a nation that just went through a revolution along with some very real fear of the US embassy being the locus of a counter-revolution or coup to put the Shah back in power, that the Shah had been allowed into the US), and just going on about the sanctity of embassies (unless, I guess, the US bombs them).)Ah, yeah, I read of Brook's former career, which, in itself, is creepy: a former intelligence operative in charge. No problems there...Regards,DanFrom: George H. Smith <smikro@...>
Sent: Monday, April 1, 2013 1:29 PM
Subject: RE: [LeftLibertarian2] Fwd: Show Reminder - Amy Peikoff - Don't Let It Go Unheard-Yaron Brook on Foreign Policy/Israel
The nuke-‘em remark, in regard to Iran, was made by Peikoff during an appearance on the O’Reilly factor. Or at least Lenny said that the decision whether or not to use nukes should be entirely up to the military, free of civilian interference. O’Reilly called Peikoff “crazy” and “Dr. Strangelove” in response. See:I don’t know if Brook takes the same position, but, given his admiration for General Sherman, it wouldn’t surprise me if he does.I see from the blurb on the original post that Brook is a “former first sergeant in Israeli military intelligence.”GhsIsn't he the Duke Nuke 'em of the Objectivist movement?Regards,Dan
- Sometimes stupidity, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. I might not be the fairest judge in this case, but that's how it appears to me.DanMy short story "Residue" now available for Kindle at:
On Apr 6, 2013, at 2:40 PM, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@...> wrote:
The stupidity of this reply is hilarious
On Tuesday, April 2, 2013, Dan wrote:I don't watch much TV. Mainly, when I do, I watch Tosh.0, South Park, The Walking Dead, and nature/science documentaries. I almost religiously avoid news. Almost. So, forgive me if the other ephemera is out of my ken.Note, too, I never wrote that your genocide joke was a "call to genocide." If I thought it were, that would put you in a very different light. Instead, I was pointing out that your telling genocide joke makes your decrying someone else telling a rape joke hypocritical. Of course, you can use the cover that you don't have a TV audience and all that, but I wasn't aware that hypocrisy only mattered when it comes to celebrities.Also another interesting bit of hypocrisy on your part to cite Aristotle on "picayune matters" here, don't you think? Aren't such matters your stock in trade almost all the time?DanMy short story "Residue" now available for Kindle at:
On Apr 2, 2013, at 4:13 AM, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@...> wrote:
It's interesting that you think a joke I repost, a private citizen in a small group, about making Islamic countries into swimming pools, is to you an example of a call for genocide, while my pointing out as an example of widespread media bias and hypocrisy a pattern of rape jokes on national television about several women from outside the political and media establishment, by Sandra Bernhard, Margaret Cho, David Letterman and Bill Maher, is whining about "some" joke a "liberal" made.Even assuming that you don't watch TV and don't keep up with currents in pop culture, its interesting how the memory and mind work. I think Aristotle has several passages on focusing on the wrong things, like people who keep accounts for picayune matters.This seems far below your usual level of functioning. If I knew you I'd ask you if you were well.
On Monday, April 1, 2013, Dan wrote:I was talking about the fit you threw here about a rape joke some liberal made. You whined about it as if it were the most unjust thing ever mouthed by a human.DanMy short story "Residue" now available for Kindle at:
On Apr 1, 2013, at 8:45 PM, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@...> wrote:
I'm sorry Dan. Did you tell a joke that I missed?I am well known as someone who is particularly offended by politically incorrect jokes, whîch are the primary reason the libertarian movement has not been more successful.
On Monday, April 1, 2013, Dan wrote:I have no problem with Bruce's humor here, but, should someone else tell a joke he finds offensive, be prepared for him to do a wounded bird imitation and act like he's the prophet of all that's good and true.DanMy short story "Residue" now available for Kindle at:
On Apr 1, 2013, at 8:33 PM, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@...> wrote:
It is always too much.My iPad was made by the finest child slaves money can by. It is fragrant with their bloodstained overworked fingers and their radiation induced leukemia.I only buy the finest.
On Monday, April 1, 2013, Juan Garofalo wrote:
At 08:25 PM 4/1/2013 -0400, you wrote:
>O'Reilly often has people on whose function is to look nuttier than he.
>Tonight Scott Brown is guest hosting for him.
If you're replying to JO, do you think quoting him (and his message) instead of me is asking too much? Are you using garbage from apple computers or something?
>On Monday, April 1, 2013, Juan Garofalo wrote:
>At 07:45 PM 4/1/2013 -0400, you wrote:
>>Why should one care.
>Let me see if I got this right. First you reply with a bit of nazi vomit to a post of mine, and when asked what you mean, you make another idiotic remark?
>>Or as Hillary would say, what does it matter.
>>On Monday, April 1, 2013, Juan Garofalo wrote:
>>At 07:09 PM 4/1/2013 -0400, you wrote:
>>>I'm not a student of "rules of war" but what comes to mind when libertarians invoke the received traditions about such things is similar to what comes to mind when liberals invoke UN proclamations to prove that there is a right to health care etc.
>>What do you mean?
>>>On Monday, April 1, 2013, Juan Garofalo wrote:
>>>At 06:11 PM 4/1/2013 -0400, you wrote:
>>>>You know, I was wondering what Juan thought about all this, as he has been insufficiently clear in the past.
>>>>On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Juan Garofalo <<mailto:juan.g71@....email@example.com> wrote:
>>>>At 12:42 PM 4/1/2013 -0400, you wrote:
>>>>>Isn't he the Duke Nuke 'em of the Objectivist movement?
>>>>No, that is turd-peikoff, intellectual heir of the little americunt rand.
>>>>> My short story "Residue" now available for Kindle at: