New Book of Rules
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 8 Aug 2006 03:48 Eeyore wrote: > Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote: > > > Jim Yanik wrote: > > > Richard The Dreaded Libertarian <null(a)example.net> wrote in > > > news:pan.2006.08.08.22.30.29.863659(a)example.net: > > > > >> For another, you might have noticed, cancer is > > >> somewhat self-limiting. > > > > > > In single humans,not in nations. > > > > Of course it's self limiting. > > Where's Franco's Fascist Spain? Where is the USSR? What happened to > > Mao's China? Not to mention all those S American dictatorships you did > > your best to prop up. Remember the military dictatorships of Greece and > > Portugal? etc etc etc > > It seems the Americans can't understand that these things must in time fall from > within. It would be a sad reflection on human nature if they didn't. > > In the meantime, wars simply tend to prop up and 'legitimise' the miltarist > regimes. See Huxley's '1984' for example. I meant Orwell of course. Graham
From: Eeyore on 8 Aug 2006 03:50 Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote: > Eeyore wrote: > > > > John Woodgate wrote: > > > >> In message <dgagd2dnnd6egl07phm8qh0aog2rb09nn5(a)4ax.com>, dated Mon, 7 > >> Aug 2006, xray <notreally(a)hotmail.invalid> writes > >> > >>> At that time, I think the hate toward the US was mainly because of how > >>> our lifestyle was leading the rest of the world (including the Middle > >>> East) astray because it was enticing, not so much because of any > >>> political or military actions the US had made. > >> It's a big factor. The priests see their lifestyle threatened, and I > >> don't mean only Muslims. > > > > Sorry, John but I don't see that the argument that the US was attacked because > > of jealousy over the richness of the western lifestyle holds any water at all. > > Why not take Bin Laden at his word, and read *why* he attacked the US? He made it pretty damn clear didn't he ? and even offered to 'cease hostilities'. > Most Americans don't want to believe him, for some odd reason. I really don't get it. I guess living on an isolated continent makes you too unaware of what's going on worldwide. Graham
From: Frank Bemelman on 8 Aug 2006 03:57 "Jim Yanik" <jyanik(a)abuse.gov> schreef in bericht news:Xns98191F579D2A5jyanikkuanet(a)129.250.170.86... > 500+ of them found to date are not WMDs? (of course,they are) You seem to know more than your holy leaders. http://www.public-action.com/911/no-wmd-sdut/ Can't you think of a better lie, or go back to your crystal ball rants. Crystal ball rants are okay. -- Thanks, Frank. (remove 'q' and '.invalid' when replying by email)
From: Frank Bemelman on 8 Aug 2006 04:10 "John Fields" <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> schreef in bericht news:i3hfd25fdedi9i14st8ipb9421va08gpve(a)4ax.com... > On Mon, 7 Aug 2006 19:34:33 +0200, "Frank Bemelman" > <f.bemelmanq(a)xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote: > >>"John Fields" <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> schreef in bericht >>news:2bsed2lrh07brpplqqhuod9ora8phrcet3(a)4ax.com... >>> On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 20:00:40 +0100, Eeyore >>> <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>Jim Yanik wrote: >>>> >>>>> Saddam was using Oil-for-Food money to rebuild his palaces and fund >>>>> WMD >>>>> programs >>>> >>>>There weren't any WMDs ! >>>> >>>>How many times do you need to be reminded ? >>> >>> There were no WMDs found because they were moved before we got >>> there. >> >>Maybe that was the will of God too eh? > > --- > Maybe, but I think more likely the will of Saddam. > --- If he still had had a few, he'd probably had used them, instead of moving them elsewhere. I doubt Syria would have been prepared to take the risk of providing a safe storage place for his WMD. >> But honestly, are you insane or something? > > --- > Not as far as I can tell, but maybe you've got evidence to prove me > wrong? Or something? It was a rhetoric question. You're piling up the evidence yourself ;) -- Thanks, Frank. (remove 'q' and '.invalid' when replying by email)
From: Frank Bemelman on 8 Aug 2006 04:15
"Jim Yanik" <jyanik(a)abuse.gov> schreef in bericht news:Xns98191FC53DBD7jyanikkuanet(a)129.250.170.86... > > Considering Saddam and his KNOWN ways,it would be insane to think he > complied with the UN resolutions. So your leaders are insane? Here: http://www.public-action.com/911/no-wmd-sdut/ > Unless one is just a Bush-hating,America-hating person. So that's what it is all about. You just can't stand a bit of critisism. Do you have a picture of Bush on your desk, and a flag in the corner of your office? -- Thanks, Frank. (remove 'q' and '.invalid' when replying by email) |