one other possible reason that people don't respond to
your vitriolic posts is that you consistently choose
to post private responses to on-list debates.
just a thought.
alison e. in nyc
ps: "boyz in the hood" was by john singleton, not
spike lee.
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 2/21/2001 8:14:28 AM Pacific
> Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> << i think the silence was deafening because it was
> a
> bullshit analogy.>>>
>
> The Unibomber was "bullshit". Yeah right.
>
> <>>
>
> First of all they never "claim" anything. I guess
> the loggers maimed by the
> Earth First group dont count in your book.
>
> <<<plenty of property, millions of dollars worth,
> has been destroyed by (or
> claimed to have been destroyed by) this group. so
> what you are saying with
> this argument, marcel, is that this destroyed
> property is just as valuable as
> the lives of thousands of victims of the KKK and
> other race-based hate
> groups.>>>
>
> In the movie Boys in the Hood your statistic is
> refuted and that was by Spike
> Lee. 63 people were killed in the Rodney King Riots.
> At least 23,000 blacks
> were killed by other blacks in this decade and that
> number is on the low
> side. The number according to Spike Lee is less than
> 6. So my point is that
> many exaggerate and over emphasize the damage while
> totally ignoring all
> kinds of other facts history and statistics. I take
> it that you believe that
> to wipe thousands of jobs property and entire towns
> off the map to save a
> spotted owl is nothing. THAT was my point and thanks
> for proving it.
>
> <<< in fact, this group (that i don't support, by
> the way) takes these
> actions in a misguided attempt to save the planet
> for all creatures, human
> and non. they are
> trying to wake people up to the devastation that is
> occuring everyday in our
> own backyards.>>>
>
> Ask the people who for generations made their living
> and raised their kids
> working as loggers and farmers and now are
> unemployed in Appalacia West. They
> will tell you what devastation is. You can continue
> to justify your political
> views with junk science fabricated by junk
> scientists with a political axe to
> grind and little empiracle evidence to support their
> violence but thats your
> perogative.
>
> <<<no, i dont' think it's the right approach. i
> don't believe in violence as
> a political tactic. >>>
>
> Sure you do you just said so above.
>
> <<<but they aren't specifically trying to hurt or
> denegrate people or
> advance an agenda based on hate (unless you think
> hating developers and
> corporations like monsanto is the same thing, i
> guess). >>
>
> This is the problem. As long as we believe we are
> only attacking the
> amorphous "corporation" then its cool in your book?
> They certainly do hate.
> Just as the anti war 60s people today cant bring
> themselves to admit today
> they treated the people who fought in Viet nam like
> dogs , today you cant see
> that it isnt the corporations alone that they are
> hurting.
>
> <<>>
>
> The Clintons are the quintessential example of the
> deterioration in the
> meaning of everything that the liberals used to
> stand for. They have forced
> the left to evacuate the moral high ground and
> expend all its credibility
> just to defend them. Same with jessie.I guess we
> all owe Nixon an apology
> sine to criticize a President who breaks a million
> laws makes us diatribers.
> After all whats a little abuse of power when his
> poll ratings are high (which
> they were) ? The great blind spot in the left's
> intellect.. Defending a
> rapist who happens to be president I would have
> thought unimaginable. But it
> is those who deign to criticize him that have to be
> put down. Stealing the
> furniture out of the White House is to our political
> culture what Eminem is
> to our musical culture. Now do you get it. Maybe
> not.
>
> I very much agree with you on one thing and that is
> how these kinds of
> matters do in fact intiiate discussion of important
issues.
