This brings up thoughts of prior debates on whether or not US citizens
are subject to the International Court. We (the US) are making a habit
of forcing our laws on other countries, but yet we are not subject to
the laws of an established INTERNATIONAL court; one who's laws are
created from a
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote:
James A. Donald
All of the terrorists came from countries that were
beneficiaries of an immense amount of US help. Saudi
Arabia was certainly not under attack. If they were
Palestinians, and they hit the Pentagon but not the two
--
On 22 Oct 2004 at 11:12, Bill Stewart wrote:
James - Many, perhaps most, of the POWs at Gitmo weren't
foreigners, they were Afghans. Many of the POWs at Gitmo
probably were Al-Qaeda or other organized paramilitary
groups. But many of them were described by the US
propagandists as
At 01:03 PM 10/23/04 -0400, John Kelsey wrote:
Blowing up a building full of random people because a few of them are
associated with some action you really disagree with is just outside
the realm of the sort of moral decision I can figure out. Just like
flying planes into buildings full of people
--
John Kelsey
I'm still trying to understand the moral theory on which
you differentiate hitting the two towers from the
Oklaholma City bombing.
James A. Donald:
The pentagon did not have a branch office in the two
towers. BATF had an office in the Murrah building.
J.A.
--
On 23 Oct 2004 at 19:25, J.A. Terranson wrote:
There are all givens to the rest of us - I am trying to fit
these arguments into Donald's Reality Distortion Field.
Is it also a given to you, as it is to Tyler, that the US
attacked North Korea, and that the reason for this attack was
to
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote:
The Taliban were illegitimate, not on legal grounds, but
because they were evil.
Using this line of reasoning, Shrub is ripe for that overdue case of
high velocity lead poisoning.
If someone was in the Taliban, then those threatened by the
Let us not forget the more tangible 'value' in bombing the WTC and messing
up things downtown. First of all, the companies in the WTC were, to say the
least, impacted (actually, the company I work for lost 11 people and
relocated to NJ for about a year)hitting them (and their workers) was
Steve Furlong [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[1] The defensive aspect here is to allow the attackers to attack from
distance beyond the reach of the other side's active defenses, thus not
risking anything more than a piece of overpriced electronics.
If some asshole is coming at you with a
On Sat, Oct 23, 2004 at 11:37:02PM -0400, Adam wrote:
None-the-less, this has been one of the more inteteresting (and
infuriating) threads in recent memory of Cypherpunks. I'm glad we're
going through it with such vigor.
That thread bores me to tears.
I miss technical content. Or, at least,
--
James A. Donald:
The Taliban were illegitimate, not on legal grounds, but
because they were evil.
J.A. Terranson
Using this line of reasoning, Shrub is ripe for that
overdue case of high velocity lead poisoning.
Doubtless he is, but to suggest that he is comparably evil to
the
--
On 23 Oct 2004 at 22:58, Adam wrote:
I am curious, Mr. Donald, how exactly you define the word
terrorist. I request that your definition be generic; i.e.
not a definition like anyone who attacks the US.On 23 Oct
2004 at 22:58, Adam wrote: I am curious, Mr. Donald, how
exactly you
At 11:37 PM -0400 10/23/04, Adam wrote:
You know, the more I read posts by Mr. Donald, the more I believe that
he is quite possibly the most apt troll I have ever encountered.
No, that was Tim May. The world champion troll if there ever was one --
among other things. :-).
James is right, of
You know, the more I read posts by Mr. Donald, the more I believe that
he is quite possibly the most apt troll I have ever encountered. It is
quite apparent from reading his responses that he is obviously an
exceptionally intelligent (academically anyway) individual. I find it
hard to believe that
The problem is, of course, that the US simply cannot keep their dicks
out of the affairs of other countries. We are obsessed with controlling
how the world develops, so as to guarantee to force countries to evolve
in such a way that is beneficial to the US. Such is an inevitable hazard
of becoming
--
James A. Donald
All of the terrorists came from countries that were
beneficiaries of an immense amount of US help. Saudi
Arabia was certainly not under attack. If they were
Palestinians, and they hit the Pentagon but not the two
towers, then they would be defending
hello,
The C code for the blowfish encryption algorithm
posted in Mr.Schneier's site, acocording to Michael.B
still 'chokes' as it is not corrected even though the
bug report, mentions that it is a fatal bug.
The bug report is available at
http://www.schneier.com/blowfish-bug.txt
His opinion is
I am curious, Mr. Donald, how exactly you define the word terrorist. I
request that your definition be generic; i.e. not a definition like
anyone who attacks the US.
I'd be willing to bet that you cannot provide a clear generic definition
of terrorist. Moreover, I can guarantee that you cannot
There are all givens to the rest of us - I am trying to fit these
arguments into Donald's Reality Distortion Field.
//Alif
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004, Tyler Durden wrote:
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:41:45 -0400
From: Tyler Durden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
There were several USG offices in the Twin Towers, some of
them intelligence. In addition, CIA was located in 7 WTC, along
with Secret Service and military offices. The military offices
were used as cover for the others. There was far more USG in
WTC than in Murrah, and the lesson learned in OKC
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote:
You guys just keep making up facts.
There were no branches of the armed services in the towers.
You are just spouting bullshit, like the story that Osama Bin
Laden was trained by the CIA, that Saddam was installed in a
CIA coup, and all those
From: Tyler Durden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Oct 23, 2004 7:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Airport insanity
Let us not forget the more tangible 'value' in bombing the WTC and messing
up things downtown. First of all, the companies in the WTC were,
Adam wrote:
You know, the more I read posts by Mr. Donald, the more I believe that
he is quite possibly the most apt troll I have ever encountered. It is
quite apparent from reading his responses that he is obviously an
exceptionally intelligent (academically anyway) individual. I find it
hard to
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Roy M. Silvernail wrote:
McViegh did not target innocents. Bin Laden did target
innocents.
I'm confused.
So is Mr. Donald.
Is Mr. Donald saying McVeigh did not surveil his target
sufficiently to know that there was a day care center in the damage
pattern? Or is
I have a hunch that Mr. Donald is instead playing the role of an
elaborate devil's advocate, furiously defending his stance against
retaliations by our fellow Cypherpunks. Tyler Durden mentioned this
hypothesis many emails ago, and I believe him to be accurate, especially
since Mr. Donald never
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Tyler Durden wrote:
I've just never
encountered anyone who had NO doubt about anything the current regime is
doing.
Really? I have - every single person voting for Shrub seems to be
exhibiting this particular blindness.
-TD
--
Yours,
J.A. Terranson
[EMAIL
On Sun, 2004-10-24 at 03:43 -0700, James A. Donald wrote:
McViegh did not target innocents. Bin Laden did target
innocents.
I'm confused. Is Mr. Donald saying McVeigh did not surveil his target
sufficiently to know that there was a day care center in the damage
pattern? Or is he saying it
27 matches
Mail list logo
