At 05:55 PM Thursday 5/12/2005, Doug Pensinger wrote:
Debbi wrote:
Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
And what sort of a teal, anyway?
Oh...oh, *dearie* me.
turning a delicate shade of tomato...or perhaps
persimmon -- mayhap pomagranate?
Debbi
Cinnamon Teal Flight Path Maru`:}
Well,
Ronn! wrote:
I wrote:
Well, anyway, mine are _pink_ when they are visible, which they _are
not_!!!
--
Doug
So there maru
Can't argue with logic like that . . .
What's logic got to do with it? 8^)
You'll See Green Alligators And Long-Necked Geese Maru
Humpty back camels and a brace o' fleas?
--
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
You'll See Green Alligators And Long-Necked Geese Maru
Humpy back camels and some chimpanzees
Julia
Ask Me About Thanksgiving '75 Maru
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On Thu, 12 May 2005 21:06:39 -0500, Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
You'll See Green Alligators And Long-Necked Geese Maru
Humpy back camels and some chimpanzees
Julia
Ask Me About Thanksgiving '75 Maru
What about Thanksgiving '75?
--
Doug
hmmm, where
Doug Pensinger wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2005 21:06:39 -0500, Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
You'll See Green Alligators And Long-Necked Geese Maru
Humpy back camels and some chimpanzees
Julia
Ask Me About Thanksgiving '75 Maru
What about Thanksgiving '75?
A
On 5/4/05, Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 3, 2005, at 8:17 PM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 09:25 PM Tuesday 5/3/2005, Dave Land wrote:
On May 3, 2005, at 6:32 PM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 03:30 PM Tuesday 5/3/2005, Dave Land wrote:
On May 3, 2005, at 10:45 AM, Horn, John
Look, this flame bait is really kind of over the top now, isn't it?
Obviously there's a history here, but frankly what that history is
applies only because those involved are choosing to make it do so.
I don't think goading or coy allusions to prior misdeeds by
(apparently) now-banned posters
At 03:30 PM Tuesday 5/3/2005, Dave Land wrote:
On May 3, 2005, at 10:45 AM, Horn, John wrote:
Behalf Of God
Try this: ask people like Nick, Erik and JDG some questions that would
force them to seriously rethink their attitudes and opinions; hold them
accountable for what they say and do on this
On May 3, 2005, at 6:32 PM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 03:30 PM Tuesday 5/3/2005, Dave Land wrote:
On May 3, 2005, at 10:45 AM, Horn, John wrote:
Behalf Of God
Try this: ask people like Nick, Erik and JDG some questions that
would
force them to seriously rethink their attitudes and opinions; hold
At 09:25 PM Tuesday 5/3/2005, Dave Land wrote:
On May 3, 2005, at 6:32 PM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 03:30 PM Tuesday 5/3/2005, Dave Land wrote:
On May 3, 2005, at 10:45 AM, Horn, John wrote:
Behalf Of God
Try this: ask people like Nick, Erik and JDG some questions that would
force them to
On May 3, 2005, at 8:17 PM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 09:25 PM Tuesday 5/3/2005, Dave Land wrote:
On May 3, 2005, at 6:32 PM, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 03:30 PM Tuesday 5/3/2005, Dave Land wrote:
On May 3, 2005, at 10:45 AM, Horn, John wrote:
Behalf Of God
Try this: ask people like Nick, Erik
snip
Dan:
Frank:
The US does not rule the world, the US is not a pappa,
and the US is not a police force. The US is just the
strongest nation today. An alliance of other nations
can be stronger than the US, but at present these
nations have different goals. If the US pushes harder,
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2005 12:57 AM
Subject: Re: Rhetorical Questions RE: Removing Dictators Re: Peaceful
change L3
Dan, et al,
OK, I wrote the whole message below, then realized that I'm
I wonder if people forget that China is just next door to North Korea, and
that they even have an alliance. Not that the Chinese like Kim Jong Il so
much, but they'd never tolerate an invasion like the US did in Afghanistan
or Iraq. However the Chinese might topple Kim Jong Il themselves if the
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 13:32:37 -0500, Dan Minette wrote
We are lucky in that we can collectively, within the nation, intervene
with professionals by calling 911 in those cases or reporting suspected
abuse to authorities.
I think Dave's point was that you can't solve somebody else's problem
Dan:
dland:
snip
Dan Wrote:
On Apr 24, 2005, at 4:03 PM, JDG wrote:
Now that we've let the DPRK gain nuclear weapons,
Assuming, that is, that the US rules the world, and
therefore is in a position to let or not let
nations like the DPRK gain nuclear weapons. Perhaps
On Apr 25, 2005, at 2:30 PM, Nick Arnett wrote:
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 13:32:37 -0500, Dan Minette wrote
Preventing someone from causing grave harm to us and our allies is
not codependant behavior.
Of course. But how do we decide that someone is about to cause grave
harm?
That's the hard question,
- Original Message -
From: Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2005 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: Rhetorical Questions RE: Removing Dictators Re: Peaceful
change L3
On Apr 25, 2005, at 2:30 PM, Nick Arnett wrote:
On Mon, 25 Apr
On Apr 25, 2005, at 3:16 PM, Dan Minette wrote:
OK, I never meant to advance the criminal justice model for
international relationships. I was merely pointing out a counter
example to the notion that interfering with the actions of another
country presupposes that the leaders of the other country
- Original Message -
From: Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2005 5:57 PM
Subject: Re: Rhetorical Questions RE: Removing Dictators Re: Peaceful
change L3
Your question reminds me that the metaphors we choose have power
On Apr 25, 2005, at 5:50 PM, Dan Minette wrote:
So, if your argument is that Bush tends to be pigheaded and plow ahead
without regard to other views when he is certain, then I will agree.
But, if it that, for the US to properly consider the views of other
nations, that it must give veto rights
At 09:01 PM 4/24/2005 -0700, Dave Land wrote:
Now that we've let the DPRK gain nuclear weapons,
Assuming, that is, that the US rules the world, and therefore is in a
position to let or not let nations like the DPRK gain nuclear weapons.
The US is the most powerful country in the world. Given
- Original Message -
From: Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2005 8:53 PM
Subject: Re: Rhetorical Questions RE: Removing Dictators Re: Peaceful
change L3
In the final analysis, we're not that far apart. At the risk
- Original Message -
From: Frank Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2005 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: Rhetorical Questions RE: Removing Dictators Re: Peaceful
change L3
Dan:
dland:
snip
Dan Wrote:
On Apr 24, 2005, at 4:03
On Apr 25, 2005, at 10:15 PM, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Frank Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The US does not rule the world, the US is not a pappa,
and the US is not a police force. The US is just the
strongest nation today. An alliance of other nations
can be stronger than
At 10:13 PM 4/22/2005 +1000, Andrew Paul wrote:
JDG wrote
At 01:34 PM 4/22/2005 +1000, Andrew Paul wrote:
Dan, it was a rhetorical question. I know why he isn't, and frankly
very
glad he isn't. But thank you for the refresher. I must learn to put
more
umm, nuance in my typing tone.
It
- Original Message -
From: JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2005 6:03 PM
Subject: Rhetorical Questions RE: Removing Dictators Re: Peaceful change L3
Pray.
Now that we've let the DPRK gain nuclear weapons, there are simply
On Apr 24, 2005, at 4:03 PM, JDG wrote:
Now that we've let the DPRK gain nuclear weapons,
Assuming, that is, that the US rules the world, and therefore is in a
position to let or not let nations like the DPRK gain nuclear
weapons. Perhaps we might consider other nations as adults, instead
of
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2005 11:01 PM
Subject: Re: Rhetorical Questions RE: Removing Dictators Re: Peaceful
change L3
On Apr 24, 2005, at 4:03 PM, JDG wrote:
Now that we've let the DPRK gain nuclear weapons
Dan, et al,
OK, I wrote the whole message below, then realized that I'm getting way
too much into argumentation and not nearly enough into being simple and
clear.
So go ahead and read and tear apart the message that begins with Dan
Wrote:, but consider this my reply:
The main thing that promted
Dan Minette wrote
From: Andrew Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Poor George, no wonder he looks tired, tossing all night, crying over
the starving Koreans kiddies etc...
What I don't understand is, given that I'm pretty sure I already
mentioned
this to you in an earlier discussion, why you
--- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 21:55:50 -0500, Robert Seeberger
wrote
I don't think Nick intended to call you a
McCarthyite
It was a particular argument that I said I see as
McCarthyism. It was
Gautam's argument, which I'm sure doesn't represent
the
At 01:34 PM 4/22/2005 +1000, Andrew Paul wrote:
Dan, it was a rhetorical question. I know why he isn't, and frankly very
glad he isn't. But thank you for the refresher. I must learn to put more
umm, nuance in my typing tone.
It clearly wasn't a very good rhetorical question - and it wasn't the
--- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And I
stand by my view still,
as he'd have us believe that anyone who participates
in any peace and justice
demonstration in the United States is a Stalinist
because a guy (Clark) behind
an organization (AIC) that is related to an
anti-Trotsky
OK, I'm done arguing with you Nick
I for one am in favour of changing the subject. As you said Gautam, we
are just going over lots of old ground here. We agree to differ. And I
retract any remarks which you found offensive. I did not intend them to
be so, and I don't think Nick et al did
JDG wrote
At 01:34 PM 4/22/2005 +1000, Andrew Paul wrote:
Dan, it was a rhetorical question. I know why he isn't, and frankly
very
glad he isn't. But thank you for the refresher. I must learn to put
more
umm, nuance in my typing tone.
It clearly wasn't a very good rhetorical question -
Maru Dubshinki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
... assuming that the Universe was closed and would collapse to a
point in a Big Crunch ... a suitably set up superintelligence
would be able to ... recreate the past ... thusly reincarnating
us.
Yes. That is how I understood Tipler, too.
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 07:58:58 -0400, JDG wrote
Dan M., Gautam, and probably others have pointed out to you on multiple
occasions that it is *not* _anyone_ who participates in _any_ peace and
justice demonstration. It has been _specific_ people
participating in _specific_ demonstrations,
On 4/22/05, Robert J. Chassell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maru Dubshinki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
(Why would a non-antiquarian superintelligence bother to reincarnate
us? In this reading, any superintelligence doing research that
involves reincarnating anyone from the past is an
- Original Message -
From: Andrew Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2005 1:45 AM
Subject: RE: Removing Dictators Re: Peaceful change L3
Dan Minette wrote
From: Andrew Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Poor George, no wonder he
Robert Seeberger wrote:
Think you could tone down the insult rhetoric a bit?
Remember that you guys have an audience.
Hear hear! Your (plural) need to put people down
only serves to make you look arrogant and elitist.
-- Matt
___
At 03:29 PM 4/21/2005 +1000, Andrew Paul wrote:
Thus, Nick, we have the situation where choosing to continue
condemnation
and sanctions, etc. would result in the deaths of innocent Iraqis and
war
would result in the death of innocent Iraqis. I think that a great
many
people were able to
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of JDG
snips fair response
And why isn't the US invading North Korea?
Why is it, as you put it doing nothing?
The calculation has to include the probability of success. While doing
nothing' in the DPRK is clearly resulting in the deaths of North Koreans,
the
--- Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh, and maybe we should elect our representatives to
that body rather than
allowing someone to nominate borderline psycopaths
to be our
representative.
--
Doug
Ah, the height of rational argumentation - calling
someone who disagrees with you
--- Andrew Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gautam Mukunda
So Gautam, are you saying that the US invaded Iraq
out of a deeply felt
need to save the Iraqi people? Not cos of WMD risks,
not cos of issues
over oil?
Again with this? Why are people who think _George
Bush_ is dumb unable to
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 19:08:23 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote
If they do, why
shouldn't that at least be part of the calculation
when we decide what to do?
If I understand this correctly, you're saying that you believe that I have
said we should not care about the people affected by the
* Nick Arnett ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
If so, then perhaps you'd like to try again, because you really don't
get what I am saying. At all. Want to try again?
I'd hazard a guess, probably not. Since what you are saying is both
nonsense and changes to some other nonsense (or just pathetic
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:23:43 -0400, JDG wrote
I would respond by noting that you seem to agree that Christians are
called to do justice. I think that Christians should stop
dictators if to do so would be justice. For example, if a dictator
is killing his own citizens, and we have the
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:31:30 -0400, JDG wrote
I think the word nothing is being used as to describe polices that
would have the practical effect of contiuing the status quo
policies in Iraq of the previous 12 years. Given what those
policies had managed to accomplish in 12 years, I think
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:39:11 -0400, JDG wrote
Gautam's point was that he doesn't feel that you are acknowledging that
*not* going to war has costs as well.You responded with a
discussion of the costs of going to war.
And how are they different? Is there an important distinction between
--- Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you _did_, we can talk
about
why you attach such moral importance to the
decisions
of two dictatorships.
I appear to have edited out a sentence in this
post...odd. Not sure how that happened. The two
dictatorships are Russia and China, of
--- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I understand this correctly, you're saying that
you believe that I have
said we should not care about the people affected by
the status quo when we
make a decision about going to war? You're saying
that I'm arguing that it
doesn't matter if
--- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Under Saddam Hussein, many families were losing
loved ones directly
to torture, disappearances, and summary
executions. Tens of
thousands of others were losing their beloved
children because
Saddam Hussein was spending the country's oil
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 06:38:42 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote
No, we can't, actually. None of them are all right,
no. International ANSWER, the group primarily
responsible for organizing the anti-war protests in
the United States,
Although I find the anti-war leadership to be a
--- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good heavens. Guilt by association, anyone? ANSWER
is associated with IAC,
IAC is associated with WWP and WWP (which is
disintegrating) didn't go along
with Trotsky so it was labeled Stalinist.
Meanwhile, the vast majority of war
protestors are
- Original Message -
From: Andrew Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 12:29 AM
Subject: RE: Removing Dictators Re: Peaceful change L3
And why isn't the US invading North Korea?
Why is it, as you put it doing nothing
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 07:47:14 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote
No. That _is_ what you are saying. It may not be
what you are _trying_ to say, but it is what you are saying.
While there are undoubtedly things about me that I cannot see, but you can, it
appears that perhaps you're getting
Wait, wasn't Tipler's argument basically given certain physical
constraints, we would surely be re-incarnated at the end of the
Universe? ...
How would we be re-incarnated? And if you think we will be, how do
you know we are not already in a re-incarnation, presuming there could
be
On 20 Apr 2005, Warren Ockrassa wrote
... the simulator is bored, bored, bored, and so is now playing
with the runtime parameters while the program is in operation.
Or maybe our universe is now on display in some hyperdimensional
children's museum, in the hands-on (or
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 07:51:59 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote
... I'd
want someone to do something about it more likely to
be effective than asking it to stop.
Ah, reduction to the absurd continues... the gap remains wide.
he'll claim that tax cuts are murder, no matter how
ridiculous it
- Original Message -
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 10:36 AM
Subject: Re: Peaceful Change L3
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 07:47:14 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote
No. That _is_ what you are saying. It may
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 08:08:29 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote
I'm sure that's true. So the next time Republicans
march in something organized by the KKK you'll say,
ohh, that's guilt by association, really you shouldn't
critcize.
The WWP isn't organzing any anti-war rallies. It is
--- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 08:08:29 -0700 (PDT), Gautam
Mukunda wrote
The WWP isn't organzing any anti-war rallies. It is
hardly even organized
itself. Like most every other extreme leftist
organization on the planet, it
ain't working. I don't favor
- Original Message -
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 11:04 AM
Subject: RE: Peaceful Change L3
... you don't associate yourself
with anything that someone like ANSWER organizes ever,
for any reason
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 09:18:22 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote
Yes. Is that so hard to understand? If the American
Nazi Party had organized an antiwar event (which they
did, I think)
Reduction to the extreme again! The parallel would actually be if the
American Nazi Party was associated
- Original Message -
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 11:36 AM
Subject: RE: Peaceful Change L3
When I asked if he realized that so-and-so were investors in the same
project,
he sounded like he was going
--- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 09:18:22 -0700 (PDT), Gautam
Mukunda wrote
Yes. Is that so hard to understand? If the
American
Nazi Party had organized an antiwar event (which
they
did, I think)
Reduction to the extreme again! The parallel would
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 11:43:21 -0500, Dan Minette wrote
Would working very hard to keep distance include trying to not have mob
members at his parties and not going to mob sponsered events?
If you're trying to draw a parallel to AIC and WWP, it is not apropos. WWP is
not the organization that
- Original Message -
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 1:28 PM
Subject: Re: Peaceful Change L3
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 11:43:21 -0500, Dan Minette wrote
Would working very hard to keep distance include trying
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 09:50:03 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote
Under the leadership of Ramsey Clark, the IAC was the
only major anti-war group that refused to condemn
Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait in 1990.
So, we've jumped from organizations that put together anti-war events, such as
On Apr 21, 2005, at 8:42 AM, Robert J. Chassell wrote:
I keep being reminded of the anthropologist Roy Rappaport writing,
The unfalsifiable supported by the undeniable yields the
unquestionable. This transforms the dubious, the arbitrary, and
the conventional into the correct, the
On Apr 21, 2005, at 6:13 AM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh, and maybe we should elect our representatives to
that body rather than
allowing someone to nominate borderline psycopaths
to be our
representative.
--
Doug
Ah, the height of rational argumentation -
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 13:53:22 -0500, Dan Minette wrote
...
To me, the only difference between this and 6 million lies is the
magnitude of the denial.
And because of Ramsey Clark's actions, it is wrong to have anything to do with
any anti-war group in the United States
Nick
On Apr 21, 2005, at 7:01 AM, Erik Reuter wrote:
By the way, nice fire analogy, Gautam. If that wasn't clear enough,
then it is hard to imagine what could be. Patience may be a virtue, but
recognizing a lost cause is surely one, too!
I thought the fire analogy was flawed in an important respect:
- Original Message -
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 2:11 PM
Subject: Re: Peaceful Change L3
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 13:53:22 -0500, Dan Minette wrote
...
To me, the only difference between this and 6
On Apr 21, 2005, at 8:08 AM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
So the next time Republicans
march in something organized by the KKK you'll say,
ohh, that's guilt by association, really you shouldn't
critcize. Wait. No Republican in this day and age
would _ever_ do something like that.
You seem to be
--- Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Apr 21, 2005, at 8:08 AM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
So the next time Republicans
march in something organized by the KKK you'll
say,
ohh, that's guilt by association, really you
shouldn't
critcize. Wait. No Republican in this day and
age
On Apr 21, 2005, at 12:48 PM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You seem to be suggesting here that no Klan members
are Republicans.
Are you certain?
Or do you mean instead that no elected Republican
official would show
public support for the Klan?
The latter -
At 02:09 PM Thursday 4/21/2005, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
On Apr 21, 2005, at 6:13 AM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh, and maybe we should elect our representatives to
that body rather than
allowing someone to nominate borderline psycopaths
to be our
On 4/21/05, Robert J. Chassell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maru wrote:
Wait, wasn't Tipler's argument basically given certain physical
constraints, we would surely be re-incarnated at the end of the
Universe? ...
How would we be re-incarnated? And if you think we will be, how do
--- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ramsey Clark is representing Saddam Hussein. You
say that makes him a bad
person.
Sigh Continuing my descent down the rabbit hole...
Ramsey Clark _is_ a bad person. Defending Saddam
Hussein was really just a confirmation of that fact,
as anyone
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 16:26:53 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote
The fact that you feel somehow compelled to defend
such a thoroughly disgusting figure
When did I defend Ramsey Clark? I was trying to follow an argument you
offered. I'm not taking issue with your assessment of Ramsey Clark.
- Original Message -
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 6:48 PM
Subject: RE: Peaceful Change L3
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 16:26:53 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote
The fact that you feel somehow compelled
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 18:56:59 -0500, Dan Minette wrote
Nick, are you reading different posts than I am?
I don't see how you are reading that as defense of Ramsey Clark. I asked if
the fact that he's defending Saddam Hussein proves that he is a bad person.
If it is true, then he is a bad
Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 11:04 AM
Subject: RE: Peaceful Change L3
... you don't associate yourself
with anything that someone like ANSWER organizes ever
--- Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
To me, making ANSWER and the KKK in any way
equivilent is an exercise
in idiocy.
xponent
A Compendium Of Whackos Maru
rob
I don't think so, Rob. I'm assuming that you just
haven't looked at them in detail - they're purely a
front group
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
Ah, the other defense of the pathetic left. Cry
fascism. This isn't even worth discussing. If you're
using it honestly (and I don't think you are, because
you're too smart to actually think this) then, as they
said in The Princess Bride, That word. I do not
think
--- Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Think you could tone down the insult rhetoric a bit?
Remember that you guys have an audience.
TIA
xponent
Concrete Maru
rob
I'm sorry, Nick just called me a McCarthyite and a
Fascist and you object to me telling Nick the word
doesn't
--- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You went to Harvard, so should we assume that you
therefore endorse and stand
for Jim Wallis' ideas, since he teaches there?
Heck, you participate in Brin-
L and so do I, so does that mean you endorse all of
*my* ideas? All of David
Brin's? Are
Warren Ockrassa wrote:
On Apr 21, 2005, at 8:08 AM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
So the next time Republicans
march in something organized by the KKK you'll say,
ohh, that's guilt by association, really you shouldn't
critcize. Wait. No Republican in this day and age
would _ever_ do something
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
To me, making ANSWER and the KKK in any way
equivilent is an exercise
in idiocy.
xponent
A Compendium Of Whackos Maru
rob
I don't think so, Rob. I'm assuming that you just
haven't looked at them in detail - they're
--- Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Dr Brin, I mean Gautam.G..you seem to
be saying that
ANSWER has killed people. More peole than the KKK if
I am reading you
correctly.
I think that deserves some explaination.
xponent
Just Teasing You Dude! Maru
rob
:-) The
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Think you could tone down the insult rhetoric a bit?
Remember that you guys have an audience.
TIA
xponent
Concrete Maru
rob
I'm sorry, Nick just called me a McCarthyite and a
Fascist and you object to me telling
Gautam Mukunda
--- Andrew Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gautam Mukunda
So Gautam, are you saying that the US invaded Iraq
out of a deeply felt
need to save the Iraqi people? Not cos of WMD risks,
not cos of issues
over oil?
Again with this? Why are people who think _George
On Apr 21, 2005, at 7:09 PM, Robert Seeberger wrote:
Warren Ockrassa wrote:
On Apr 21, 2005, at 8:08 AM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
So the next time Republicans
march in something organized by the KKK you'll say,
ohh, that's guilt by association, really you shouldn't
critcize. Wait. No Republican in
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Dr Brin, I mean Gautam.G..you seem to
be saying that
ANSWER has killed people. More peole than the KKK if
I am reading you
correctly.
I think that deserves some explaination.
xponent
Just Teasing You Dude!
Dan Minette
From: Andrew Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Removing Dictators Re: Peaceful change L3
And why isn't the US invading North Korea?
Why is it, as you put it doing nothing?
As JDG said, the answer to that is fairly straightforward. South
Korea
begged Clinton
- Original Message -
From: Andrew Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 10:34 PM
Subject: RE: Removing Dictators Re: Peaceful change L3
Dan Minette
From: Andrew Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Removing Dictators Re
Gautam wrote:
Ah, the height of rational argumentation - calling
someone who disagrees with you a psychopath.
I don't know if I disagree with him. I do think the U.N. could use
reform, but a conservative Republican colleague of his called him a
serial abuser and three Republicans on the
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 19:02:20 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote
I'm sorry, Nick just called me a McCarthyite and a
Fascist
I'd appreciate it if you'd differentiate comments about behavior from comments
about people... and questions from statements.
and you object to me telling Nick the word
1 - 100 of 174 matches
Mail list logo
