was there a question in there? On 6/20/06, Cory Nott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am saying that in order to have a discussion we have to go with the > knowledge that we have, even if it is incomplete. I see nothing wrong with > demanding further knowledge and accountability, but until that is > delivered > we should not forestall any further discussion. If you believe that any > further discussion is impossible, I'd like to hear your reasons rather > than > a complete digression into some other argument. > > If individuals acting on behalf of the United States are deliberately > targetting citizens in order to terrorize the populace, then those who are > doing so and those who know about it and offer support or refuse to > intervene if possible are complicit in terrorist acts. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] <Libertarian%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto: > [email protected] <Libertarian%40yahoogroups.com>]On > Behalf Of John Stroebel > Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 8:45 PM > To: [email protected] <Libertarian%40yahoogroups.com> > Subject: Re: [Libertarian] MODERATOR Intervention! Re: More evidence, > Muslims are enemies of Free Speech > > Ah.....so we don't need accurate info on who 'they' are....is that about > right? > > You seem to believe your idea of who 'they' are does not need to be > accurate. OK. Tell me this: when it comes to torture in Abu Graeb prison, > Marines massacres, dropping bombs on civilian centers of cities, or the > 100,000 tp 250,000 dead Iraqi civilians depending on who you believe > (can't > go by what our gov't says..,..they don't do a body count on dead men women > and children)....and you say > > > "but placing bombs in cars and targetting innocent civilians is an > attack > > and worthy of being called terrorism." > > ...does that make US terrorists???? > > On 6/20/06, Cory Nott <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <corynott%40yahoo.com>> wrote: > > > > They may consider themselves to be defenders - whether of faith or > > country or whatever, but placing bombs in cars and targetting innocent > > civilians is an attack and worthy of being called terrorism. They are > > attempting to influence events by inspiring terror in a populace. > > > > As for whether or not we are getting "accurate answers" is entirely a > > separate issue and irrelevant to the labels that can be used to describe > > certain activities. If we are deliberately (and in the minds of many, > > unintentionally) attacking civilians then it is murder, pure and simple. > > > > >
-- ***************************************** "We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately!" ...Ben Franklin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/bmUd6C/fOaOAA/cUmLAA/KlSolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
