Re: [ZION] Iraq
We do bear the responsibility of any inaction we support when we could have acted with a reasonable expectation of success. This sentence begs a long discussion about such things as success but that is not something I have time to go into right now. perhaps when I return from our descent into Linville Gorge. However, I can respect the position of others who feel differently for some rather valid reasons (don't stick your nose into another's problems, etc.). I simply think that those positions lead to a world that is not as good as it might otherwise be. Your statements concerning Pakistan do not stand up to examination. Somehow, I haven't seen the current leader of Pakistan gas 150,000 of their people. I haven't seen Pakistan attack their neighbor, raping and pillaging as they go. Etc. Jon - Original Message - From: Marc A. Schindler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 21, 2002 2:26 PM Subject: Re: [ZION] Iraq Why? Since when do those who prefer peace bear responsibility for others' actions? Do we also bear the responsibility for the thousands of people who have died in Kashmir simply because they were trying to exercise their right to a free vote in a democracy (India) from the hands of those who would take this away from them (Islamist groups based in Pakistan)? Again I ask (and keep in mind it's a rhetorical question -- I'm not suggesting we invade Pakistan), since every reason the US and the UK have given for the necessity of armed conflict with Iraq applies in spades to Pakistan, why aren't we talking about the invasion of Pakistan? Are we also to be held responsible for the deaths in China due to the astonishing record of the communist government there over the past half century? Jon Spencer wrote: This is perhaps a small correction, and I would assume this is what you meant: I am in support of a war against *Saddam*, hopefully with the support of the Iraqi people. I am grateful to our leaders for the use of smart weapons, which will minimize the number of innocent deaths. But for those who want us to stay home because of the inevitable innocent deaths, on you hands will be the deaths of tens of thousands of innocents joining in with the hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis Saddam has already killed. Jon - Original Message - From: Paul Osborne [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 3:08 PM Subject: Re: [ZION] Iraq Saddam will go. And as hard as it is to imagine, I guess I, too, could be wrong. You're not wrong this time. His days are numbered and the writing is on the wall. I'm in favor of a war with Iraq based on what I know about the situation. Paul O [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / -- Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland Knowledge may give weight, but accomplishments give lustre, and many more people see than weigh. - Lord Chesterfield Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author's employer, nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated. // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Iraq
This is perhaps a small correction, and I would assume this is what you meant: I am in support of a war against *Saddam*, hopefully with the support of the Iraqi people. I am grateful to our leaders for the use of smart weapons, which will minimize the number of innocent deaths. But for those who want us to stay home because of the inevitable innocent deaths, on you hands will be the deaths of tens of thousands of innocents joining in with the hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis Saddam has already killed. Jon - Original Message - From: Paul Osborne [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 3:08 PM Subject: Re: [ZION] Iraq Saddam will go. And as hard as it is to imagine, I guess I, too, could be wrong. You're not wrong this time. His days are numbered and the writing is on the wall. I'm in favor of a war with Iraq based on what I know about the situation. Paul O [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Iraq
Why? Since when do those who prefer peace bear responsibility for others' actions? Do we also bear the responsibility for the thousands of people who have died in Kashmir simply because they were trying to exercise their right to a free vote in a democracy (India) from the hands of those who would take this away from them (Islamist groups based in Pakistan)? Again I ask (and keep in mind it's a rhetorical question -- I'm not suggesting we invade Pakistan), since every reason the US and the UK have given for the necessity of armed conflict with Iraq applies in spades to Pakistan, why aren't we talking about the invasion of Pakistan? Are we also to be held responsible for the deaths in China due to the astonishing record of the communist government there over the past half century? Jon Spencer wrote: This is perhaps a small correction, and I would assume this is what you meant: I am in support of a war against *Saddam*, hopefully with the support of the Iraqi people. I am grateful to our leaders for the use of smart weapons, which will minimize the number of innocent deaths. But for those who want us to stay home because of the inevitable innocent deaths, on you hands will be the deaths of tens of thousands of innocents joining in with the hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis Saddam has already killed. Jon - Original Message - From: Paul Osborne [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 3:08 PM Subject: Re: [ZION] Iraq Saddam will go. And as hard as it is to imagine, I guess I, too, could be wrong. You're not wrong this time. His days are numbered and the writing is on the wall. I'm in favor of a war with Iraq based on what I know about the situation. Paul O [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / -- Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland Knowledge may give weight, but accomplishments give lustre, and many more people see than weigh. Lord Chesterfield Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer, nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated. // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^^=== This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^^===
Re: [ZION] Iraq
You are probably wrong. War is not imminent because we are not ready. We will be in about one month. Also, I believe that the statements Bush makes are directed at Saddam primarily, and not at the US populace. I also believe that the US is trying very hard to get a rebellion going in Iraq, although I personally hold out little hope of that happening. I do not believe that there will be any backing down. IMNSHO, Bush honestly believes that Saddam is a major threat to not only the US, bat also to Canada (:-) and the rest of our allies. Saddam will go. And as hard as it is to imagine, I guess I, too, could be wrong. Jon - Original Message - From: Marc A. Schindler [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: zion-l [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 6:20 PM Subject: [ZION] Iraq I can't say I told you so yet but Bush has announced today that despite the omissions in the report on WMD delivered by Iraq to the UN (and only today being given to the non-permanent members of the Security Council, incidentally), war is not imminent. I've been of the opinion since this issue arose that there won't be a war in Iraq, that the situation is at least as much about domestic US politics as it is with anything actually going on in Iraq and that we'd see a gradual backing down once the mid-term elections were past. I could be wrong -- I guess we'll see. http://my.netscape.com/corewidgets/news/story.psp?cat=51180id=2002121817270 00163465 -- Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland Knowledge may give weight, but accomplishments give lustre, and many more people see than weigh. - Lord Chesterfield Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author's employer, nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated. // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Iraq
Jon Spencer wrote: You are probably wrong. War is not imminent because we are not ready. We will be in about one month. So why did two complete naval battle groups start sailing *out of* the Middle East earlier this week? Actually, this is an area where my prognostication has a weak point, because you're right in principle; the war could be delayed until the US feels it's ready. Any prognostication is at best an educated guess, and if I'm wrong, well, it won't be the first time I've had to eat lumpy porridge ;-) Also, I believe that the statements Bush makes are directed at Saddam primarily, and not at the US populace. I also believe that the US is trying very hard to get a rebellion going in Iraq, although I personally hold out little hope of that happening. Why? Saddam isn't on Florida's voter list, is he? /snidely-whiplashism I do not believe that there will be any backing down. IMNSHO, Bush honestly believes that Saddam is a major threat to not only the US, bat also to Canada (:-) and the rest of our allies. Saddam will go. And as hard as it is to imagine, I guess I, too, could be wrong. Jon At least we're both covering our cyber-rear ends, so to speak... -- Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland Knowledge may give weight, but accomplishments give lustre, and many more people see than weigh. Lord Chesterfield Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer, nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated. // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^^=== This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^^===
Re: [ZION] Iraq: letters in Meridian
At 08:07 PM, Friday, 11/1/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote: I'm sorry to hear that. It can be very disruptive and discouraging, and I wish you all the best in finding something you enjoy as soon as possible. And seriously, if you're a high-tech worker or a professional in various other departments, as a citizen of a NAFTA country you can get a job anywhere in the US, Mexico or Canada with very minimal paperwork (far less than what one needs to get an H1B, for instance). So if NAFTA and its global counterpart, the WTO, are truly in favor of free trade why are only high tech workers permitted to go wherever the work is? Free trade DEMANDS a free flow of labor as well as a lowering of tariffs. And when I say a free flow of labor, I am talking about the way labor flows from one state to another here in the USA. The bottom line is: When supporters of NAFTA and the WTO use the phrase free trade, they are being hypocrites. They have no interest in genuinely free trade. It would break their monopolies. John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] === To me, boxing is like a ballet, except there's no music, no choreography and the dancers hit each other. -- Jack Handy === All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Iraq: letters in Meridian
I can only say amen. I'm also upset that I have to pay GST on things I buy from
the States. I think a US plant would rather set up in a maquiladora in Ciudad
Juarez, for instance, where environmental and labour laws are primitive, than allow
those same workers into an Arizona or Texas plant. It's cheaper, and in effect
allows them to export their pollution. As far as I'm concerned NAFTA is only a
half-measure. And even in the areas where it's supposed to work, Mexico and Canada
are at the mercy of the US's domestic protectionist politicians. We have, in
effect, a form of taxation without representation -- witness the ongoing softwood
lumber issue. Mexico and Canada have also lost NAFTA tribunal challenges, but the
US has lost the vast majority of them, but domestic interests push the DoC to
defend domestic interests to the hilt.
So it's a long ways from perfect.
And then we had that bonehead Pat Buchanan, calling Canada Canucklestan because
we're supposedly a haven for terrorists and aren't free traders (!) (we supposedly
manipulate our currency exchange rate to undercut domestic, US manufacturers). He
was interviewed by an amazingly indulgent Mary Lou Findlay on As It Happens and he
had the nerve to say, in response to Findlay pointing out that all of the 911
bombers had entered the USA directly, and completely legally, by saying, that
doesn't mean we trust Canada. Talk about your non sequiturs. Talk about your
idjuts. But he serves a purpose: as long as he's around, he makes Bush look like
Solomon.
Don't get me started...
John W. Redelfs wrote:
At 08:07 PM, Friday, 11/1/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote:
I'm sorry to hear that. It can be very disruptive and discouraging, and I
wish you
all the best in finding something you enjoy as soon as possible. And
seriously, if
you're a high-tech worker or a professional in various other departments, as a
citizen of a NAFTA country you can get a job anywhere in the US, Mexico or
Canada
with very minimal paperwork (far less than what one needs to get an H1B, for
instance).
So if NAFTA and its global counterpart, the WTO, are truly in favor of free
trade why are only high tech workers permitted to go wherever the work
is? Free trade DEMANDS a free flow of labor as well as a lowering of
tariffs. And when I say a free flow of labor, I am talking about the way
labor flows from one state to another here in the USA.
The bottom line is: When supporters of NAFTA and the WTO use the phrase
free trade, they are being hypocrites. They have no interest in genuinely
free trade. It would break their monopolies.
John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
To me, boxing is like a ballet, except there's no
music, no choreography and the dancers hit each other.
-- Jack Handy
===
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
The first duty of a university is to teach wisdom, not a trade; character, not
technicalities. We want a lot of engineers in the modern world, but we dont want a
world of engineers. Sir Winston Churchill (1950)
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer, nor
those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Iraq: letters in Meridian
Stephen Beecroft wrote:
-Marc-
when it can dip *below* -40oC (which is also, as you probably
know, -40oF).
This is unnecessarily cruel. There was no need to preempt my favorite
smart-alek comment. Meanie.
You mean how F really means Foreignheat?
Stephen
Automobiles don't kill people. People driving automobiles kill people.
Which is why we license the drivers and the machines.
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
Guns dont kill people; people with guns kill people
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Iraq: letters in Meridian
Marc A. Schindler wrote: Our foreign affairs people are advising Canadian citizens who were born in the Middle East not to travel via the US. = Grampa Bill comments: Well, that's about the best news I've heard lately! Don't waste the atonement. Sue Woodbury, Oct. 20, 2002 Love y'all, Grampa Bill in Savannah / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Iraq: letters in Meridian
I'm sorry to hear that. It can be very disruptive and discouraging, and I wish you
all the best in finding something you enjoy as soon as possible. And seriously, if
you're a high-tech worker or a professional in various other departments, as a
citizen of a NAFTA country you can get a job anywhere in the US, Mexico or Canada
with very minimal paperwork (far less than what one needs to get an H1B, for
instance). But you need to hit Monster board and similar sites, as well as local
headhunters, to find out where your kind of jobs are. (www.monster.com or
www.monster.ca)
Steven Montgomery wrote:
Ok, I was just asking. Yet, it was not entirely a throw away remark, as
after four years at a job that was perfect for myself and family at the
time, I now find myself among the ranks of the unemployed.
--
Steven Montgomery
At 11:29 AM 11/1/2002, you wrote:
Well, I'm not a headhunter so can't say, and realize this is a throw-away
remark,
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
Guns dont kill people; people with guns kill people
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer, nor
those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Iraq: letters in Meridian
Ok, I was just asking. Yet, it was not entirely a throw away remark, as after four years at a job that was perfect for myself and family at the time, I now find myself among the ranks of the unemployed. O dear! I'm so sorry to hear that. I hope you get... Paul O [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Iraq: letters in Meridian
Now, if we can just stop the flow of terrorists from the US into our country that'll
be even
better.
Grampa Bill wrote:
Marc A. Schindler wrote:
Our foreign affairs people
are advising Canadian citizens who were born in the Middle East not to travel via
the US.
=
Grampa Bill comments:
Well, that's about the best news I've heard lately!
Don't waste the atonement.
Sue Woodbury, Oct. 20, 2002
Love y'all,
Grampa Bill in Savannah
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
Guns dont kill people; people with guns kill people
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely;
its
contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer, nor those of any
organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Iraq: letters in Meridian
Double bummer. Well, look after your own emotional health, too. I've learned the
hard way that physical illness can have all kinds of psychological effects which
in turn exacerbate the physical illness. I wish I had known that before I
decided to get sick. :-/
You'll be in our prayers.
Steven Montgomery wrote:
At 07:50 PM 11/1/2002, you wrote:
Ok, I was just asking. Yet, it was not entirely a throw away remark,
as
after four years at a job that was perfect for myself and family at the
time, I now find myself among the ranks of the unemployed.
O dear! I'm so sorry to hear that. I hope you get...
Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
First things first. I'm not going to seriously look until I get my wife's
upcoming operation out of the way. It's a fairly serious one, which will
take her about six weeks to recuperate so until then I'm Mr. Mom around the
house. Job hunting unfortunately has to take a back seat at the moment.
--
Steven Montgomery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
. . . it is as much their [The Elders of Israel] duty to study correct
political principles as well as religion, and to seek and know and
comprehend the social and political interests of man, and to learn and be
able to teach that which would be best calculated to promote the interests
of the world.--John Taylor
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
Guns dont kill people; people with guns kill people
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Iraq: letters in Meridian
At 08:46 PM, Wednesday, 10/30/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote: Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland Guns don't kill people; people with guns kill people. And people with knives. And people with rocks. And people with baseball bats. A few years ago here in Ketchikan Ward, a member who had not attended church since he was a teenager, tried to rob a local man. There was a struggle. The robber picked up a rock and hit his intended victim on the head, and he died. And just last year there were 3 or 4 murders. One of the victims was just beat to death. It doesn't take a gun to kill people. All it takes is a murderer. And if we take away their guns, they will just murder using something else. Did anyone read in the newspaper about six months ago about a playground rampage in Japan? I think about 13 children we killed, and the murderer used a knife, not a gun. What we need is murderer control, not gun control. John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] === I don't think I'm alone when I say I'd like to see more and more planets fall under the ruthless domination of our solar system. --Jack Handy === All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Iraq: letters in Meridian
Things have changed indeed. Got any good job openings up there in maple leaf land? -- Steven Montgomery At 02:40 PM 10/31/2002, you wrote: You really don't want to get into this again. I'd rather face a guy with a bat than a guy with a firearm. Common sense. Ironically, a Canadian is now in a New York state jail because he brought his hunting rifle with him as he crossed the border to fill up at a gas station 15 metres from the border. The actual border crossing is about a kilometre further down the road, and locals had been using this gas station for years, as the gas prices in Quebec are quite high. But things have changed -- you're losing your freedoms. Our foreign affairs people are advising Canadian citizens who were born in the Middle East not to travel via the US. One, a man originally from Syria, was enroute from Damascus, where he'd been visiting family (the first time he'd been there since he left, as a child), and was deported from JFK back to Syria. Canadian consular officials weren't even informed, in direct violation of the Vienna Convention. It's a pretty sad state of affairs when we pinko socialists have more freedom than you do. John W. Redelfs wrote: At 08:46 PM, Wednesday, 10/30/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote: Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland Guns don't kill people; people with guns kill people. And people with knives. And people with rocks. And people with baseball bats. A few years ago here in Ketchikan Ward, a member who had not attended church since he was a teenager, tried to rob a local man. There was a struggle. The robber picked up a rock and hit his intended victim on the head, and he died. And just last year there were 3 or 4 murders. One of the victims was just beat to death. It doesn't take a gun to kill people. All it takes is a murderer. And if we take away their guns, they will just murder using something else. Did anyone read in the newspaper about six months ago about a playground rampage in Japan? I think about 13 children we killed, and the murderer used a knife, not a gun. What we need is murderer control, not gun control. John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] === I don't think I'm alone when I say I'd like to see more and more planets fall under the ruthless domination of our solar system. --Jack Handy === All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Iraq: letters in Meridian
At 05:42 PM, Thursday, 10/31/02, Paul Osborne wrote: Not me, Marc. The damage done by a bat could leave me in terrible shape with broken bones and a bashed in skull. The gun will probably kill me and send me on my way to bliss. So, I'll take the gun bullet, please, with a coke and an order of french fries too. Paul, you crack me up. --JWR / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Iraq and War
September 11th was a defining moment in history, it showed that America could be attacked within her own borders; it didn't need an ICBM as has been the thinking. It would be tragic that when (not if) it happens again; and what could be the outcome (will cities not buildings lay waste)? Lastely, could it have been prevented? Will the thinking of no war still be present? Vic --- Marc A. Schindler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just read over Elder Nelson's talk when it comes out in the Ensign. I mysel= f have a difficult time seeing how people can still, with all due respect, = not get it after hearing this talk. He said as a CHURCH we should renounce wa= r and emphasized that it would be the descendants of Ishmael and Jacob who= would be the peacemakers in the region. I think it's pretty hard to wriggle out o= f that one. And to your BoM reading I hope you add some selective DC read= ing, too, especially a revelation given at the height of persecution of the Sain= ts. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Within the first chapters of the Book of Mormon it talks about Nephi chop= ping off the head of Laban. Toward the end of the Book of Mormon it talks about Mormon and Moroni war= ring against the Lamanites. In between, there is bloodshed and it gives me the impression as long as = one is fighting for ones homeland and ones family, than war becomes accepta= ble. Osama and is band of terrorists are warring against the U.S. It appears to me that is only a matter of time before Saddam does the sam= e. I've foreborn specific comment on your questions -- I have a general questi= on at the end -- but it seems to some people to be only a matter of time be= fore N. Korea wars against the U.S., so why isn't the US government amassing arm= aments in that area? Also, if you're concerned about military dictatorships= with WMD, why continue to give billions every year to Pakistan, which *already h= as* nuclear weapons -- tested ones, ready to use. Seems to me you should bo= mb Pakistan back to the stone age before you worry about Iraq. Should a nation sit back and let it happen or should there be a response? As LDS, and with what the contents of the Book of Mormon says, in all hon= esty; is there such a thing as a pacifist Mormon? There can be nothing BUT a pacifist LDS. And for what it's worth, I think a= lmost every one of your implied assumptions in your question is wrong. Vic But perhaps I've been too shy in expressing my opinion ;-) -- Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and= falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark. --Michelangelo Buonarroti Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the auth= or solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author=92s employer, nor those of any organization with which the author may be associ= ated. ///= // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// ///= // =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D _ Washington DC's Largest FREE Email service. --- http://www.DCemail.com --- A Washington Online Community Member --- http://www.DCpages.com _ Select your own custom email address for FREE! Get [EMAIL PROTECTED] w/No Ads, 6MB, POP more! http://www.everyone.net/selectmail?campaign=tag / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
RE: [ZION] Iraq and War
-Marc- Just read over Elder Nelson's talk when it comes out in the Ensign. I myself have a difficult time seeing how people can still, with all due respect, not get it after hearing this talk. And I have a difficult time seeing why people are so eager to twist an apostle's words into supporting their political tastes, rather than try to glean the truth and wisdom he was teaching. I suppose we both should work on our ability to understand. He said as a CHURCH we should renounce war and emphasized that it would be the descendants of Ishmael and Jacob who would be the peacemakers in the region. And therefore...? There can be nothing BUT a pacifist LDS. From The American Heritage Dictionary (1985): 1. The belief that disputes between nations should and can be settled peacefully. 2a. Opposition to war or violence as a means of resolving disputes. b. Such opposition demonstrated by refusal to participate in military action. #1 does partially apply to Saints, of course, but it is so obvious that even the most hawk-like Saint agrees that disputes *should* be settled peacefully. Disputes involving aggression by enemies against you obviously *cannot* be settled peacefully. Both parts of definition 2 are anti-Mormon. From Merriam-Webster's online (www.m-w.com): Main Entry: pac·i·fism Pronunciation: 'pa-s-fi-zm Function: noun Etymology: French pacifisme, from pacifique pacific Date: 1902 1 : opposition to war or violence as a means of settling disputes; specifically : refusal to bear arms on moral or religious grounds 2 : an attitude or policy of nonresistance Neither of these definitions describes the Church's position. The definion at www.dictionary.com is word-for-word identical to that of the American Heritage definition quoted above. So you're wrong, Marc. Mormons are *not* pacifist, or at least they should not be. Quite the contrary. Stephen / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Iraq and War
Stephen Beecroft wrote: -Marc- Stephen, I'm not going to engage in point-by-point games here. Life's too short, Not that I necessarily disagree with the above, but if that's how you feel, why are you so willing to engage in point-by-point games at other times? I'm human. I'm inconsistent. So sue me. Seriously, as I answered in another post, I don't have enough information yet, I don't believe, to address this talk directly to the Iraq situation per se. I believe that in general prophecies tend to be broader than just one issue, and it's we members who narrow them down (all of us, or most of us). and Elder Nelson's words were, as far as I'm concerned, very clear and unamibiguous. And he clearly, unambiguously did not mention Iraq. As I did not. It's my personal belief that his words can be considered a criticism of US foreign policy, but I'm not trying to put words into Elder Nelson's mouth. Incidentally, it's a bit ironic, because I'm not so sure there's actually going to be a war with Iraq. I think Bush's tactics are not direct here. I have an inkling of what I think he might be up to, but I can't read his mind and it's too soon to tell. Let's just say that I think he's trying to kill more than one bird with one stone, and there'll be little violence on the streets of Baghdad in the near future. The Economist article, which I used (not having anything to do with Elder Nelson's talk -- this occurred before conference weekend) was specific and it was unbiased. Seems I recently critiqued an Economist article you referenced and demonstrated its tremendous bias. So, if the Economist article used emotional words, then I can take what you just wrote and say, because you used an emotional word like tremendous that you're biased, and I don't have to listen to you? Actually I value your input, even when I think it's biased and even when I'm arguing against it. And fwiw, I think you're giving yourself too much credit. I think you'll have a hard time maintaining that the Economist's articles are unbiased. But maybe I'm wrong. Can you give a URL to the specific article you're citing? I actually posted the whole thing here. It was only a week ago. But wait a minute. You claim to have already critiqued the article. Why do you need a URL to it again? There seems to be some confusion between using emotional words and bias which it seems you and Dan both need to clarify in your own minds to improve your critical reading skills, imho. Well, it's easy for you to claim my critical reading skills aren't where they should be. You certainly might be right. But I notice you never bothered responding to my dismantling of your extraordinary claim that Latter-day Saints are necessarily pacifists. In several senses of the definition you gave. Not all of them. I don't mean to imply that LDS have to be conscientious objectors, but we are members of a church whose official policy is to proclaim peace and renounce war. That can certainly be said to be a pacifist point of view. You don't have to fit ALL definitions of a word (not in English, a notoriously ambiguous language at best) to be able to use it. Else why bother even to try using words? Let's communicate in source code. Anyone paying attention to the thread could have figured this out, and seen that Dan and I were interpreting data differently. Apparently that's not the case. I was indeed paying attention to the thread, and it looked to me like you were dismissing his sources as biased and proclaiming your own to be unbiased. As I've said several times, I dismissed his source as careless and therefore biased. That's an important distinction. His source said that according to the Israeli military intelligence (no citation given), Jane's (no citation given) said such-and-such. I did a search of Jane's website (I can't afford the hard copy -- their subs are hundreds of dollars a year, but I did occasionally look at it in the provincial government library, so am familiar with the publication) and found not a single reference to *any* Israeli military intelligence reference to anything. So what am I supposed to think about an article that uses vague and 2nd hand sources? At least the Economist cites its sources. I thought I could ease myself out of this by leaving the last word to Dan and he abused what was meant to be a gentlemanly gesture by calling me a liar. I don't believe Dan was calling you a liar, though of course I could be wrong. That would be out of character for Dan. I think he was applying that term to those who author slanted news articles and present them as unbiased. And fwiw, I don't think it's particularly gentlemanly to say, in effect, I'm right and you're wrong, and if you can't see that then you're blind as a bat, but I'll give you the last word. You put that in quotation marks. That implies I wrote those words. Please retract that accusation. I didn't. Okay, I also see that
Re: [ZION] Iraq and War
Stephen Beecroft wrote: -Marc- I believe that in general prophecies tend to be broader than just one issue, and it's we members who narrow them down (all of us, or most of us). I tend to agree with this. Interesting, then, that you wrote: and Elder Nelson's words were, as far as I'm concerned, very clear and unamibiguous. Generality of application implies some ambiguity, at least to me. I'm curious what you thought was the specific application of Elder Nelson's clear and unambiguous words. Then let me clarify what I mean by the two words. General to me doesn't mean vague, but rather refers to scope, either time-related, geography-related, whatever. Not limited to time, place or person, let's say. Ambiguous to me refers to the clarity of meaning. So one can have an unambiguous but general statement. They're not easy to craft, but I believe that's how prophets prefer to express themselves. It's my personal belief that his words can be considered a criticism of US foreign policy, His words can be considered any number of things -- a criticism of US foreign policy, an endorsement of expedient and necessary political actions, a recipe for walnut fudge. The more important question, I think, is what Elder Nelson actually meant. Perhaps you believe he intended to criticize US actions. I doubt it, but it's possible. But I'm still wondering what you meant when you wrote that the Saints still [do] 'not get it' after hearing his talk. I personally don't know any Saints, in the flesh or in cyberspace, who believe that war is generally a good thing; so what is it that you think the Saints don't get? That not only war, but militarism, are not healthy options. Militarism is the consideration of military actions before they ought to be considered, according to the scriptures, as I read it. I think I said something similar in another response, so I'll let it go at that. -Marc- So, if the Economist article used emotional words, then I can take what you just wrote and say, because you used an emotional word like tremendous that you're biased, My charge of bias was not based on a single occurrence of a term, but rather on the whole tenor of the article and the slant they gave it. But you didnt' say that. But thanks for clarifying your, er, general statement ;-) and I don't have to listen to you? Naturally you don't. And if you do wish to listen to me, I am quite sure you formulate in your mind's eye a vision of what you believe my viewpoint (or bias) to be, in order to better understand what I write. I happily (if admittedly, at times, somewhat impatiently) listen to you because there's something in it for me -- you help me hone my words and craft my arguments better, if nothing else. And fwiw, I think you're giving yourself too much credit. The curse of the responsible. If not me, who? But wait a minute. You claim to have already critiqued the article. Why do you need a URL to it again? To review it and see if my criticisms were justified. I don't remember it being only a week ago, and my memory of the particulars is hazy. It should be on the archives. If you really want me to, I'll repost it, but because it was premium material, I have to do more than post a URL (which I don't mind; a minor sin -- just in case y'all were labouring under the understandable but false assumption that I'm perfect) ;-) -Stephen- I notice you never bothered responding to my dismantling of your extraordinary claim that Latter-day Saints are necessarily pacifists. -Marc- In several senses of the definition you gave. Not all of them. We both know that the generally-accepted and understood meaning of the term pacifist is one who rejects warfare under all circumstances. Well, all it takes to demolish a general argument is one exception. You carefully avoided that kind of argument, but, no, I did not have the Quaker's definition in mind; I actually had in mind the definition given in DC (134 iirc; I'd have to look it up). to renounce war is definitely a pacific approach, I think we're now just arguing over connotations. After all, Elder Nelson didn't call for a jihad (or its English equivalent, a crusade). I am pretty sure you realized this when you wrote what you did. If you had another, narrower definition of pacifist in mind, it was incumbent upon you to define your terms. As I demonstrated, none of the dictionary definitions reasonably applied to Latter-day Saints. I disagree. I pointed out that in your first dictionary definition, it gave 3 meanings, and I said renounce war was in keeping with the first 2, but not necessarily the 3rd definition. And we can play dictionary games if you want. I have a few I could turn to, too. But to what end? If one doesn't understand what another says, the best approach is to ask, not throw a dictionary at him. I don't mean to imply that LDS have to be conscientious objectors, but we are members of a
Re: [ZION] Iraq and war
Actually, I do agree that this is a big mistake. Since probably at most only 1/2 of your armed forces are fighting forces, when the Mexican army reaches your border with the US, you may really miss those 2,000. Jon Marc A. Schindler wrote: Canada ready to send 2 000 troops along with US forces to Iraq (this is about the same that was committed in the Afghan conflict). Big mistake, imo. But you probably already knew that. / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
