On Jul 6, 8:39=A0am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Rupert wrote:
> > On Jul 6, 6:45 am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> Rupert wrote:
> >>> On Jul 6, 1:55 am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>>> Rupert, slavishly adoring of a third-rate philosophy prof who spent
=
his
> >>>> career at an academic backwater, uncritically quoted the third-rate
=
prof
> >>>> and blabbered:
> >>> It would be widely agreed in the academic community
> >> No.
>
> >>> that the author of
> >>> "The Case for Animal Rights" is not a "third-rate prof
> >> Regan spent his entire career at an academic backwater, and if not
for
> >> having staked out an extreme position on a controversial topic, his
> >> entire career would have gone unnoticed in the academic world.
>
> > There's more to it than just taking an extreme position on a
> > controversial topic,
>
> That's *all* he did.
>
You've read the book?
> > anyway, so in that case the question of how highly Regan's work is
> > regarded by academics is not really all that im****tant.
>
> You're contradicting yourself again. =A0You said he wasn't a third-rate
> prof, indicating you think he was more highly regarded in the academic
> world; now you're saying it's not im****tant.
>
No, Ball, that is not contradicting myself. I will have to have a go
at teaching you some logic some time.
I didn't say it wasn't im****tant, I said it can't be all that
im****tant if you're correct that John Rawls ought to have been thrown
out of academia. But what the hell, I'll say it now. It's not
im****tant.
Regan's not a "third-rate prof", and I bothered to mention this
briefly, *and* it's not im****tant. All of these are correct. Savvy?
> He *was* a third-rate prof, a nobody, at a backwater.
>
He's still working there, isn't he?
Whatever. Have you read his book? All you can do by way of critiquing
it is parrot Cohen, Cohen's criticisms of it are misdirected.
>
>
>
>
> >>>>> [Regan, the third-rate prof:] =A0Consider this possible scenario.
W=
hy not hire someone to infiltrate
> >>>>> the animal rights movement, as an agent provocateur, with one main
> >>>>> purpose: to find a malleable person in the movement who could be
> >>>>> "encouraged" (shall we say) to try to do something that would
reall=
y
> >>>>> discredit ARAs. Like, maybe this person could be "encouraged" to
tr=
y
> >>>>> to murder someone. And not just anyone. No, the "someone" should
be=
a
> >>>>> pillar of the community, someone who (what an odd coincidence)
just
> >>>>> happened to be a leader in a major animal user industry, someone
wh=
o
> >>>>> just happened to have been famously outspoken in his criticisms of
> >>>>> ARAs. An attempt on his life would be perfect. It would show the
> >>>>> public that ARAs really are extremists who will stop at nothing to
> >>>>> further their ends. It is not hard to visualize the headline:
"Anim=
al
> >>>>> Rights Terrorist Attempts to Murder Pillar of Community".
> >>>>> A few problems would have to be solved. It takes time to find the
> >>>>> right person for the job. It takes money to pay all the players.
Wh=
o
> >>>>> is going to come up with the necessary cash? Well, suppose the
pill=
ar
> >>>>> himself could pay for the attempt on his life. Suppose the pillar
> >>>>> himself (such is his influence) could arrange to have the local
pol=
ice
> >>>>> on hand to arrest the would-be murderer. "Nah", you might say,
"Thi=
s
> >>>>> is too fanciful, too conspiratorial. I don't think anyone in a
majo=
r
> >>>>> animal user industry would ever do anything like this." Think
again=
..
> >>>>> Leon Hirsch, past president of the Norwalk, Connecticut-based U.
S.
> >>>>> Surgical Cor****ation, played the role of the pillar of the
communit=
y.
> >>>>> Hirsch's former company manufactures staples used in place of
ordin=
ary
> >>>>> sutures in many operations. During Hirsch's tenure, physicians
> >>>>> received training by practicing on live dogs, who were vivisected,
> >>>>> then killed. ARAs (led by Friends of Animals, also locate in
Norwal=
k)
> >>>>> mounted an in-your-face campaign against Hirsch and his company
bac=
k
> >>>>> in the late 1980s. His ingenious way of getting even was to put up
=
the
> >>>>> necessary money to arrange for an ARA to try to murder him.
> >>>>> On November 11, 1989, a man on the payroll of a firm Hirsch had
hir=
ed
> >>>>> drove a young woman named Fran Trutt, a self-professed ARA, along
w=
ith
> >>>>> her two recently purchased pipe bombs, from New York City to
Norwal=
k.
> >>>>> When she placed the bombs adjacent to Hirsch's parking space,
Hirsc=
h's
> >>>>> friends in the Norwalk police department just happened to be on
han=
d
> >>>>> to arrest her.
> >>>>> The resulting story (not the bombs, which never exploded) was the
r=
eal
> >>>>> bombshell. There it was: "Animal Rights Terrorist Attempts to
Murde=
r
> >>>>> Pillar of Community". As John C. Stauber and Sheldom Rampton
observ=
e,
> >>>>> "Normally, of course, company presidents do not arrange their own
> >>>>> murder, but Hirsch was neither crazy nor suicidal. He was trying
to
> >>>>> engineer an embarrassing scandal that would discredit the animal
> >>>>> rights movement."
> >>>>> Hirsch would have succeeded, too, except for one thing: the
ensuing
> >>>>> trial brought ot light extensive tape transcripts that implicated
> >>>>> everyone, from Hirsch on down, who had hatched the plot to
discredi=
t
> >>>>> ARAs. Friends of Animals sued Hirsch, who sold U. S. Surgical in
19=
98,
> >>>>> but their suit was unsuccessful, and he never faced any criminal
> >>>>> charges. Perhaps not surprisingly, Fran Trutt was the only person
t=
o
> >>>>> serve time (a year in prison, followed by a year on probation).
She
> >>>>> seems to have left the movement.
> >>>> False. =A0There was no entrapment, and the firm did not set Trutt
up=
..
> >>> Well, that's interesting, I wonder why Hirsch doesn't sue Regan for
> >>> defamation.
> >>> "No entrapment", eh? Strong words, Rudy.
> >> No, the accusation of entrapment is what would be strong language,
wer=
e
> >> it not for the fact that every criminal in modern history claims to
ha=
ve
> >> been entrapped. =A0This **** Trutt was not entrapped at all.
=A0Entrap=
ment,
> >> at least in American jurisprudence, occurs when someone is induced by
> >> law enforcement to commit a crime that he would not otherwise have
> >> committed; that he showed no inclination to commit until pressure was
> >> applied by police. =A0There was no "agent provocateur" in this case -
=
the
> >> ***** Trutt willingly engaged herself in the conspiracy to murder
> >> Hirsch, and she obtained the materials for her pipe bombs entirely
> >> independently of any coercion by the private security agents.
>
> > All right. If we can find sources that bear that out, fine. :)
>
> > I note that you were the first person to use the word "entrapment".
>
> No. =A0It was in the New York Times article I cited. =A0It's also what
Re=
gan
> - the third-rate hack at a backwater - was suggesting when he kept
> writing "encouraged" in quotation marks.
>
Well, I haven't had a chance to look at that yet because I'm willingly
living in a country ruled by a corrupt autocracy. Regan did make an
insinuation, yes, he didn't commit himself to an accusation of
entrapment as currently defined in American jurisprudence. Your point
is that Regan's insinuation is not sustained by the facts, well,
that's interesting, thanks for pointing that out, I'll investigate the
matter further.
>
>
> >> Regan completely misrepresented what happened. =A0That's what
third-ra=
te
> >> philosophy profs at academic backwaters do.
>
> > I'll look into the matter further. There's some discussion of it in
> > Peter Singer's "Ethics into Action" as well, I think.
>
> Oh, no doubt, no doubt!
>
> > Singer is probably a third-rate prof at an academic backwater too,
> > isn't he? :) He must be because he's an animal liberationist.
>
> Singer, showing how totally detached from reality and good sense the
> academic world can be, got himself an appointment at Princeton, one of
> the premier private universities in the
U.S.http://people.brandeis.edu/~t=
euber/singerdrawsastir.html
>
Indeed he did.
> >>> I can't read your link because my anti-censor****p software has
stoppe=
d
> >>> working, I'll have to look at it later.
> >> If you weren't willingly helping sup****t a corrupt autocracy, you
> >> wouldn't have this issue. =A0You're helping to prop up the vestiges
of=
one
> >> of the most corrupt, murderous regimes in history. =A0The Chinese
> >> Communist party caused the deaths of tens, more likely hundreds of
> >> millions of Chinese, and here you are helping to sup****t the direct
> >> political descendants of the murderers. =A0Many of these people
themse=
lves
> >> have blood on their hands, and you're helping them maintain their
grip
> >> on power.
>
> > Well, thanks for your thoughts, Rudy, I'll think about that one,
>
> Not very much, you won't.
>
Typical clueless comment.
> > but actually I don't think I'm affecting the political situation in
> > China in any tangible way.
>
> You're sup****ting the regime.
>
> > I really had no idea that I was "willingly" paying taxes.
>
> Who said anything about taxes, you ****?
>
You've lost me, I'm afraid. I'm sup****ting the regime, but we're not
talking about taxes. I don't sup****t the regime in any way, Ball. They
are currently extorting money from me, I have the option of
withdrawing my tax revenue but someone else would take my place and
generate just as much tax revenue. It is true that if everyone who had
a choice in the matter said "We're not going to work in China until
you stop abusing human rights", then the situation would probably
improve. I did seriously contemplate resigning and flying back to
Sydney recently, for various completely different reasons. Your
perspective on the matter did not occur to me before, I will think
seriously about it, it is just that there is this woman whom I happen
to be in love with who does not wish to leave China at the moment. I
don't really have the option of doing very much constructive about the
political situation in China (well, maybe I could do a bit if I went
back home) and I don't really think that I have a moral obligation to
leave my current job.
> > I mean, I got assaulted in a nightclub a few months ago
>
> Tell us more. =A0Did you grab the ass of another bloke's girl? =A0How
lon=
g
> were you unconscious?
>
A guy walked up to my girlfriend and slapped her butt. I walked up to
him and said "That's my girlfriend, I don't want you to touch her
there." He said "Are you serious? How about her tits, am I allowed to
feel those? I think you're stupid." I said "You're allowed to think
I'm stupid, I'm just telling you what you can and can't do with my
girlfriend." He pushed me hard in the chest. A bouncer escorted me out
despite the fact that I had not been violent.
With all the good laughs you give me, Ball, it's only fair that you
should have a few too. :)
> > George Bush has blood on his hands, does he not?
>
> He sure does. =A0I just heard a bit on radio yesterday about a former
> prosecutor (guy prosecuted Charles Manson and his "family"; you're too
> young to know anything about it) who has written a book laying out the
> case for charging Bush with the murder of all the American servicemen
> who have died in Iraq. =A0That doesn't even address his guilt for the
> deaths of Iraqis. =A0I completely and thoroughly oppose the war in Iraq,
> and I think Bush should have been impeached - far too late for that now
> - and, once out of office, should be prosecuted.
>
Jolly good.
> > Why don't you go and work in the Netherlands?
>
> Unlike the gerontocracy in China, we don't have a regime here. =A0Bush
is
> but one part of the government, and he will leave office at the end or
> his term. =A0Our system of government here, unlike China's, isn't
> inherently corrupt. =A0Until China stops being a one-party state - a
> system you are sup****ting, even if only in a small way - it will be a
> tyranny. =A0You ought not sup****t it.
>
> BTW, I'd love to be able to move my family to Europe. =A0I don't think
> it's a realistic possibility. =A0I think I'm too old to get a work visa,
> and they would refuse me political asylum.- Hide quoted text -
>
As I say, I don't see how I'm "sup****ting" the one-party state if it's
not about taxes.
Okay, so what you would do in my position? You have a romantic
relation****p in China, your partner doesn't want to leave China.
Suddenly you have the moral insight that it's wrong to work in a
country that is governed by a tyranny. You'd hand in your letter of
resignation straight away, would you? You wouldn't feel that staying
one more year is excusable?
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
