--
On 19 Nov 2002 at 15:45, Tyler Durden wrote:
Mikey: I would suggest tangling with Chomsky for a bit. Start
with...
http://zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=11ItemID=2
312
Chomsky is a liar. His citations are mostly fraudulent, and he
has at one time or another defended every
On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Tyler Durden wrote:
Let's have some history here. The Muslims have not been at war against the
Israelites since Biblical times. That is completely wrong. Hell, there
haven't been any Israelites for nearly two millenia.
More to the point, there were no Muslims in
On Tuesday 19 November 2002 03:30 pm, Jim Dixon wrote:
More to the point, there were no Muslims in Biblical times. The
Muslims appeared around 600 years after Christ, centuries after the
beginning of the Jewish diaspora. The Romans drove the Jews out of
Jerusalem and
I believe that it is generally accepted that until quite recently, in
historical terms, the Jews fared much better under the Muslims than
the Christians.
Actually, there's no comparison. Although there have been exceptions, the
Muslims' track record is MUCH better than the Christians. Take
In school yard politics this edge is normally a weapon
of some sort that can equalize the playing field (guns usually in the US,
try going to an inner city public school for 2 years). Saddam sees this and
that is what let him to develop those WMD, to equalize against a superior
foe / bully
A
On Tuesday 19 November 2002 03:06 pm, Trei, Peter wrote:
Mike Diehl[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote
You don't deny either of my surmises about your experience or lack
thereof.
I didn't find them relevent. My understanding of the facts doesn't matter.
I was LOOKING for the
Well, they have enough non-central leadership to all be against Israel and
the US. And to have been at war against the Israelies since Bible times...
OK, Mike, this is a good example of the kind of facts that lead to fairly
easy (though erroneous) conclusions.
Let's have some history here.
On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Vincent Penquerc'h wrote:
I just hope that Americans see this, and see that what they're
going to get from this behavior isn't world domination, but either
a genocide of half the planet, or a life in a bared wire world,
with no freedom left, in a vain attempt to protect
Israeli tanks aren't the ONLY things that kill someone's
kids. The whole
region has been at war for 100's of years. If Israel backed
You do realize that the whole world has been at war for hundreds
of years, do you ? Israel is now the bully in the region, and is
conforted in keeping this
Tyler Durden[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
In school yard politics this edge is normally a weapon
of some sort that can equalize the playing field (guns usually in the US,
try going to an inner city public school for 2 years). Saddam sees this
and
that is what let him to develop
On Tuesday 19 November 2002 01:18 pm, Trei, Peter wrote:
If you think 'the Muslims' are your enemy,
then you have a problem.
I never said that they were MY enemy.
'The Muslims'
are not a monolithic group, and have no
central leadership. This is a bit like
Mike Diehl[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] writes
[much snippage]
. No, I think the Muslims need to back down, or be forced to.
[more snippage]
If you think 'the Muslims' are your enemy,
then you have a problem. 'The Muslims'
are not a monolithic group, and
Mikey:
I would suggest tangling with Chomsky for a bit. Start with...
http://zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=11ItemID=2312
And then go from there. I have to agree with Peter Trei that your arguments
sound pretty pre-packaged and freeze-dried, very similar to the pablum the
American
How can anyone claim that the U.S. or Israel or corporations or rich
Americans are morally worse than the likes of Hussein?
...I have to bow to the urge to answer
Note that everything that was proposed is bombing. Killing innocents,
in an attempt to make them revolt and overthrow their
14 matches
Mail list logo
