--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On this general subject... a while back, in the context of options
for Iraq other than war, I offered examples of non-violent regime
changes, with some on the list arguing that they are rare. I
recently came across a compilation
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But he didn't _run_ the campaign at all. He smiled, waved and read
canned speeches. Rove et al ran the campaign.
I won't pretend to have any real day-to-day knowledge of how the
Bush '00 and Bush '04 campaigns were run. It is
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Similarly, no one is stopping religious kids from gathering
together to pray at school.
This is not exactly true... although student religious groups do have
the legal right to meet at schools, at the local level, many school
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So are you suggesting that, as it becomes more and more clear that
we _do_ have a very serious problem, that we should hold off on
doing anything about it while we research the idea that it's part
of a larger phenomenon?
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
but because every MW of
wind power used is that many barrels of Middle Eastern oil we won't
need to purchase til later.
Actually, this is unlikely.
Let's say that increased use of wind power results in a decrease in the
price
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So what would be the point in tapping the ANWR?
I'm not sure where this question comes from. I personally don't
have particularly strong feelings either way about drilling in
ANWR.
If one wanted to make the case for drilling in
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ronn! wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/06/14/sex.selection.ap/index.html
I don't understand what the objection is (the ones stated in the
article
are lame), and I'm really surprised that the U.S. of all places is
the
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Robert G. Seeberger
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/11/2006 8:48:13 AM, jdiebremse ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Robert Seeberger rceeberger@
wrote:
but because every MW of
wind power used is that many barrels of Middle Eastern oil we
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Do you believe we are near or past peak oil?
I certainly haven't seen any evidence that we are *past* peak oil,
if indeed, there is such a thing. Near is, of course, an
ambiguous term.
Because Middle Eastern oil is, roughly,
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eugenics is a social philosophy. I don't think that if I have six
offspring and all of them are the same sex and I choose the sex of
the seventh to be the opposite sex that that amounts to a social
philosophy.
It amounts to
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you saying that if the free choice of American parents
results in a generation that is born 75% female and 25% male,
that you would
have no problem with that? (And women say that they can't find
any good men today!)
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 15/07/2006, at 3:43 PM, jdiebremse wrote:
We weren't discussing abortion.
Yes we are. We are talking about conceiving a number of
children,
and eliminating the children of the undesired sex.
As I pointed out
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bryon Daly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What if the abortion factor was eliminated?
I still have grave reservations about genetic engineering of human
beings. I don't agree that parents have a blanket right to tinker
with the genetic code of their children without
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of jdiebremse
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 7:43 AM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose
Its nice to finally know exactly what happened:
http://www.slate.com/id/2145889/
I still seems that I wasn't very far off the mark when I noted
that it can't have been a very deep secret that the wife of an
ambassador was a CIA agent.
JDG
___
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, I'm sorry. Your argument is fallacious because the chance
that the male/female ratio becomes severely offset under current
circumstances is very close to zero.
Well, obviously I disagree. You haven't really provided any
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 17/07/2006, at 6:50 AM, jdiebremse wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell charlie@ wrote:
On 15/07/2006, at 3:43 PM, jdiebremse wrote:
We weren't discussing abortion.
Yes we are. We are talking about
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ronn!Blankenship
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 02:49 AM Monday 7/17/2006, Charlie Bell wrote:
Cancer is undifferentiated balls of cells too. Is a tumour
a human?
The obvious difference is that if left alone a blastocyst has a
chance (if nothing goes wrong) of
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Well, if you are able to assume that the economic cost of choosing
a baby's sex goes down, I thought I could assume that the price of
oil would not go up...
For the recrord, I don't see how anything I said implied that the
price of
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Abortion is the killing of an unborn child, plain and simple.
Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy. An unimplanted embryo
is not a pregnancy. Plain, and simple.
Not plain, and not simple. What word would you have me use
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The couple in this case thinks they have a good reason for sex
selection:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?
in_article_id=391264in_page_id=1770ct=5
I don't think that.
Wow... killing all the male
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You started the semantic game, by defining abortion contrary to
most peoples' usage, and saying plain and simple.
What are you basing your view of most peoples' usage on? I would
love to see your evidence on this point. So far
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see no biological basis for classifying the cells of the
zygote as part of some other organisim, so therfore it is its
own organism.
It has no organs. How can it be an organism?
Since when did having organs become a
Doug,
I had no idea you were taking my 75% ratio literally. Sorry about
that.
With abortion in general you again focus on prohibiting them while
the real problem in most cases is unwanted pregnancy. If you
reduce unwanted pregnancy you will reduce the call for abortion.
If you outlaw
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Should women who get abortions get the death penalty?
Actually I don't believe in the death penalty... except in extreme
cases (i.e. the level of Osama bin Laden or John Allen Muhammad.)
JDG
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's another, to illustrate the point - a fertility clinic is
on fire. The fire service is 20 minutes away, and can't help. On
one floor, there are 100 infants. On another, is the frozen
embryo storage facility, with 100 liquid
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I give about 40 speeches a year, in red states to Republican
audiences, and I get the same enthusiastic responses from those
audiences as I get from Liberal college audiences. The only
difference is, is that the Republicans often
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
only the party in
power has been this corrupt and this cynical.
Where have you gone Dan Rostenkowski?
Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you!
;-)
___
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is complex about this question, to pick one major example --
should the
US have gone to war with
Iraq if US intelligence had concluded that Iraq was not making WMD
or providing support to al Qaeda?
Is that too complex for
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Hobby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Welcome back.
Thank you.
I think you're missing Charlie's point.
To me, his argument is that it is VERY hard to draw a clear
line between things that can turn into adult humans and things
that can't. I advise conceding the
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I'm saying WHAT THEY'RE CALLED is beside the point.
Which I continue to fail to understand. Obviously, some very
intelligent people believe that HeLa are of, at minimum, another
genus from humans, let alone of another species.
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Very interesting ones, but
indisputably human.
You use that word indisputably, but doesn't the fact that a new
species name has been proposed *by definition* imply that at least one
person believes the HeLa to be non-human? After
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gary Denton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In Robert Sawyer's *Mindscan* he postulates that when Roe v. Wade
is overturned the definition of human life the Supreme Court
adopts is individualization., two weeks after fertilization.
[lengthy reasoning deleted]
Of course, one
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's something else to being human, and
it's to do with our minds not our bodies.
Conjoined twins, parasitic twins. See you
avoided the rest. They're uncomfortable thoughts, aren't they,
but it's not science fiction.
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For one thing, does Iraq not producing WMD also mean that Iraq
had no stockpiles of WMD? Does it also mean that Iraq was not
retaining to capacity to restart WMD programs as soon as
sanctions were lifted? Yes, Nick, it is
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After all, how can you
propose a new species name for humanity?
Very easily. _Homo technologia_ could be the next step, if they
form
a separate breeding group from baseline humans.
Or Homo symbioticus (or whatever the name
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The definition I gave (interbreding
populations)
Doesn't this definition fail to account for species that reproduce
asexually?
JDG
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the debate in the States has become *so* polarised that
it's difficult to explore nuance. As Dan's caricature of
the pro-
choice position showed.
I must have missed that, but I find it hard to believe that Dan
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is why we'll never agree. Being human is about expressing
humanity, not about chromosome number, or genetic engineering, or
symbiosis, or phenotypic modification. It's about language,
society,
culture, art, curiosity,
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And I suppose that John Kerry, Bill Clinton, and Al Gore *also*
told
us those thing in order to justify the war too, huh Nick?
Does it have to be about partisanship?
It seems to me to be clearly about partisanship for you -
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Reporters and photographers will have to produce valid media
credentials before they are allowed to enter the trailer parks,
he said.
Dave
Uns deine Papiere zeigen Maru
I don't know the specifics of this situation,
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We don't need to think of a sperm or zygote as sacred. But
we should consider what we do when we cultivate a sentiment
among us
that babies don't matter and are no more worthy to live than
germs, and less worthy to live
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Indeed, I'd argue that you have your
causality reversed - they weren't telling us those things that
weren't true to justify the war, they were trying to justify the
war because they were telling us those things that weren't
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gibson Jonathan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Charlie,
I've read over RFK's piece in Rolling Stone, Was the 2004
Election Stolen?
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/
was_the_2004_election_stolen and it seems pretty damning against
an honest election this
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And then there's Scott Ritter and his team, who were the people in
charge of actually determining the facts on the ground. Ritter
consistently said
there were no WMDs, even after the invasion when the government
claimed to have
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are confusing a factual conclusion with a political
conclusion. Whether or not Iraq had WMD stockpiles or programs
is
a factual conclusion for which the intelligence services are
suited. Whether that threat is
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you saying that Iraq, despite having no WMDs,
Other than Scott Ritter (last in Iraq in 1998), did any of the
intelligence services actually conclude that Iraq had no WMD
stocpiles
or programs before the war?
Programs
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, you are saying that in 2002, a major intelligence agency
concluded that Iraq had no WMD stockpiles of any kind?
No. You've inverted the statement. The NIE, as well as Tenet in
later public statements about that NIE, said
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And this was before the war? And they concluded that *none* of
the stockpiles were weaponized.
Yes, John. Again, I'd urge you to go to the sources.
Uh, what's your source for this?
There was no delivery system that they
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tenet's speech about it, in which he makes very clear the
difference between
having programs and intensions v. actually having WMDs (as well as
ordinary weapons v. WMDs), including the crystal-clear
statement, They never said
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We assess that they possess CW bulk fills for SRBM warheads,
including for
a limited number of covertly stored Scuds, possibly a few with
extended
range.
Ah yes. The missiles. That I, and the British Army base I lived
All are quotations:
We judge that Iraq has... chemical and biological weapons. (5)
Since inspections ended in 1998 Iraq has... energized its missile
program and invested more heavily in biolgical weapons; in the view
of most agencies, Baghdad is reconstituting its nuclear weapons
program. (5)
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
3) Not stating that there was an imminent threat is not the same
as stating that there is not an imminent threat.
Irrelevant. The point is that it was not a foundation for saying
that there were WMDs or there was an immediate
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We judge that Iraq has... chemical and biological weapons. (5)
Weapons, yes. But don't be misled into thinking this means
weapons of mass destruction. The NIE makes it clear that it does
not.
Nick,
We are clearly failing to
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I find your reaction to be astonishing. Indeed, I suspect it is
at the heart of our inability to communicate. The quote you
have cited from George Tenet said the NIE did not say that
there was an imminent threat. You,
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/4/06, Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is in the first Key Judgment on page 5 of the report
We judge that... Baghdad has
chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges
in excess of UN
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
One of the ideas that came from the Enlightenment is
that all men are
created equal. That concept means that the
differences in intelligence,
race, religion, age, are superficial differences
when discussing human
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was not an error to overthrow Saddam. Sure, your government
lied to you about the reasons,
Which lies were these?
JDG
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is if you're replacing him with a vacuum. Saddam could have
waited
another 6 month or a year, with more and more pressure. The
Coalition could have genuinely won the hearts and minds of the
Iraqis. There must have been better
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The US has also been a leader in the
crisis in Sudan.
:-o
I'm just going to have to withdraw from this thread.
Perhaps you can name another country that has described Sudan as
engaging in genocide?
JDG
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JDG said:
Only conspicious because you defined troops as including only
military
personnel, and not including *police* personnel.
So is your thesis that genocide is a criminal problem whereas, say,
terrorism is a
Excellent post, Dan.Two ancillary comments.
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You see that it's mostly small countries that provide troops. I'm
guessing,
by Bangladesh leading the list, that the troops are paid by the UN,
not
sponsored by their own
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Obviously, my response was much more extensive than the selection
you
quoted. While snipping quoted text is to be encouraged, snipping
quoted text as means of misrepresenting the original argument is
dirty
pool.
I don't
I'm jumping in a little late here, and will get to Doug's post on
Chapter 1 in a moment, but I thought that I'd also post some
thoughts on the Introduction.
The introduction reads a bit like an executive summary of the book.
Diamond opens by defining collapse, the subject of the book, as a
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I like asking questions like this :) I'm still disappointed that I
didn't get a reply from JDG to the similar question I posed about
what I see as his essentialism (the one about human/chimpanzee
hybrids, I mean).
You'll have
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the things the National Park Service
emphasized is that the term Ancestral Puebloan is preferred for
this civilization over the term Anasazi. The term Anasazi is
linked to a Navajo word meaning ancient enemy.
This first chapter is also of particular interest to me, as I traveled
extensively through the State of Montana two years ago while retracing
the Lewis and Clark Trail - and I'll additionally find myself in the
town of Big Sky, MT next week on business for work. The chapter
certainly held my
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JDG said:
You'll have to refresh my memory then, as I honestly don't recall
the
question
There's a clarified version of the question on my weblog at
http://www.theculture.org/rich/sharpblue/archives/000128.html
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JDG said:
The problem with your question is that there seems to be plenty of
evidence that not all DNA is created equal - that some DNA is more
important than other DNA. Thus, its hard to really speak about your
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
No, it won't - it would be _wrong_ to call it a planet! It should
be called by something else, to stress the fact that it does
not orbit a star.
That is exactly what I think is ridiculous. That orbits are more
important
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did they know what they were doing to their island? Did they try to do
anything about it? I can just imagine an Island conference to discuss
the
preservation of the trees. Would the attendees have come to the
conclusion that
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], pencimen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's certainly hard to convince people without food that the red-
footed gnatcatcher's needs are greater than their own. Even if you
can convince them in the abstract that the extinction of another
species is a Bad Thing (tm),
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
COUSHATTA -- Nine black children attending Red River Elementary
School
were
directed last week to the back of the school bus by a white driver
who
designated the front seats for white children...
Isn't this exactly
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
jdiebremse wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Robert Seeberger rceeberger@
wrote:
No, it won't - it would be _wrong_ to call it a planet! It should
be called by something else, to stress the fact that it does
not orbit
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As for the connection of Katrina to global warming, I think that
advocates of doing something about global warming do themselves no
favors by making such arguments. After all, these arguments
connecting
specific weather
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for keeping this alive John. I have been exceptionally busy for
the last few weeks, but I have read beyond the next chapter. Is anyone
up
for kicking off the discussion on Chapter 3? If not, I'll have
something
by
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's nice that this topic has attracted some interest and that people
are giving some thought to the sickening poisonous evil filth of
religion and the ghastly damage it causes individuals and society.
However a number of
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This type of change, while certainly having negative consequences, is
not a
catastrophe. I'd argue that the potential for disaster from an
asteroid hit
is far higher than from global warming.
And the recent discovery of the
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can see no obvious correlation between civilizations that
collapse
and
civilizations that are highly religious. One could just as easily
ask Was their Polynesianness integral to their collapse? (You may
be
offended,
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the most critical question involved is the understanding of
the
transcendental: Truths that are true, whether or not they are
believed
by humans, or even whether they are perceived by humans; Reality
that
exists
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
The ABC television network -- a cog in the Walt Disney empire --
unleashed a promotional blitz in the last week for a new docudrama
called The Path to 9/11. ABC has thrown its corporate might behind the
two-night production,
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is why the Democrats will always lose: we lack the will to feed
poisonous lies to children to achieve our ends.
Uh huh.
- It tells students that the United States went to war in Iraq
because
of weapons of mass
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], John W Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People extol the virtues of abortion
Not *all* people, Maru.
JDG
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Hobby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
jdiebremse wrote:
...
The ABC television network -- a cog in the Walt Disney empire --
unleashed a promotional blitz in the last week for a new
docudrama
called The Path to 9/11. ABC has thrown its corporate might
behind
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good question. Where does devout become fanatical? I think you
may be onto something here.
When the choices of others are involved?
That's a good answer.
Of course, under this definition, the Easter Islanders would not be
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess that I don't understand why it is invalid to also assume
that
warming will increase ocean temperatures, and so increase the number
of
storms.
I'm just referencing what I've read, John, Here's an article
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], PAT MATHEWS [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We will know we've reached a turning point when we get a President who
puts
the entire nation on a war footing and does not put up with any
nonsense
from anyone. I'm keeping my eyes peeled for whoever's out there that
will do
it.
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A while ago, somebody said This country isn't at war, only our
military is at war. I think that was profound. It bugs the heck out
of me, to put it mildly, that our leaders ask no one except the troops
to make sacrifices for the
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JDG said:
I think you are neglecting the possibility that one might actually
be
true and another might actually be wrong.
I'm clearly not neglecting that possibility and in fact in this thread
have been fairly open to it.
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brazilian's current drug civil war may have a body count of
this magnitude. If there was a way to trade 100,000 and solve
the drug problem, I think I would accept this price.
Easy for you to say. Make
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gibson Jonathan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because the USA may be the target of nuclear terrorism. OTOH,
nuclear terrorists might explode a bomb anywhere they can, just
to show they have it.
OK.
How does this make any difference? We faced nuclear megadeath
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think the downfall of Egypt (and WHICH downfalln too?) would
be due to resource depletion neccessarily, since the downfall was due to
conquest by external forces (with vastly superior organization,
resources, etc) at a time when
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Matt Grimaldi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jim Sharkey wrote:
] The Fool wrote:
] E. You know nothing. You are a Fvcking idiot and a troll.
] Maybe I missed a memo, but I thought we didn't do this kind of
] shit around here. IAAMOAC, and all that.
]
] Are we
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 14, 2006, at 10:34 AM, J.D. Giorgis wrote:
A thought-provoking article about the implications of
differing fertility rates based on political ideology
in the US:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gibson Jonathan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That you can phrase the question as should a defense company be making
sub-standard profits - whatever that means in this realm - is amazing
to read. If you have any direct experience I'd like to hear about it.
They've always
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, if ABC had decided to air Farenheit 9/11 this weekend instead
would
you all agree or disagree that such an action would be a bald-faced
attempt to slander Republicans and revise history right before
Americans
vote in a
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is why the Democrats will always lose: we lack the will to
feed
poisonous lies to children to achieve our ends.
Uh huh.
- It tells students that the United States went to war in Iraq
because
of weapons of mass
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In an impressive display of agility, educational publisher Scholastic
has cancelled their planned distribution of study guides to accompany
the Path to 9/11 miniseries and replaced them with a Media Literacy
Discussion Guide that
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], John W Redelfs jredelfs@ wrote:
People extol the virtues of abortion
Not *all* people, Maru.
Not anybody that I know of. At best, it is a triage decision.
Wow. Finally a view that really
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/15/06, jdiebremse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I personally think that it would be good for the TV networks
to take on controversial atttudes.
Airing a factually inaccurate historical docu-drama? That is as much
like
1 - 100 of 198 matches
Mail list logo
