Re: [ZION] War in Iraq

2002-10-21 Thread John W. Redelfs
At 12:03 PM, Monday, 10/21/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote:

I keep asking why Pakistan isn't being targetted instead of Iraq. We can
add another piece of turtle meat to the fire: there is at least the
accusation that Pakistan supplied North Korea with its light gas
centrifugal technology (which it got from the US) which is used to
produce enriched uranium. Pakistan has denied it. The US is also
accusing China of helping North Korea, but I can't see how a nuclear war
in the region would be to Beijing's advantage.


It is worse than that.  Pakistan got The Bomb from China who got The Bomb 
from us.  We talk about nuclear proliferation, but we don't actually do 
anything about it.  Another UBI, China supplied ICBMs to Pakistan, not just 
nuclear technology.  And that was in direct violation of anti-proliferation 
treaties.  Shortly afterwards we extended to them a binding Permanent 
Normal Trade relations agreement.

I just don't understand this telestial world.  I'm completely 
confused.  Why is it, that almost every 10 to 20 years we get into a war 
with someone who has been built up and armed by us?

John W. Redelfs   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
I can image a world without war, a world without fear, a
world  without hate.  And I can picture us attacking that
world, because they'd never expect it.' --Jack Handy
===
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] War in Iraq

2002-10-21 Thread John W. Redelfs
At 12:03 PM, Monday, 10/21/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote:

Incidentally, just to twit those who belittle Jimmy Carter's long
crusade against war, it was Carter who went to Pyongyang about 6 or 7
years ago and defused the last dangerous situationt here. Maybe Bush
should use Carter this time, too ;-)


Jimmy Carter is in the CFR.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] War in Iraq

2002-10-21 Thread Steven Montgomery
At 05:39 PM 10/21/2002, JWR wrote:

At 12:03 PM, Monday, 10/21/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote:

I keep asking why Pakistan isn't being targetted instead of Iraq. We can
add another piece of turtle meat to the fire: there is at least the
accusation that Pakistan supplied North Korea with its light gas
centrifugal technology (which it got from the US) which is used to
produce enriched uranium. Pakistan has denied it. The US is also
accusing China of helping North Korea, but I can't see how a nuclear war
in the region would be to Beijing's advantage.


It is worse than that.  Pakistan got The Bomb from China who got The Bomb 
from us.

And according to Major Racey Jordan (_Major Jordan's Diaries_), who flew 
lend-lease supply missions from Alaska to the Soviet Union, the Soviet's 
were given all the materials, plans and specifications to build their own 
Atomic Bomb--a direct result of Harry Hopkin's involvement in the process.



--
Steven Montgomery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a standard of
selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which American
politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today. 
--Steven W. Mosher 

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^



Re: [ZION] War in Iraq

2002-10-21 Thread Marc A. Schindler


John W. Redelfs wrote:

 At 12:03 PM, Monday, 10/21/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote:
 Incidentally, just to twit those who belittle Jimmy Carter's long
 crusade against war, it was Carter who went to Pyongyang about 6 or 7
 years ago and defused the last dangerous situationt here. Maybe Bush
 should use Carter this time, too ;-)

 Jimmy Carter is in the CFR.


Well, then, like I said -- he'd be a natural!

--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“We do not think that there is an incompatibility between words and deeds; the
worst thing is to rush into action before the consequences have been properly
debated…To think of the future and wait was merely another way of saying one was
a coward; any idea of moderation was just an attempt to disguise one’s unmanly
character; ability to understand a question from all sides meant that one was
totally unfitted for action.” – Pericles about his fellow-Athenians, as quoted by
Thucydides in “The Peloponessian Wars”

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




Re: [ZION] War in Iraq

2002-10-12 Thread Jon Spencer

I do, and this one's OK.  I'll let you know if things change.

Jon

Marc A. Schindler wrote:

Is the US's goal as benevolent as George Bush would like to make it
seem?
Who guards the guardians in a world police state?

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Pakistan election (was Re: [ZION] War in Iraq)

2002-10-11 Thread Mark Gregson


 The first of my prognostications has come true: Islamic
 fundamentalists have won the Pakistani election:

No, fundamentalists have not won the election.  Read the whole article and then read 
some other news reports.  Fundamentalists have not won the election and will not 
control the government.  

My prediction: when vote counting is complete the fundamentalists will not have the 
swing votes. (Not that it would matter if they did, since Musharraf has veto power and 
dismissal power, too ).

 When the military dictatorship there falls, we will be facing an Islamic
 fundamentalist nuclear power.

Why are you so sure that the dictatorship will fall?  It's in a semi-transitional 
phase right now, so by definition it cannot actually fall.  

=  Mark Gregson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  =

   
-- 
__
Download the FREE Opera browser at www.opera.com/download/

Free OperaMail at http://www.operamail.com/

Powered by Outblaze

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: Pakistan election (was Re: [ZION] War in Iraq)

2002-10-11 Thread Marc A. Schindler



Mark Gregson wrote:


  The first of my prognostications has come true: Islamic
  fundamentalists have won the Pakistani election:

 No, fundamentalists have not won the election.  Read the whole article and then read 
some other news reports.  Fundamentalists have not won the election and will not 
control the government.


I said they'd win a majority of the seats set aside for general election, and that 
they have done, both in regional and in the national parliament. But I also said it 
wouldn't make any difference
because Mussharaf is still the military dictator and has the power to dismiss the PM 
and parliament. This just increases the pressure on the situation, which was my point.

In any case, let's go through the article point by point:

1. A coalition of pro-Taliban parties  won control of a provincial legislature near 
the Afghan border Friday, the first solid results from Pakistan's election. Vote 
counting for the national
parliament was moving slowly.  This is one of four regional parliaments which 
includes the Northwest Frontier, a Taliban stronghold.

2. For the first time since a 1999 coup, Pakistanis voted Thursday in elections the 
military government hailed as a historic return to democratic rule and the opposition 
denounced as a
stage-managed sleight of hand to mask resident Gen. Pervez Musharraf's firm grip on 
power.. Both Pakistan and the US are portraying this as a transition to democracy. 
Some (and I'm one of them)
believe it will not lead in the short run to Musharraf's fall (although eventually it 
will, but some other things have to happen first).

3. Musharraf - an important U.S. ally in the war on terrorism - has created a 
military-controlled National Security Council that will vet all national policy 
decisions. He has also granted himself
the  power to sack the prime minister and dissolve parliament, rendering the vote 
little more than window-dressing for continued military rule. As above.

4. I predicted that Islamic fundamentalists would gain control over the national 
parliament in Islamabad. I had in mind a majority of those seats available for it to 
run for. That hasn't quite
happened, but they are going to play a pivotal role, controlling whatever ruling 
coalition wins, so I think I'm right for the wrong reason (and in any case this 
represents an increase in
fundamentalist support): The religious parties also were surprisingly strong in the 
National Assembly, Pakistan's lawmaking lower house of Parliament.  With returns 
trickling in, the religious
alliance looked like it could emerge as a key partner in any coalition government in 
the center.

5. The situation as of last night in Islamabad: But vote counting for the National 
Assembly was slow and by early Friday only 40 of the 272 general seats in the federal 
Parliament were confirmed.
Of those, the religious alliance already  had 14 seats, including one in the federal 
capital of Islamabad.

I haven't even looked at the Globe this morning.



 My prediction: when vote counting is complete the fundamentalists will not have the 
swing votes. (Not that it would matter if they did, since Musharraf has veto power 
and dismissal power, too ).

  When the military dictatorship there falls, we will be facing an Islamic
  fundamentalist nuclear power.

 Why are you so sure that the dictatorship will fall?  It's in a semi-transitional 
phase right now, so by definition it cannot actually fall.


I don't see it transitioning in the least.


 =  Mark Gregson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  =


 --
 __

 Download the FREE Opera browser at www.opera.com/download/

 Free OperaMail at http://www.operamail.com/

 Powered by Outblaze

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling 
short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; 
its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer, nor those of 
any organization with which
the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register 

Re: Pakistan election (was Re: [ZION] War in Iraq)

2002-10-11 Thread Mark Gregson


-- Marc --
I said they'd win a majority of the seats set aside for general election, and that 
they have done, both in regional and in the national parliament.

-- Me --
How have they won a majority of the seats set aside for general election?  There are 
272 general seats.  60 are reserved for women and another 10 are reserved for minority 
religious groups.  That leaves 202 general sets.  The fundamentalists have apparently 
won 14 so far, of 40 reporting.  That is not a majority of all the seats and is not a 
majority of the seats reporting so far.

=  Mark Gregson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  =

   
-- 
__
Download the FREE Opera browser at www.opera.com/download/

Free OperaMail at http://www.operamail.com/

Powered by Outblaze

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: Pakistan election (was Re: [ZION] War in Iraq)

2002-10-11 Thread Marc A. Schindler

I was wrong for the right reason. They look placed to control either main party's 
coalition. The regional government they won is in the Northwest Frontier, too -- as in 
Khyber Pass and Peshawar. Voter turnout has been very poor, as most Pakistanis realize 
the election is a sham (contrary to what Bush's press spokesman seems to think). This 
will just increase the pressure on the
pressure cooker there.

Mark Gregson wrote:


 -- Marc --
 I said they'd win a majority of the seats set aside for general election, and that 
they have done, both in regional and in the national parliament.

 -- Me --
 How have they won a majority of the seats set aside for general election?  There are 
272 general seats.  60 are reserved for women and another 10 are reserved for 
minority religious groups.  That leaves 202 general sets.  The fundamentalists have 
apparently won 14 so far, of 40 reporting.  That is not a majority of all the seats 
and is not a majority of the seats reporting so far.

 =  Mark Gregson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  =


 --
 __

 Download the FREE Opera browser at www.opera.com/download/

 Free OperaMail at http://www.operamail.com/

 Powered by Outblaze

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling 
short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; 
its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer, nor those of 
any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





Re: Pakistan election (was Re: [ZION] War in Iraq)

2002-10-11 Thread Marc A. Schindler



Marc A. Schindler wrote:

 I was wrong for the right reason.

sigh That should of course have read right for the wrong reason. My point was that 
the islamicists are gaining control of Pakistan's parliamentary system, that this will 
increase pressure on the military government, which will not relinquish power 
willingly, and when the cork does pop, the US will have another group of 65-odd 
million upset at it for propping up the military regime
in the first place. And they'll have the bomb, already tested.

 They look placed to control either main party's coalition. The regional government 
they won is in the Northwest Frontier, too -- as in Khyber Pass and Peshawar. Voter 
turnout has been very poor, as most Pakistanis realize the election is a sham 
(contrary to what Bush's press spokesman seems to think). This will just increase the 
pressure on the
 pressure cooker there.

 Mark Gregson wrote:

 
  -- Marc --
  I said they'd win a majority of the seats set aside for general election, and that 
they have done, both in regional and in the national parliament.
 
  -- Me --
  How have they won a majority of the seats set aside for general election?  There 
are 272 general seats.  60 are reserved for women and another 10 are reserved for 
minority religious groups.  That leaves 202 general sets.  The fundamentalists have 
apparently won 14 so far, of 40 reporting.  That is not a majority of all the seats 
and is not a majority of the seats reporting so far.
 
  =  Mark Gregson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  =
 
 
  --
  __
 
  Download the FREE Opera browser at www.opera.com/download/
 
  Free OperaMail at http://www.operamail.com/
 
  Powered by Outblaze
 
  /
  ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
  ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
  /
 

 --
 Marc A. Schindler
 Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

 The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling 
short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
 --Michelangelo Buonarroti

 Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author 
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer, nor 
those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling 
short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; 
its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer, nor those of 
any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





Re: [ZION] War in Iraq

2002-10-03 Thread Marc A. Schindler

Feel free. I'm no longer on LDS-poll (I had to cut back my listserve activity for
health reasons).

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Go on Marc, post it to LDS-poll :)

 Clifford Dubery

 -Original Message-
 From: Marc A. Schindler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 6:34 AM
 To: zion-l
 Subject: [ZION] War in Iraq

 Step 1.Co-op Congress. Status: half-done
 Step 2.Get the peacemakers out of the way:
 http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=1365350
 Step 3:Continue with the media fog that it's about WMD (sub-step:
 has the guy who wrote the phrase regime change for that speech been
 fired yet?)

 --
 Marc A. Schindler
 Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

 The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high
 and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our
 mark.
 --Michelangelo Buonarroti

 Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the
 author solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the
 author’s employer, nor those of any organization with which the author
 may be associated.

 
 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 
 /

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and
falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





RE: [ZION] War in Iraq

2002-10-03 Thread clifford

Its not the same if it comes from me Marc.  Ce la vie.

Clifford M Dubery

-Original Message-
From: Marc A. Schindler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 8:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ZION] War in Iraq


Feel free. I'm no longer on LDS-poll (I had to cut back my listserve
activity for
health reasons).

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Go on Marc, post it to LDS-poll :)

 Clifford Dubery

 -Original Message-
 From: Marc A. Schindler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 6:34 AM
 To: zion-l
 Subject: [ZION] War in Iraq

 Step 1.Co-op Congress. Status: half-done
 Step 2.Get the peacemakers out of the way:
 http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=1365350
 Step 3:Continue with the media fog that it's about WMD (sub-step:
 has the guy who wrote the phrase regime change for that speech been
 fired yet?)

 --
 Marc A. Schindler
 Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

 The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high
 and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our
 mark.
 --Michelangelo Buonarroti

 Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the
 author solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the
 author’s employer, nor those of any organization with which the author
 may be associated.



 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///


 /



/
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///


/


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and
falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the
author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s
employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.


/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///

/

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===






Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-10-02 Thread Marc A. Schindler

Re: the constitutionality of declaring war

The lead editorial in The New Yorker is called “The Talk of the Town” and is usually
written by Hendrik Hertzberg who is, believe it or not, an intelligent liberal (they do
exist). He’s the kind of person with whom you might not always agree, but who makes
intelligent arguments. To compare, on the other end of the spectrum, personally I find
Mark Steyn not only funny, but usually pretty intelligent, although I only agree with 
him
maybe 1/3 of the time. David Frum I rarely agree with, either, but I don’t find him
humourous OR intelligent. Oh, and you know a guy’s intelligent when he knows that a
female professor emeritus is properly called a professor emerita! (like me teasing John
about conjugating the word “signaturi”)

Anyway, I’m not even a scholar on my own country’s constitution, let alone yours’, but 
I
find Hertzberg makes an interesting argument here. What I find admirable about it is 
that
I know from other things he’s written that he’s dead set against war with Iraq (as I 
am),
and yet he finds there’s justification for Bush going to war, constitutionally 
speaking,
whether he (Hertzberg) likes it or not -- and the argument is something which would, I
would think, appeal to most conservatives, although it's got some warnings and
conditions.

The New Yorker puts a lot of its current issue online, but the problem is that, thanks 
to
S-Cargo (Escargot) Canada*, by the time I get an issue, it’s a week old. And they don’t
post editorials from their archives, so here’s the column in its entirety.

*How did you think the term snailmail was coined?

Here’s the column, from the 30/09/02 issue of The New Yorker:

COMMENT
DECLARATION

Last Tuesday was Constitution Day, the anniversary of the wrap party of the original
Constitutional Convention, when the thirty-nine delegates still in Philadelphia, before
saddling up to disperse to their homes up and down the Eastern Seaboard, got together 
one
last time to sign the document they had just spent four months hashing out. 
Constitution
Day, like Flag Day and Armed Forces Day, is one of those would-be holidays that never
quite achieved escape velocity Its just another day at the office. But Joyce Appleby, a
busy and eminent professor emerita of American history at U.C.L.A, took it off anyway.
She spent it in Washington, where she presented members of Congress with a petition
signed by nearly thirteen hundred of her professional colleagues. We, the undersigned
American historians, urge our members of Congress to assume their Constitutional
responsibility to debate and vote on whether or nor to declare war on Iraq, the 
petition
began. We ask our senators and representatives to do this because Congress has not
asserted Its authority to declare : war for over half a century, leaving the ' 
president
solely in control of war powers to the detriment of our democracy and in clear 
violation
of the Constitution.

Just how many wars the United States has fought since that first Constitution Day, ten
score and fifteen years ago, is a hard number to pin down. How does a couple of hundred
sound? There have been eight or nine that were big enough so that most reasonably
attentive college students could probably name them, from the War of 1812 to the 
Persian
Gulf War. There have been a dozen other conflicts that involved the accoutrements of 
big
time warfare) such as pitched battles or naval engagements. And if you count the many
so-called Indian wars, the various Latin-American adventures, and all the military
episodes that, to their participants at least, felt an awful lot like war (from the
forays against the Barbary pirate states of North Africa at the outset of the 
nineteenth
century, to the Balkan interventions at the close of the twentieth), the numbers begin 
to
mount up.

Formal declarations of war, however, are as rare as the thing itself is common. There
have been only five: for the War of 1812, the Mexican War (1846), the Spanish-American
War (1898), and the two World Wars. The idea that there was once a time when American
soldiers never went into battle without a declaration of war is an Edenic fantasy—an
exercise in nostalgia for a past that never was, like the idea that the government used
to belong to the people and now serves the special interests. Anyway, a formal
declaration is hardly a necessary condition for a war to be, so to speak, 
constitutional.
Our bloodiest undeclared war was not Vietnam; it was the Civil War, which killed more
Americans than all the nations wars put together except the Second World War) and which
the national imagination has sacralized. In 1861, the government of the United States
viewed itself as suppressing a lawless rebellion, not as fighting the armies of a
sovereign state. For Congress to have declared war on the Confederacy would have been 
to
bestow upon the Slave Power a kind of backhanded diplomatic recognition. (The same
difficulty would attend a declaration of war on Al 

Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-10-01 Thread Marc A. Schindler

Fair enough, and I agree totally. (Sorry -- I really tried to find a nit to pick,
but your scalp -- maybe even what it covers -- is absolutely healthy).

Stephen Beecroft wrote:.


 I didn't say that most Muslims want to blast Americans, if that's what
 you're suggesting (though that might be the case). My point was simple
 and, I thought, fairly clear: The term jihad had a bad reputation
 since long before the Taliban even existed, so they (the Taliban)
 certainly haven't given the term [jihad] a bad name. In the non-Muslim
 west, the term has always had the unpleasant connotation of fanatical,
 murderous zealots.

 Stephen

--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and
falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-10-01 Thread Dan R Allen





 Dan:
 But you also see cites like this:
 On Monday, Perisic and two others were charged with espionage, the
 state-run Tanjug news agency reported, citing a statement released by
 military prosecutors. If convicted, the three face between three and 15
 years in jail. This came from the on-line version of the Las Vegas Sun,
 under a AP byline.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/w-eur/2002/sep/30/093002490.html


Marc:
An example of a verifiable citation.

Dan:
It's all relative I guess since I don't read Slav, and the items referenced
would be difficult to find without dates, etc.

 Dan:
 So while saying Janes reported may not be as specific as you desire, it
 does not lessen it's validity, or the reliability of the reporter.


Marc:
An example of a hard-to-verify citation. For some reason I find more of
this kind
in certain online news sources (like CNS)  that the right wing especially
seems
to be attracted to. Am not sure why that should be so. Surely it can't be
that
right-wingers can't tell a valid journalistic service from a propaganda
service.
I know some smart conservatives who would never fail to make that
distinction.

Dan:
Generic statements released by Yugoslav military prosecutors are hard to
verify also.
Why is it left-wingers claim that only news sources that they agree with
are acceptable?
Might have something to do with ideological bent, don't you think?
MSNBC and their ilk claim impartiality, yet constantly apply bias in
determining what they consider to be news. Services like CNS do not claim
impartiality, and generally make it easy to identify their bias.
A propaganda instrument will generally be much more effective by claiming
impartiality while feeding their victims only that what they want them to
hear.


Marc,
I have no problem discussing issues based on the factual content, but
personal ideological attacks should be beneath us. Therefore I will no
longer respond to your comments about the 'right' or 'intelligence' of the
U.S. government plans for responding to the Iraqi threat.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-10-01 Thread Marc A. Schindler



Dan R Allen wrote:

  Dan:
  But you also see cites like this:
  On Monday, Perisic and two others were charged with espionage, the
  state-run Tanjug news agency reported, citing a statement released by
  military prosecutors. If convicted, the three face between three and 15
  years in jail. This came from the on-line version of the Las Vegas Sun,
  under a AP byline.
 
 http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/w-eur/2002/sep/30/093002490.html
 

 Marc:
 An example of a verifiable citation.

 Dan:
 It's all relative I guess since I don't read Slav, and the items referenced
 would be difficult to find without dates, etc.


Serbo-Croation is the language you mean, but Tanjug, while also issuing
statements in their native tongue, will also release translated versions for the
wire services to pick up. AP is the English-language source. In other words, the
URL you gave above is sufficient for a citation. Just saying it was in Janes
isn't specific enough. Another reader can't find it.


  Dan:
  So while saying Janes reported may not be as specific as you desire, it
  does not lessen it's validity, or the reliability of the reporter.

What it tells me is that the reporter does not know his/her alleged trade if they
can't put together a simple citation, like, say, Janes Defence Weekly, 27/08/02,
p. 28-32. Although it's never the kind of thing I could prove, it leaves me with
the suspicion that the reporter got his information second or third hand, and not
directly from the news source, contrary to the Las Vegas Sun AP report (for one
thing, the AP report would be in most major dailies in the US and probably
Canada, so you could do a search on it.).



 Marc:
 An example of a hard-to-verify citation. For some reason I find more of
 this kind
 in certain online news sources (like CNS)  that the right wing especially
 seems
 to be attracted to. Am not sure why that should be so. Surely it can't be
 that
 right-wingers can't tell a valid journalistic service from a propaganda
 service.
 I know some smart conservatives who would never fail to make that
 distinction.

 Dan:
 Generic statements released by Yugoslav military prosecutors are hard to
 verify also.

I don't follow you. What's a generic statement in this context? The Yugoslavian
story named names. It wasn't generic at all.


 Why is it left-wingers claim that only news sources that they agree with
 are acceptable?

They don't. I'm not a left-winger, but even if some think I am, I dissed the
Guardian right on this thread. To quote:

 Dan: But since CNS is too untrustworthy, how about the Guardian?

Marc:
Too ideological and wacky for my tastes. In any case, the summary you give
strikes me as an accurate account of their beliefs and the payments their
families receive. So again, ideology isn't the point.


 Might have something to do with ideological bent, don't you think?
 MSNBC and their ilk claim impartiality, yet constantly apply bias in
 determining what they consider to be news.

Can you give some examples? I can. ABC, actually, but same diff.
We get most of the US networks up here on cable, including the traditional Big 3.
The local station's feed we get is Spokane, which is kind of odd, getting US news
through a small place like Spokane, but that's another story. Anyway the national
and international news is no different from ABC in Spokane than it would be in
San Francisco. But this one day there had been an earthquake around 5.5 or so,
and the local news team, who were giving regional news (Pacific Northwest --
Pacific Central West to us) said the earthquake was felt from Portland to
Bellingham, and from Ketchikan to Juneau.

So, what does that make the points between Bellingham and Ketchikan -- the  Lower
Mainland (metro Vancouver), Vancouver Island, the Sunshine Coast, the Inside
Passage and the Queen Charlotte Islands -- chopped liver?

 Services like CNS do not claim
 impartiality, and generally make it easy to identify their bias.
 A propaganda instrument will generally be much more effective by claiming
 impartiality while feeding their victims only that what they want them to
 hear.


Again, examples, please. I've given you an example.

Let's take another look at your example from CNS:

Here was your quote: In addition, Jane's Foreign Report, a highly regarded
intelligence publication, reports that Israel's military intelligence service,
Aman, suspects that Iraq sponsored the
suicide attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Now, this could well be true. I don't know. But I'm not going to believe Lawrence
Morahan, the writer, because his argument here (just here -- I'm using this part
of the article as an example) is based solely on a report that according to
Jane's Foreign Report, one of the Jane's group of defence and military
publications published in Britain (and well-known and well-respected), has
allegedly made a claim from Israel's military intelligence service.

Let's work backwards.
First of all, Mossad or Aman both 

Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-30 Thread Marc A. Schindler



Dan R Allen wrote:

  Dan:
  Certainly conservative - therefore unreliable?
 

 Marc:
 No, not necessarily, but they don't give their sources. And whether they're
 conservative or liberal, that makes them sloppy journalists. Also, hiding
 their
 background is, in my opinion, dishonest. Everyone knows that CATO has a
 house
 organ, for instance, and that the WSJ is owned by Dow Jones. That's okay
 (and
 they're conservative. So to repeat, that's not my point).

 Dan:
 What level of sourcing is required? The article stated that one source was
 Janes. No, they didn't give a _specific_ cite to a _specific_ article or
 employee, but then again, neither does most news services.


Actually most do. For instance, a science article will say, In an article in the
most recent issue of Nature, a team of British scientists have announced


 If you go to the main page, it's fairly easy to find their affiliation. For
 example, looking under 'History', I found this:
 The Cybercast News Service was launched June 16, 1998 as a news source for
 individuals, news organizations and broadcasters who put a higher premium
 on balance than spin. Study after study by the Media Research Center -- the
 parent organization of CNSNews.com -- clearly demonstrate both a liberal
 bias in many news outlets and a frequent double-standard in editorial
 decisions on what constitutes news.


Right. In other words, they have an ideological agenda, and news is secondary.


 That's the first paragraph. No, it isn't on the first page, but then again,
 I haven't been able to find a similar statement forsay MSNBC.


That's because they're primarily a news organization and have no ideological axe
to grind. Although as it happens, it's not hard to find their mission statement,
which is as a distributor of news garnered from other news agencies:
http://privacy.msn.com/tou/#msnbc

--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and
falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-30 Thread Marc A. Schindler



Dan R Allen wrote:

 Marc:
 Precisely. You challenged John to show why the Saudi government sent them.
 I
 pointed out that they didn't. I'm happy that you've come around to our way
 of
 thinking ;-)

 Dan:
 I knew that they didn't. John had implied that Saudi Arabia had a higher
 level of guilt for the attacks than did Iraq, because 15(17) of the
 terrorist were Saudi, with Saudi Passports. Just because they were Saudi
 citizens does not mean that the Saudi government supported their actions in
 any way. The Iraqi government, on the other hand, does have ties to
 terrorist groups, reportedly had intelligence connections to the specific
 group that carried out the attacks, does pay restitution to the families of
 suicide bombers, and is unwilling to prove that they are not actively
 pursuing WMD.


But most of the money for terrorist activities comes from Saudi Arabia. Not from
the government perhaps (although some does through Ikhwan and similar fraternal
and charitable organizations, and through direct funding of the PLO's
government bureaucracy) so I don't see your point. Saudi Arabia also pays money
to survivors of martyrs. Also, you can't prove a negative. The world's largest
producer of WMD is right where you live, Dan. Ever been to Tooele?


 Marc:
 I'm not sure what you mean about what [I'm] looking for, but very
 generally
 speaking I approve of the German approach. The Saudi government,
 incidentally,
 promised to pull US troops out of Dhahran, but they have yet to. This has
 made
 some fundamentalists furious. Saudi Arabia presents itself not just as a
 nation-state, but as Guardian of the Two Holy Cities (of Mecca and
 Medina), so
 it has special meaning to most Moslems.

 Dan:
 They probably are not ready for us to leave because of the benefits of
 having us there.


The point is they broke a promise. Why they broke it is immaterial.

--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and
falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




RE: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-30 Thread Stephen Beecroft

-Marc-
 jihad has traditionally, in Sunni Islam, meant the kind of
 struggle that we all must undergo in order to purify ourselves
 in order to make ourselves fit to be in God's presence after
 death. The Taliban have given the term a bad name).

-Stephen-
 Not so. That is, the term jihad has usually (not always) been
 interpreted by most of the Islamic schools as meaning an internal
 purification struggle, but throughout Islamic history, many
 Muslims of the Sunni, Shi'ite, and other fringe Islamic sects
 have used the term to refer to the struggle against infidels,
 mostly Christians and Jews. So the Taliban certainly have not
 given the term jihad any bad name that it hasn't already had
 for a dozen centuries.

-Marc-
 Many is not most any more than many crusades have not been
 most crusades.

I didn't say that most Muslims want to blast Americans, if that's what 
you're suggesting (though that might be the case). My point was simple 
and, I thought, fairly clear: The term jihad had a bad reputation 
since long before the Taliban even existed, so they (the Taliban) 
certainly haven't given the term [jihad] a bad name. In the non-Muslim 
west, the term has always had the unpleasant connotation of fanatical, 
murderous zealots.

Stephen

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-29 Thread Marc A. Schindler

Or as they used to say bluntly during the Lebanese civil war, nits grow up to be
lice.

Grampa Bill wrote:

 Elmer L. Fairbank wrote:

  There is an Arab proverb that goes something like:  The friend of my friend
  is my friend, the friend of my enemy is my enemy.

 
 Grampa Bill comments:
 And I've heard the converse, The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
 But I like the one that goes, The son of my enemy grows up to be the enemy
 of my son. Bombs AWAAAY
 .
 Love y'all,
 Grampa Bill in Savannah

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling
short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer, nor
those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-29 Thread Marc A. Schindler



[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Marc Schindler:

 ... Saudi Arabia can issue visas to allow foreigners to visit
 *their* country (although good luck if you're a woman or a
 tourist -- hajj and business visas are pretty well all that
 Saudi Arabia issues).

 ___

 Saudi visas are an invitation to enter the Kingdom as a
 guest of the king.  Upon entering, it is government policy
 that a person obtain permission from the king to leave the
 country.  Hence, after obtaining an entry visa to go to Saudi
 Arabia, one must then apply for and obtain an exit visa in
 order to leave.


Ah, exit visas are a whole 'nother matter, and you're right, some countries
require them (East Germany used to, too).  But I got the impression Dan was
talking about *entry* visas and somehow was under the impression that the Saudis
issued entry visas to the *US*, which is of course, backwards.


 Being in country under those circumstances causes a very
 interesting feeling to one, such as I, who is accustomed to
 the freedoms of the US of A.

 Larry Jackson
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and
falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




RE: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-29 Thread John W. Redelfs

At 10:02 AM 9/29/02 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] favored us with:
If a country wants to require exit visas for its citizens, I think 
that is the country's perogative.  

And it also an individual's prerogative to not travel to that country.  I have always 
had a barely conscious fear of not being able to get back.  That is one reason I have 
never been to Europe or the Middle East.  There were Americans in Europe when WWII 
broke out that didn't get home until the war was over.

I find it unusual, though, that 
a country would require the obtaining of a visa for a foreigner 
to leave.  I understand detaining a person if there has been a 
criminal problem or something, but the general concept of 
requiring permission for a visitor to leave strikes me as being 
a bit unusual.

John W. Redelfs   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
640K of computer memory ought to be enough for 
anybody. - Bill Gates, 1981 
*
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-28 Thread Marc A. Schindler



Dan R Allen wrote:

 Marc:
 What the U.S. government has has to come from its intelligence agencies.
 Unless
 you have a suggested alternative source?

 Dan:
 What I'm suggesting is that they are not releasing every bit of information
 to the press.

Uh, yeah, I'd go along with that. Heck, they're not even sharing it with each
other.


 Marc:
  I see they haven't given a specific citation to Jane's. Also, CNS is a
  subsidiary
  of the Media Research Center, whose stated purpose is to be The Leader
 in
  Documenting, Exposing and Neutralizing Liberal Media Bias
  http://www.mediaresearch.org/
 
  Gosh, you don't think they'd have a conservative, pro-war bias, do you?
 
 Dan:
 Certainly conservative - therefore unreliable?


No, not necessarily, but they don't give their sources. And whether they're
conservative or liberal, that makes them sloppy journalists. Also, hiding their
background is, in my opinion, dishonest. Everyone knows that CATO has a house
organ, for instance, and that the WSJ is owned by Dow Jones. That's okay (and
they're conservative. So to repeat, that's not my point).


  
 http://www.cnsnews.com/ForeignBureaus/Archive/200204/FOR20020412f.html
 

 Marc:
  Did you even read this? It doesn't talk about Iraq, but *Saudi Arabia*
  giving the
  survivors cash payments. Sounds like Rumsfeld's confused. The article
 said
  he
  didn't know anything about the Saudi program. Oh well, they all look
 alike,
  don't
  they :-/


I'm sorry, but I don't have my original post, so I'm not sure what you're
criticizing. For the record, the very first sentence mentions that Saudi Arabia
makes the payments. Are you sure *I* wasn't correcting *you*?


 Dan:
 Yes I did read it; this is one of three paragraphs discussing how Saddam
 _also_ provides payments to the families of the bombers.

 But since CNS is too untrustworthy, how about the Guardian?

Too ideological and wacky for my tastes. In any case, the summary you give
strikes me as an accurate account of their beliefs and the payments their
families receive. So again, ideology isn't the point.


 http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,619495,00.html?FACTNet
 In life most suicide bombers are nobodies, but in death they rise and
 become shaheed, and their families rise with them. Each martyr's family
 receives an official certificate of martyrdom from the Iraqi dictator
 Saddam Hussein, and a prize of $10,000.

 Or here: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/03/25/1017004766310.html
 Or here: http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020825-77873160.htm


I have no idea what your point is

--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and
falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-28 Thread Marc A. Schindler

I have no idea what you're talking about.

To repeat, for the third time, Saudi Arabia, nor any other non-US country, has
the right to issue a visa to allow a non-US citizen to visit the US. Only the US
INS can do that. Saudi Arabia, likewise, is the only jurisdiction that has the
authority to permit visas to allow non-Saudis to visit. In practice, women and
tourists are excluded -- only businessmen (gender intended) and hajji are allowed
visitor visas. You can get resident visas with the permission of your Saudi
employer.

And what's weird is your confusing statement about satellite dishes. If I took an
electronic picture of my neighbour's Bell ExpressVue satellite dish, which is 3
metres from our kitchen window, and posted it somewhere, would you apologize, and
stop making weird claims?

Jon Spencer wrote:

 This was an ongoing topic on Fox News.  The US Ambassador to Saudi Arabia
 and some state department geeks tried to justify it.

 It is true.  If only it were legal to have satellite dishes in Canada (how
 in the world did THAT get to be the case??  That's weird!) you could get
 decent news.

 Jon

 John W. Redelfs wrote:

  At 04:50 PM 9/27/02 -0600 Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
   Can you support your statement that the Saudi's are granting visas
 without
   US approval? Anyone can print anything they want to, but that doesn't
 mean
   that we have to allow them entry.
 
  How about, I heard it on MSNBC news?

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and
falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^





RE: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-28 Thread John W. Redelfs

At 05:23 PM 9/28/02 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] favored us with:
Being in country under those circumstances causes a very 
interesting feeling to one, such as I, who is accustomed to 
the freedoms of the US of A.

It is one of the reasons I refuse to leave the USA.  --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




RE: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-27 Thread Dan R Allen





Dan:
This would suggest then that we really can't rely on what we hear in the
news to judge whether the war is right or wrong. Wouldn't you agree?

Dan Allen:

If this is _all_ that they have no, but do you _really_ believe
that this it all of it?  Most likely what we get is just the stuff
that they control the least.

___

It would be important to note that at the very beginning of
this exercise in terrorism, it was announced that one of the
tools to be used would be disinformation.  Was it General
Patton who was responsible for giving the Germans a
first-hand lesson in that during World War II?

It is quite an effective tool, though frustrating for those who
are trying to find the truth.

Larry Jackson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

/

///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^










Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-27 Thread Jon Spencer

Good points and analysis.

Let's move to more nuclear and solar and fuel cell energy and let the Saudis
sink into their own cesspool.  of course, we may have another Iraq to deal
with, but, then, that will give us something to argue about.

Jon

Gary Smith wrote:

 Let's see: 17 of 19 hijackers in the WTC were Saudis. Osama Bin Laden's
 father owns the largest construction firm in Saudi Arabia. The official
 Saudi news organization condemns the US, and calls the suicide bombers,
 martyrs.

 The actual problem isn't that the Saudi head prince is against the US.
 The problem is (and this is true with many of the Arab nations) that they
 have severe economic and political struggles. Rather than have the poor
 and struggling mad at the crown prince, they divert people's anger
 towards the West and Israel. In this way, they don't risk losing their
 power to a democracy; and they don't have to fix the problems.

 So we get an unofficial/official support of Western aggression.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-27 Thread Marc A. Schindler



Dan R Allen wrote:

 John:
 As for you claim that the Saudi's show a willingness to work with us to at
 least reduce the terrorism, I would like to see you support that
 statement.  15 of the 19 who made the suicide attacks were Saudis.  Osama
 bin Laden is Saudi.  Supposedly the attacks were motivated by his hatred of
 US bases on Saudi soil.  The Saudis are still granting visas for travel to
 the USA by way of various travel agencies, not requiring any screening by
 our embassy there.   The Saudis have been financing much of the terrorism
 in the Middle East.  And it is they who have been putting up money for the
 families of suicide bomber, not Saddam Hussein.

 Dan:
 Where is the evidence that those 15 were sent by the Saudi government?

Their passports. John didn't say they were sent by the Saudi government, he
merely pointed out that they were Saudis, which is true.


 Osama bin Laden was exiled from Saudi Arabia well before the attacks.

On the WTC. But he orchestrated the first WTC bombing and the bombing of the USS
Cole, plus the bombing of a disco in Berlin, from his base in Sudan, where he
likely is now (if not in Kashmir).


 Can you support your statement that the Saudi's are granting visas without
 US approval? Anyone can print anything they want to, but that doesn't mean
 that we have to allow them entry.

I'd want more info on this, too. Country X doesn't issue a visa to visit Country
Y; it's the other way around -- Country Y issues visas to citizens of Country X
to allow them to visit Country Y.


 I'm aware that there is Saudi support for much of the Palestinian
 terrorism,

They bankroll the civilian administration of the PLO to the tune of $250 million
a year.

 but do you have any evidence that they have been supporting
 anti-American terrorism?

The government almost certainly not, but I'm not aware of anyone making that
claim. It is the fraternal brotherhoods, the Ikhwan (association of Moslem
Brotherhood -- like the Knights of Columbus to the Catholics) and madrassam, or
religious schools, that do the fund-raising. They are based in Saudi because
that's where the money is.

 Last I heard we still have bases in Saudi Arabia -

You have one base near Dhohar, and its status is in doubt. When you build a base
in a foreign country its status is always that of a guest installation of the
host country. You know, like Guantanamo Bay and Panama City. Well, on second
thought, let's not go too far with the hospitality thang.


 much to the consternation of OBL assuming he's still alive of course.
 You need to go back and re-read that article I linked to, specifically the
 paragraph that I also pasted with it.



--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and
falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-27 Thread Dan R Allen





 Dan:
 Where is the evidence that those 15 were sent by the Saudi government?

Marc:
Their passports. John didn't say they were sent by the Saudi government, he
merely pointed out that they were Saudis, which is true.

Dan:
I wasn't denying that they were Saudi's; only that they were not operating
under orders from the Saudi government. On the other hand, Iraq's
government, through Saddam, has been linked to terrorism.


 Osama bin Laden was exiled from Saudi Arabia well before the attacks.

???On the WTC.??? - What does this mean?
 But he orchestrated the first WTC bombing and the bombing of the USS
Cole, plus the bombing of a disco in Berlin, from his base in Sudan, where
he
likely is now (if not in Kashmir).

Marc:
The government almost certainly not, but I'm not aware of anyone making
that
claim. It is the fraternal brotherhoods, the Ikhwan (association of
Moslem
Brotherhood -- like the Knights of Columbus to the Catholics) and
madrassam, or
religious schools, that do the fund-raising. They are based in Saudi
because
that's where the money is.

Dan:
And this is what I was talking about. The Saudi government is not
supporting this (at least officially), but is unable to deal with
brotherhoods without losing support and power.

 Last I heard we still have bases in Saudi Arabia -

Marc:
You have one base near Dhohar, and its status is in doubt. When you build a
base
in a foreign country its status is always that of a guest installation of
the
host country. You know, like Guantanamo Bay and Panama City. Well, on
second
thought, let's not go too far with the hospitality thang.

Dan:
Nevertheless, it is still there, and still in operation. The personnel are
even allowed to leave the base and play the tourist in town. I suspect that
this is also the base where the Southern Iraqi no-fly zone is patrolled
from.
Germany would probably be a better example for what you're looking for.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-27 Thread John W. Redelfs

At 04:50 PM 9/27/02 -0600 Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
 Can you support your statement that the Saudi's are granting visas without
 US approval? Anyone can print anything they want to, but that doesn't mean
 that we have to allow them entry.

How about, I heard it on MSNBC news?

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-27 Thread Jon Spencer

You know, we haven't found Jimmy Hoffa's body either.  Actually, I have it
on good authority that OBL is now rooming with Elvis and Jimmy Hoffa.

Jon

John W. Redelfs wrote:

 At 04:50 PM 9/27/02 -0600 Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
 On the WTC. But he orchestrated the first WTC bombing and the bombing of
the USS
 Cole, plus the bombing of a disco in Berlin, from his base in Sudan,
where he
 likely is now (if not in Kashmir).

 That's another thing that cracks me up with some people's thinking on bin
Laden.  He must be dead because we haven't found him.  Huh?  We haven't
found his body either.  Our press has made much of the fact that the
Al-Qaede is active in over 60 countries.  That means that he has friends in
over 60 countries that would be at least as willing to shelter him as were
those who sheltered Anne Frank during the Holocaust.  He could be holed up
anywhere.  He could be New Jersey.  Why do we evern pretend the ability to
find him.  Eric Rudolph is still at large, for Pete's sake.  He's been
missing for years.  And he is from right here in the USA.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-27 Thread Marc A. Schindler



Dan R Allen wrote:

 At 03:48 PM 9/26/02 -0700 Dan R Allen favored us with:
 Dan:
 I would have a problem with the global wording also, except that he also
 said that this would be a _long_ war;

 John:
 In other words a war we have no intention of winning.  Sounds like pretty
 tricky language to me.

 Dan:
 No, the intent is there, but the realization is that this is not going to
 be the kind of war that will make for great network ratings.

Then it won't happen. And you can quote me on that.

--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and
falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-26 Thread Dan R Allen




At 05:13 PM 9/25/02 -0700 Dan R Allen favored us with:

Dan:
Saddam   MAY NOT   have ordered the attacks, but it is very   LIKELY
that he was
involved in the planning, or financial and intel support.
  http://www.cnsnews.com/Pentagon/Archive/200109/PEN20010925a.html
the CIA is LOOKING INTO   whether one of the suicide pilots in the Sept.
11
attacks - Mohammed Atta - met Iraqi agents while he was organizing his
terrorist cell in the German city of Hamburg.
In addition, Jane's Foreign Report, a highly regarded intelligence
publication, reports that Israel's military intelligence service, Aman,
SUSPECTS   that Iraq sponsored the suicide attacks on the World Trade
Center
and the Pentagon.

He has supported, and continues to support the recruitment of suicide
bombers by paying the surviving families:
  http://www.cnsnews.com/ForeignBureaus/Archive/200204/FOR20020412f.html
Last week, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld criticized Saddam for
increasing from $10,000 to $25,000 the compensation he is prepared to pay
families who send one of their own to become a suicide bomber.

 From Marc's Globe and Mail article:
[An aggressor must] show a necessity of self-defence, instant,
overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation.
Daniel Webster U.S. Secretary of State.

A pre-emptive strike is justifiable if the enemy is massing for the
attack,
and there is no time left for negotiations. Saddam has shown a clear
unwillingness to negotiate except where it will buy him time to act. We
know that he is capable of building (may already have) WMD's, and a
willingness to use them. He has a clear motive to place those weapons in
the hands of terrorists to use against us. There is sufficient evidence
TO
SUGGEST   that he is part of the network known as Al-queda - whether as
part of the inner circle, or just a active supporter it doesn't really
matter. He clearly has the capability to work with them.

Bomb Saudi before Iraq? Not while they show a willingness to work with us
to at least reduce the terrorism - they did kick Osama Bin Laden out of
the
country. On the other hand, Saddam's government, like the Taliban, is
actively supporting terrorist activity, and so it must go before he has a
chance to support another terrorist attack.

John:
Notice by the words I have highlighted above how tentative all these claims
are.   We are an honorable nation supposedly.  Do we attack a sovereign
nation just because it  MAY  have been involved in something or other.  I
seems to me that before we start a war that could kill hundreds of
thousands of men or even millions of men, we need to have conclusive proof,
not a lot of may haves.

Dan:
I used those words because _I_ don't have the SPECIFIC facts of Saddam's
involvement. I am making an assumption that those actually making the
decisions have better, more specific information than those of us who are
not.
Any war should be approached with extreme caution, but I am willing to
accept the US and Britain's word that there is credible evidence that
Saddam poses a immediate threat unless forced to back down.
More evidence that links are being uncovered:
http://apnews.excite.com/article/20020926/D7M9AG1G0.html

John:
As for you claim that the Saudi's show a willingness to work with us to at
least reduce the terrorism, I would like to see you support that
statement.  15 of the 19 who made the suicide attacks were Saudis.  Osama
bin Laden is Saudi.  Supposedly the attacks were motivated by his hatred of
US bases on Saudi soil.  The Saudis are still granting visas for travel to
the USA by way of various travel agencies, not requiring any screening by
our embassy there.   The Saudis have been financing much of the terrorism
in the Middle East.  And it is they who have been putting up money for the
families of suicide bomber, not Saddam Hussein.

Dan:
Where is the evidence that those 15 were sent by the Saudi government?
Osama bin Laden was exiled from Saudi Arabia well before the attacks.
Can you support your statement that the Saudi's are granting visas without
US approval? Anyone can print anything they want to, but that doesn't mean
that we have to allow them entry.
I'm aware that there is Saudi support for much of the Palestinian
terrorism, but do you have any evidence that they have been supporting
anti-American terrorism? Last I heard we still have bases in Saudi Arabia -
much to the consternation of OBL assuming he's still alive of course.
You need to go back and re-read that article I linked to, specifically the
paragraph that I also pasted with it.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: 

Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-26 Thread Dan R Allen




Marc:
In any case, do you seriously think this piece of intelligence is
sufficient for
George III to build invasion plans on, even if it were true? After all, do
you
have any idea how many intelligence services the *U.S.* has? Just a rough
guess

Dan:
If this is _all_ that they have no, but do you _really_ believe that this
it all of it?
Most likely what we get is just the stuff that they control the least.
I'm not even sure that George knows

Dan R Allen wrote:

 Dan:
 Saddam may not have ordered the attacks, but it is very likely that he
was
 involved in the planning, or financial and intel support.
   http://www.cnsnews.com/Pentagon/Archive/200109/PEN20010925a.html
 the CIA is looking into whether one of the suicide pilots in the Sept.
11
 attacks - Mohammed Atta - met Iraqi agents while he was organizing his
 terrorist cell in the German city of Hamburg.
 In addition, Jane's Foreign Report, a highly regarded intelligence
 publication, reports that Israel's military intelligence service, Aman,
 suspects that Iraq sponsored the suicide attacks on the World Trade
Center
 and the Pentagon.

I see they haven't given a specific citation to Jane's. Also, CNS is a
subsidiary
of the Media Research Center, whose stated purpose is to be The Leader in
Documenting, Exposing and Neutralizing Liberal Media Bias
http://www.mediaresearch.org/

Gosh, you don't think they'd have a conservative, pro-war bias, do you?



 He has supported, and continues to support the recruitment of suicide
 bombers by paying the surviving families:
   http://www.cnsnews.com/ForeignBureaus/Archive/200204/FOR20020412f.html

Did you even read this? It doesn't talk about Iraq, but *Saudi Arabia*
giving the
survivors cash payments. Sounds like Rumsfeld's confused. The article said
he
didn't know anything about the Saudi program. Oh well, they all look alike,
don't
they :-/


 Last week, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld criticized Saddam for
 increasing from $10,000 to $25,000 the compensation he is prepared to pay
 families who send one of their own to become a suicide bomber.


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and
falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the
author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author's
employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/

///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===




Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-26 Thread Dan R Allen

   
 
  John W. Redelfs
 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]To:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   
 
   cc: 
 
  09/26/02 01:42 PMSubject:  Re: [ZION] War on Iraq
 
  Please respond to
 
  zion 
 
   
 
   
 








At 01:11 PM 9/26/02 -0700 Dan R Allen favored us with:
I'm aware that there is Saudi support for much of the Palestinian
terrorism, but do you have any evidence that they have been supporting
anti-American terrorism?

John:
Do you believe that there is any great different between Palestinian
terrorism and anti-American terrorism.  My understanding is the most
Islamic extremists considered Israel to be an extension of American power
into the Middle East.  Am I wrong?  --JWR

Dan:
Enough that I think it should have a lower priority for us to deal with.
Mostly I think that the terrorists use that claim as a propaganda tool
without fully believing it. I believe that their hatred of Israel is much
deeper, and that we are seen mostly as a stick that keeps Israel propped
up.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




RE: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-26 Thread larry . jackson

Dan Allen:

If this is _all_ that they have no, but do you _really_ believe 
that this it all of it?  Most likely what we get is just the stuff 
that they control the least.

___

It would be important to note that at the very beginning of 
this exercise in terrorism, it was announced that one of the 
tools to be used would be disinformation.  Was it General 
Patton who was responsible for giving the Germans a 
first-hand lesson in that during World War II?

It is quite an effective tool, though frustrating for those who 
are trying to find the truth.

Larry Jackson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-25 Thread Marc A. Schindler

Japan attacked you first, so your agonizing over Hiroshima doesn't even enter
into the picture. There are no right people to bomb in Iraq.

Gary Smith wrote:

 I hope we bomb the right people, also. However, it isn't always easy to
 draw the line in the right place. Was the bombing of Hiroshima and
 Nagasaki justified? Must we have lost one million American soldiers
 invading Japan, just to keep from wiping out 300,000 Japanese people?

 I think we have been rather patient with Hussein. He stopped the
 inspections 4 years ago, and we haven't done anything about it, yet. We
 still wouldn't be doing anything about it, had the WTC not been toppled,
 killing thousands. If Hussein were just a big bully in the neighborhood,
 we would probably leave him alone. However, he is one that historically
 has shown he will use bio-chem warfare on peoples (Iran and the Kurds).
 He is known to have been seeking nuclear weapons. During the last war, he
 sought a burnt-earth strategy, setting fire to the Kuwaiti oil fields.

 Hussein may not be directly involved in the past attacks, but is part of
 a growing regional problem. Given what we know of history, if a new Nazi
 party arose in Germany, and Jews started disappearing into concentration
 camps; would you suggest we wait until they attacked us to do something
 about it?  I know America historically has striven to stay aloof,
 especially in war. However, we now live in an age of mass destruction.
 Would you suggest we wait until one of our major cities is left
 uninhabitable by a dirty bomb? The fall of the WTC damaged our economy,
 extending the recession for over a year. Imagine the economic damage if
 NYC, LA, or some other major city were evacuated and left empty for years
 while we cleaned up the radiation contamination. Is that what you are
 suggesting we do?
 I don't like the idea of having to invade Iraq. But I know that if we do,
 most of the rest of the Arab world will quietly submit, and back off from
 the idea of suicide bombers and mass destruction. If we can accomplish
 that ideal, then we have won a major victory. Secondly, we may succeed in
 bringing democracy into the region, as we did in Europe and Japan after
 WWII.

 Regardless of their current problems, Afghanis are better off now than
 they were a year ago. At least women can have a life, and soccer fields
 are for playing in-not for executions
 K'aya K'ama,
 Gerald/gary  Smithgszion1 @juno.comhttp://www
 .geocities.com/rameumptom/index.html
 No one is as hopelessly enslaved as the person who thinks he's free.  -
 Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

 JWR:
 I just hope we strafe and bomb the right guy.  Are we certain that Saddam
 Hussein was behind the incidents that you mention?  It would be a shame
 if we clobber Peter for something that Paul did.
 I wonder how many Americans would be in favor of this war if it were
 between two evenly matched opponents?
  Your friend and brother,
 John W. Redelfs, [EMAIL PROTECTED]


 

 GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!

 Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!

 Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:

 http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and
falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-25 Thread John W. Redelfs

Gary Smith favored us with:
 Hussein may not be directly involved in the past attacks, but is part of
 a growing regional problem. Given what we know of history, if a new Nazi
 party arose in Germany, and Jews started disappearing into concentration
 camps; would you suggest we wait until they attacked us to do something
 about it?  I know America historically has striven to stay aloof,
 especially in war. However, we now live in an age of mass destruction.
 Would you suggest we wait until one of our major cities is left
 uninhabitable by a dirty bomb? The fall of the WTC damaged our economy,
 extending the recession for over a year. Imagine the economic damage if
 NYC, LA, or some other major city were evacuated and left empty for years
 while we cleaned up the radiation contamination. Is that what you are
 suggesting we do?

This seem very close the thinking used by men who feel the Constitution is obsolete 
because 
...we now live in an age of fill in whatever you please.  Right is right.  And 
wrong is wrong.  It is wrong to go to war unless you have been attacked by an 
aggressor.  And so far, no one has convinced me that the attack on 9-11 was something 
financed and ordered by Saddam Hussein.  If we are going to bomb some country back to 
the stone age, let's at least get the right country.  We ought to bomb Saudi Arabia 
before Iraq.  Or... I guess we could just declare war against the whole Islamic world. 
 That might be fun.  I hope you all have a safe place to hide.

John W. Redelfs[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against 
principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the 
darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in 
high [places]. (Ephesians 6:12)
*
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^




Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-25 Thread Marc A. Schindler

Especially because the Islamic World includes France, Germany, Britain, Canada...and 
the United States now.
John's more than right: there is no place to hide.

John W. Redelfs wrote:

 Gary Smith favored us with:
  Hussein may not be directly involved in the past attacks, but is part of
  a growing regional problem. Given what we know of history, if a new Nazi
  party arose in Germany, and Jews started disappearing into concentration
  camps; would you suggest we wait until they attacked us to do something
  about it?  I know America historically has striven to stay aloof,
  especially in war. However, we now live in an age of mass destruction.
  Would you suggest we wait until one of our major cities is left
  uninhabitable by a dirty bomb? The fall of the WTC damaged our economy,
  extending the recession for over a year. Imagine the economic damage if
  NYC, LA, or some other major city were evacuated and left empty for years
  while we cleaned up the radiation contamination. Is that what you are
  suggesting we do?

 This seem very close the thinking used by men who feel the Constitution is obsolete 
because
 ...we now live in an age of fill in whatever you please.  Right is right.  And 
wrong is wrong.  It is wrong to go to war unless you have been attacked by an 
aggressor.  And so far, no one has convinced me that the attack on 9-11 was something 
financed and ordered by Saddam Hussein.  If we are going to bomb some country back to 
the stone age, let's at least get the right country.  We ought to bomb Saudi Arabia 
before Iraq.  Or... I guess we could just declare war against the whole Islamic 
world.  That might be fun.  I hope you all have a safe place to hide.

 John W. Redelfs[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 *
 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against
 principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the
 darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in
 high [places]. (Ephesians 6:12)
 *
 All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR

 /
 ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
 ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
 /


--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too high and falling 
short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving our mark.
--Michelangelo Buonarroti

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; 
its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer, nor those of 
any organization with which the author may be associated.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^^===
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===





Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-25 Thread John W. Redelfs

At 05:13 PM 9/25/02 -0700 Dan R Allen favored us with:

Dan:
Saddam   MAY NOT   have ordered the attacks, but it is very   LIKELY   that he was
involved in the planning, or financial and intel support.
  http://www.cnsnews.com/Pentagon/Archive/200109/PEN20010925a.html
the CIA is LOOKING INTO   whether one of the suicide pilots in the Sept. 11
attacks - Mohammed Atta - met Iraqi agents while he was organizing his
terrorist cell in the German city of Hamburg.
In addition, Jane's Foreign Report, a highly regarded intelligence
publication, reports that Israel's military intelligence service, Aman,  
SUSPECTS   that Iraq sponsored the suicide attacks on the World Trade Center
and the Pentagon.

He has supported, and continues to support the recruitment of suicide
bombers by paying the surviving families:
  http://www.cnsnews.com/ForeignBureaus/Archive/200204/FOR20020412f.html
Last week, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld criticized Saddam for
increasing from $10,000 to $25,000 the compensation he is prepared to pay
families who send one of their own to become a suicide bomber.

 From Marc's Globe and Mail article:
[An aggressor must] show a necessity of self-defence, instant,
overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation.
Daniel Webster U.S. Secretary of State.

A pre-emptive strike is justifiable if the enemy is massing for the attack,
and there is no time left for negotiations. Saddam has shown a clear
unwillingness to negotiate except where it will buy him time to act. We
know that he is capable of building (may already have) WMD's, and a
willingness to use them. He has a clear motive to place those weapons in
the hands of terrorists to use against us. There is sufficient evidence   TO
SUGGEST   that he is part of the network known as Al-queda - whether as
part of the inner circle, or just a active supporter it doesn't really
matter. He clearly has the capability to work with them.

Bomb Saudi before Iraq? Not while they show a willingness to work with us
to at least reduce the terrorism - they did kick Osama Bin Laden out of the
country. On the other hand, Saddam's government, like the Taliban, is
actively supporting terrorist activity, and so it must go before he has a
chance to support another terrorist attack.

Notice by the words I have highlighted above how tentative all these claims are.   We 
are an honorable nation supposedly.  Do we attack a sovereign nation just because it  
MAY  have been involved in something or other.  I seems to me that before we start a 
war that could kill hundreds of thousands of men or even millions of men, we need to 
have conclusive proof, not a lot of may haves.

As for you claim that the Saudi's show a willingness to work with us to at least 
reduce the terrorism, I would like to see you support that statement.  15 of the 19 
who made the suicide attacks were Saudis.  Osama bin Laden is Saudi.  Supposedly the 
attacks were motivated by his hatred of US bases on Saudi soil.  The Saudis are still 
granting visas for travel to the USA by way of various travel agencies, not requiring 
any screening by our embassy there.   The Saudis have been financing much of the 
terrorism in the Middle East.  And it is they who have been putting up money for the 
families of suicide bomber, not Saddam Hussein.

I don't know what is going on.  None of my information sources are reliable.  I don't 
know of any reliable information sources.  But I smell a rat.  Something is rotten in 
Copenhagen.  I believe there is a good chance that if we attack Saddam Hussein, we 
will be attacking the wrong guy.  We just cannot go about attacking anyone that   MAY  
have done something we don't like.  Before one starts killing hundreds of thousands of 
people, we need to be dead certain we are hitting the right target.

Of course I'm such a crackpot that I don't believe that any Muslim extremists attacked 
us on 9-11.  The Gadianton Robbers set it up, perhaps contracted it out, and they are 
setting up the Moslems to take the fall.  I think Osama bin Laden and the others have 
been framed.

Of course, what do I know?  As I already said, I don't have access to reliable sources 
of information.  And I think it is entirely possible that you don't either.

What if George W. Bush did it? heh, heh 

John W. Redelfs[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against 
principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the 
darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in 
high [places]. (Ephesians 6:12)
*
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///

Re: [ZION] War on Iraq

2002-09-25 Thread Paul Osborne

John said:
I don't know what is going on.  None of my information sources are
reliable.  I don't know of any reliable information sources.  But I
smell a rat.  Something is rotten in Copenhagen.  


Taken out of context, it sounds like you are one poor lost soul. ;-)

Here, have some chocolate donuts:

oo
oo

hee hee

Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

/
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html  ///
/

==^
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^