--- Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Finally, I respectfully request that you withdraw
the statement that you
think I'm okay with Saddam Hussein.
--
Doug
Ahh, I think I finally got through. OK. I do, but
maybe now I've made my point. It's all about motives,
motives, motives. I
On Sun, Apr 04, 2004 at 06:16:07AM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
It's never about whether anything was a good idea or not. I can
engage on that level. But that's not what I hear. It's all about
motives. Motives, motives, motives. It's Saudi money - that's the
most recent one. Or it's
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How far does your tolerance of different viewpoints
extend? For example,
one could argue that the 9/11 suicide pilots
honestly disagree with you
-- they had a goal and were trying to achieve it as
soldiers in a just
war. You can disagree with their
At 04:47 PM 4/3/2004 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote:
The Saudi's are reforming?
I posted examples of this recently in response to a message from Dr. Brin.
Perhaps the most salient example was that 2003 is called by Saudi citizens
The Year of the Petition, due to the novelty of that democratic
At 11:35 AM 4/1/2004 -0800 Deborah Harrell wrote:
Incidentally, as for that famous escape of the
Saudis.
Do you know who made the decision to let them out
of the country? It was, well, your hero, Richard
Clarke.
Do you have a link for this information? Thanks.
I've been trying to keep up
Gautam wrote:
Well, Doug, you certainly have. The principal goal of
all that Saudi money was what? It was to convince the
American government to:
1. Make solving the Israeli/Palestinian problem the
focus of American efforts in the Middle East
Oh, yea, we've done them a great disservice on that
--- Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So you're saying that if I see what looks very much
like a conflict of
interest, I should just shut up about it? Not a
particularly American
sentiment, Gautam. What's your next, suggestion,
Gulags?
Doug
No Doug, although I have no doubt
Gautam wrote:
No Doug, although I have no doubt that you'd love to
put me and everyone else who disagrees with you into
them. Supporting the liberation of Iraq - is that
treason to you, or just sedition?
The subject was civil discourse, and you suggested that I was compromising
it because I
--- Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But wait, I thought they were Republicans. Or maybe
its just that some
Republicans are honorary Saudis. After all, the G.
H. W. Bush library was
built with help from his Saudi friends. Then
there's the Carlyl Group
where the Saudi's have
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
So other than the fact that no Administration in
American history has done more to oppose the desires
of the Saudi government than that of George W. Bush,
what's your evidence that they've been bought off
again?
It just proves how Evil Bush is, because he was bought
Mike Lee wrote:
... Every fundie religion does it.
Could you define what you mean by a fundie religion? I know that
there are people who are fundamentalists and churches that are
fundamentalist, but fundamentalist religion strikes me as a non sequitur.
To my understanding, a fundamentalist
Could you define what you mean by a fundie religion? I
know that there are people who are fundamentalists and
churches that are fundamentalist, but fundamentalist
religion strikes me as a non sequitur.
Any religious group/believer that thinks they have revealed truth from God,
the Cosmos,
Incidentally, as for that famous escape of the Saudis.
Do you know who made the decision to let them out of the
country? It was, well, your hero, Richard Clarke.
Hmmm.
God knows I don't want to defend Richard Clarke, but from what I've read
about this, he was just the waterboy on this
Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Incidentally, as for that famous escape of the
Saudis.
Do you know who made the decision to let them out
of the country? It was, well, your hero, Richard
Clarke.
Do you have a link for this information? Thanks.
I've been trying to keep up
--- Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you have a link for this information? Thanks.
I've been trying to keep up with the
statements/counterstatements on this issue -- thanks
to all who have posted articles here.
Debbi
I remember reading it in Vanity Fair...a quick Google
comes
Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you have a link for this information? Thanks.
sniplet
I remember reading it in Vanity Fair...a quick
Google comes up with this from the Boston Herald:
From: Mike Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Killer Bs Discussion' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: The color of truth (L3) (part 1)
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 19:43:10 -0800
Islam is plain nasty. Racist, woman-hating, implacably oppposed to
democratic
At 07:21 PM 3/30/2004 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote:
What evidence is this?
http://tinyurl.com/38ecs
http://tinyurl.com/36k6u
http://tinyurl.com/26pwx
These look like partisan talking points to me, rather than evidence. i.e.
because John Podesta says so isn't evidence any more than because Marc
Mike wrote:
I've said it before here; I'm convinced that heightened
airport security would have thwarted the attacks.
Oh, for Christ's sake. I didn't even think you'd come up with something
as lame as that.
snip
Trust me, if I wanted to blow up a plane, it would get blown up. If I
wanted to
You and I might be able to sneak something by security, but 5
or 6 Saudi nationals (per plane), some of whom are suspected
terrorists? Don't think so.
Oh, my, you're not advocating racial profiling, are you?
Every time I get on a plane, I'm around people who look suspicious to me.
And, by
Mike Lee wrote:
And, really, all you head shaking, nice politically correct Americans who
think that the KKK are Neanderthals and shouldn't be allowed to breed,
but you give Muslims a pass (I guess because at least they're not
Republicans)
But wait, I thought they were Republicans. Or maybe
What color is the truth in your world?
This color:
TRUTH CONSEQUENCES
The Bush Administration and September 11
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pre-9/11: White House Received Warnings.2
Pre-9/11: Administration Reduces Counter-Terrorism3
Pre-9/11: Strengthening Saudi
Mike wrote:
Really, Doug, all this Monday morning quarterbacking is going nowhere.
Next you'll be complaining because Tom Clancy warned us about crashing a
plane
into the capitol building.
Spin every little thing you can all day long, but everybody knows the
truth: nobody took these jackasses
At 06:32 PM 3/30/2004 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote:
But the evidence points to the fact that Clinton/Gore took them _more_
seriously than Bush did.
What evidence is this?
I'm convinced by the evidence that 9/11 is less likely to have happened
under Gore. What exactly is it that convinces you
- Original Message -
From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: The color of truth (L3) (part 1)
At 06:32 PM 3/30/2004 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote:
But the evidence points to the fact
On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 21:38:48 -0500, John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
At 06:32 PM 3/30/2004 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote:
But the evidence points to the fact that Clinton/Gore took them _more_
seriously than Bush did.
What evidence is this?
http://tinyurl.com/38ecs
http://tinyurl.com/36k6u
On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 21:12:03 -0600, Dan Minette
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personally, I don't think the chances would have been much less likely,
but it seems that Bush downplaying AQ before 9-11 is fairly well
established.
I've said it before here; I'm convinced that heightened airport
I've said it before here; I'm convinced that heightened
airport security would have thwarted the attacks.
Oh, for Christ's sake. I didn't even think you'd come up with something as
lame as that.
I fly quite a bit. I'll give you this: increased airport security is a
complete waste of time by
On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 21:17:20 -0800, Mike Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Doug can't believe I'm serious:
Imploding? Are you serious? There's some serious straw
clutching in the above linked articles. Absolutely peanuts
compared to the misinformation being spewed by BushCo.
What color is the
29 matches
Mail list logo
