If you are going to correct the grammar and spelling of all of the posts, you are going to be very busy.... ; )
Erin -----Original Message----- From: Braver, Ben [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 12:26 PM To: CF-Community Subject: RE: The Anti Terrorism Act.. Brainwashed? Because he disagrees with you you call him names and can't talk to him? Oh, come on. You've been making some very opinionated statements. People react to that. And FYI "your" is a possessive. The contraction of "you are" is "you're". -----Original Message----- From: Benjamin Falloon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 10:46 PM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: The Anti Terrorism Act.. I can't talk to you. your brainwashed. ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 3:53 PM Subject: RE: The Anti Terrorism Act.. > That wasn't my phrase. I was referring to the previous post. But I also > sense that you're nit-picking, being unable to rise to intelligent debate. > > You've got a real chip on your shoulder. I think you've been feed too much > leftist propaganda. At least that's the impression you leave. > > H. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Benjamin Falloon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 10:29 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: The Anti Terrorism Act.. > > > well. God bless america. Even the 'non-whites' as you call them. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 3:30 PM > Subject: RE: The Anti Terrorism Act.. > > > > Manifest Destiny is a term that dates back to the 1850s. It's a term that > > was coined by expansionists after the Louisiana Purchase. Manifest means > > "evident." The term meant it was the U.S.'s inevitable destiny, God-given, > > really, to expand from coast to coast. It was the rally cry that sent > > pioneers west. > > > > I would ask your friend, why would we engage in a war not in our best > > interests? Seems kind of ludicrous to expect us to, doesn't? As for > > engaging in war purely in the interest of democracy and freedom, see my > post > > on WWII. Other conflicts spring to mind, but I don't know much about > those, > > so I'll keep quiet. I'm sure if I say something, somebody will mention > some > > U.S. company that owned some borax mine or something. Fact is, in just > about > > any country, you make an economic justification for U.S. involvement, so > > many of our companies have such far reaching interests. We've also stuck > > our neck out a few times for non-whites, but again, I'm not educated > enough > > on the details to give locations and dates. But I can think of a couple > that > > just maybe we had no economic interest. > > > > H. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Angel Stewart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 4:39 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: RE: The Anti Terrorism Act.. > > > > > > I'm listening.And learning :) > > It is good to see differing, even sometimes radical, opinions expressed. > > > > So don't stop now..this has the potential to be an interesting discussion. > > > > BUt just to throw something out there... > > > > Someone told me today that part of Bin Laden's goal is/was to prevent > > America from 'taking over' the world. > > It seems that there is a growing feeling amongst muslims that American > > Capitalism, and morals or lack thereof, will > > 'takeover' their traditions and their way of life (such as it is), and > that > > this must be stopped at all costs. This person > > believes that America is actively seeking to Rule The World and to > increase > > its powerbase and influence throughout the world > > through economic forces, military maneuvers and its 'foreign policy'. She > > said something about Manifest Destiny from the > > 1950s rearing its head all over again (anyone know what that is?). SHe > also > > agreed with Falloon when she said that she did > > not know of any single time in History when America intervened somewhere > > militarily against its National Interests (and this > > includes Political interest of the then leader) or when it had nothing to > > gain from that military conflict. In otherwords it > > has never used its influence or its forces in any region of the world > simply > > to promote democracy, Freedom, or the American > > Way.She claimed that despite what the majority of Americans seem to think, > > and actually believe that htey are the great > > protectors of Democracy and Freedom in the world, that they would never > > agree to American lives being lost somewhere simply > > to assure Freedom and a better way of life for a people, especially if > that > > people were non-white. > > > > Any thoughts on all this? > > > > I told her she was full of sh**, but I'd get back to her on that tomorrow > > and ran out of the office ^_^. > > > > -Gel > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Benjamin Falloon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > If I appear to have "anti-American blinders" on that only because I'm > > out-number in this board 10-1. Therefore I have to push this perspective a > > little more feverishly. > > > > I'm not saying that american is responsible for all of the worlds ills. To > > say this would be folly and never once have I said this. I wish people > would > > stop drawing this conclusion. > > > > My point is very simple. The balance of power in the world is far too in > > favour of the States and not by a small margin either. By a great divide. > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
