Chris Umphress wrote:
I suppose I could argue on either side of that fence. In my mind,
Abraham was there early, so the Israelites were re-claiming their
land. Interesting viewpoint, though.
I had to respond to this...
Stating that it's because Abraham was "there" so long ago and thus the
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Chris Umphress wrote:
> I suppose I could argue on either side of that fence. In my mind,
> Abraham was there early, so the Israelites were re-claiming their
> land. Interesting viewpoint, though.
I have a hard time with placing a reservation on a land parcel for 4000
years
On 12/19/05, J.A. Terranson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Chris Umphress wrote:
>
> > On 12/19/05, J.A. Terranson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > America is odd in that is is an active supporter of terrorism (Israel), an
> >
> > Come again? Israel is a terrorist state?
Maybe because Israel Invaded their country...!!??? and they dont have
and army to defend themself other than suicide bombers?
and Israel is backup up by? the USA.
Chris Umphress wrote:
On 12/19/05, J.A. Terranson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
America is odd in that is is an active supporter
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Chris Umphress wrote:
> On 12/19/05, J.A. Terranson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > America is odd in that is is an active supporter of terrorism (Israel), an
>
> Come again? Israel is a terrorist state? How in the world did you get
> your mind bent enough that this even s
On 12/19/05, J.A. Terranson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> America is odd in that is is an active supporter of terrorism (Israel), an
Come again? Israel is a terrorist state? How in the world did you get
your mind bent enough that this even seems right? What are you on?
Israel has some intere
IL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Full-Disclosure@lists.grok.org.uk
> Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] An uncontrolled ***OFFTOPIC*** thread ...
> America's future under George Bush ... my last post in this thread
>
> If the US spent 1/10th of the time and money on pre
./TJ ... sorry to have added to this thread even more, I hate feeding trolls.
-Original Message-From: Byron Sonne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 5:32 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
; Full-Disclosure@lists.grok.org.ukSubject: Re: [Full-disclosure] An uncontrolled ***OFFTOP
ubject: Re: [Full-disclosure] An uncontrolled ***OFFTOPIC*** thread ...
America's future under George Bush
And - about permitting Iran to develop nuclear power "because the US is a
bully" ... WTF?
More than one side to the story, homes... everyone has the right to
peacable nuclear
t: Re: [Full-disclosure] An uncontrolled ***OFFTOPIC*** thread ...
America's future under George Bush
> And - about permitting Iran to develop nuclear power "because the US is a
> bully" ... WTF?
More than one side to the story, homes... everyone has the right to
peacable
And - about permitting Iran to develop nuclear power "because the US is a
bully" ... WTF?
More than one side to the story, homes... everyone has the right to
peacable nuclear power. Even if they did develop nukes, it's in their
right. If the USA, Russia + satellite states, France, UK, India,
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, TJ wrote:
> So, because war was not declared it doesn't exist?
Not at all. It clearly exists - we've certainly killed and maimed enough
civilians to prove it.
> No; we are at war - not because of what our President has done / is doing,
> but because we were attacked (again
So, because war was not declared it doesn't exist?
No; we are at war - not because of what our President has done / is doing,
but because we were attacked (again) and are *finally* responding.
And - about permitting Iran to develop nuclear power "because the US is a
bully" ... WTF? You are talk
13 matches
Mail list logo
