BUSH WINS!

[Paul Burridge]

It's a funny old world where a guy can get re-elected having taken his
country to war over nothing but a Big Lie. A precedent-creating
"pre-emptive strike" where there was no actual threat! We all make
mistakes, but the least we'd expect if we make a mistake of that
magnitude would be to get the sack and spend the next few years in
prison. Instead, his actions have been *endorsed* by the electorate!
Oh well; it's your business, I guess. I just hope the same thing
doesn't happen here in Britland in 6 months' time.
Anyway, thank God it's all over. No more OT political postings!
Yippee!!
--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.

 

[Fred Bloggs]

Paul Burridge wrote:

It's a funny old world where a guy can get re-elected having taken his
country to war over nothing but a Big Lie.
[...snip...]

Well what did you expect- barring some major voting scandal- the United
States is finished.

 

[Brian]

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" <dirk@neopax.com> wrote in message
news:2usbuuF2d48s3U1@uni-berlin.de...

Brian wrote:

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" <dirk@neopax.com> wrote in message
news:2usap8F2eha2qU1@uni-berlin.de...
Brian wrote:
"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" <dirk@neopax.com> wrote in message
news:2us2diF2f4l05U1@uni-berlin.de...
Paul Burridge wrote:

It's a funny old world where a guy can get re-elected having
taken
his
country to war over nothing but a Big Lie. A
precedent-creating
"pre-emptive strike" where there was no actual threat! We all
make
mistakes, but the least we'd expect if we make a mistake of
that
magnitude would be to get the sack and spend the next few
years in
prison. Instead, his actions have been *endorsed* by the
electorate!
Oh well; it's your business, I guess. I just hope the same
thing
doesn't happen here in Britland in 6 months' time.
Anyway, thank God it's all over. No more OT political
postings!
Yippee!!

Well, here's a prediction for Bush's next term.
A vast increase in global terrorism, total alienation of the
Islamic
world,
severe decrease in freedom in the West, and at least one major
NBC
attack on a
Western or US city.

Add to that a the breakup of Iraq and much of it going Islamic
Fundamentalist,
with a Turkish invasion of the North.

Indecisive war with Iran, but without significant US ground
troops
(leading to
accelerated Iranian nuclear programs). Pakistan's Musharraf
assassinated
and the
nation going Islamic Fundie (more so than at present).

Problems with China as it becomes the new New Cold War
bogeyman and
scapegoat.
The US verges on bankruptcy with massive devaluation of the
dollar.
Oil
prices
continue to rise due to ME instability. Recognition that peak
oil
production has
occurred earlier than expected due to such problems.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

You guys are pathetic. Your guy didn't win, because you
didn't come up with someone better, or have a better plan.
Kerry was such a zero, he had very little effect on this
election.
This was more a race between Bush and Bush. His good
points versus his bad points. If your party would've had
someone with something better, had a better vision for
this
country, was a motivator instead of a divider, you
would've
probably won hands down. All Kerry could do was try to
discredit Bush, because Kerry (and his party), had nothing
better to offer. Sorry guys, you missed a golden
opportunity.
Even though you have lost, you still spread your vile
garbage.
You are like kids, that don't know how to grow up.

My party is in my sigline.
And if you took the trouble to check you'll discover I'm British.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

And if you took the trouble to look, you would see that I was
responding
to what Dirk Bruere wrote.

Er... the Democrats are not my party.
The Consensus is.
Additionally, we shall see who is right in 4yrs (or sooner).
My predictions are on record.
Care to make some of your own?

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

I predict that your predictions are all wet. Many of the
Nay sayers, underestimate Bush's intellenence (which
is where they make their biggest mistake). You are
in good company though, because Bin Laden and
Saddam Hosain (and the Democrates), made the
same mistake. We both seem to agree though,
that this is a very dangerous world that we live in.
Taking the passive approach, will only increase
our danger. No one knows what the future will bring,
but I would rather take my chances with Bush than
Kerry, any day.
Brian

 

[Rich Grise]

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:01:03 +0100, Frank Bemelman wrote:

"Fred Bloggs" <nospam@nospam.com> schreef in bericht
news:4188D150.8070309@nospam.com...

Paul Burridge wrote:
It's a funny old world where a guy can get re-elected having taken his
country to war over nothing but a Big Lie.
[...snip...]

Well what did you expect- barring some major voting scandal- the United
States is finished.

Well, honestly, I did not expect it at all. There must be something
in the drinking water that kills common sense.

Nah. It's that vast right-wing conspiracy. But I guess we'd better
be careful what we say from now on - if they've got the power to
bugger a whole fuckin national election, it would be ill-advised
to get in their crosshairs.

Zeig Heil!
Rich

 

[John Fields]

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 18:04:14 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:01:03 +0100, Frank Bemelman wrote:

Well, honestly, I did not expect it at all. There must be something
in the drinking water that kills common sense.

Nah. It's that vast right-wing conspiracy. But I guess we'd better
be careful what we say from now on - if they've got the power to
bugger a whole fuckin national election, it would be ill-advised
to get in their crosshairs.

---
to "get" in?
---

Zeig Heil!
Rich

---
Heil Ziggy!

--
John Fields

 

[Adam. Seychell]

Brian wrote:

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" <dirk@neopax.com> wrote in message
news:2usbuuF2d48s3U1@uni-berlin.de...
Brian wrote:

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" <dirk@neopax.com> wrote in message
news:2usap8F2eha2qU1@uni-berlin.de...
Brian wrote:
"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" <dirk@neopax.com> wrote in message
news:2us2diF2f4l05U1@uni-berlin.de...
Paul Burridge wrote:

It's a funny old world where a guy can get re-elected having
taken
his
country to war over nothing but a Big Lie. A
precedent-creating
"pre-emptive strike" where there was no actual threat! We all
make
mistakes, but the least we'd expect if we make a mistake of
that
magnitude would be to get the sack and spend the next few
years in
prison. Instead, his actions have been *endorsed* by the
electorate!
Oh well; it's your business, I guess. I just hope the same
thing
doesn't happen here in Britland in 6 months' time.
Anyway, thank God it's all over. No more OT political
postings!
Yippee!!

Well, here's a prediction for Bush's next term.
A vast increase in global terrorism, total alienation of the
Islamic
world,
severe decrease in freedom in the West, and at least one major
NBC
attack on a
Western or US city.

Add to that a the breakup of Iraq and much of it going Islamic
Fundamentalist,
with a Turkish invasion of the North.

Indecisive war with Iran, but without significant US ground
troops
(leading to
accelerated Iranian nuclear programs). Pakistan's Musharraf
assassinated
and the
nation going Islamic Fundie (more so than at present).

Problems with China as it becomes the new New Cold War
bogeyman and
scapegoat.
The US verges on bankruptcy with massive devaluation of the
dollar.
Oil
prices
continue to rise due to ME instability. Recognition that peak
oil
production has
occurred earlier than expected due to such problems.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

You guys are pathetic. Your guy didn't win, because you
didn't come up with someone better, or have a better plan.
Kerry was such a zero, he had very little effect on this
election.
This was more a race between Bush and Bush. His good
points versus his bad points. If your party would've had
someone with something better, had a better vision for
this
country, was a motivator instead of a divider, you
would've
probably won hands down. All Kerry could do was try to
discredit Bush, because Kerry (and his party), had nothing
better to offer. Sorry guys, you missed a golden
opportunity.
Even though you have lost, you still spread your vile
garbage.
You are like kids, that don't know how to grow up.

My party is in my sigline.
And if you took the trouble to check you'll discover I'm British.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

And if you took the trouble to look, you would see that I was
responding
to what Dirk Bruere wrote.

Er... the Democrats are not my party.
The Consensus is.
Additionally, we shall see who is right in 4yrs (or sooner).
My predictions are on record.
Care to make some of your own?

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

I predict that your predictions are all wet. Many of the
Nay sayers, underestimate Bush's intellenence (which
is where they make their biggest mistake). You are
in good company though, because Bin Laden and
Saddam Hosain (and the Democrates), made the
same mistake. We both seem to agree though,
that this is a very dangerous world that we live in.
Taking the passive approach, will only increase
our danger. No one knows what the future will bring,
but I would rather take my chances with Bush than
Kerry, any day.
Brian

Well, I couldn't agree more. If robber were to rob a bank then he/she
wouldn't get very far going the passive approach, they'll need a big gun
or something. Similarly, if the Bush administration wants America to
have domination and prosperity at the expense of other nations then it
certainly cannot take the passive approach either. The robber could be
faced with a threat from the victim and so it would be an safety
advantage for the robber to carry a weapon and use it if necessary. So I
have to agree, the passive will only increase the danger to Americans.

 

[Brian]

"Adam. Seychell" <invald@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:418945ba$0$7344$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

Brian wrote:

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" <dirk@neopax.com> wrote in message
news:2usbuuF2d48s3U1@uni-berlin.de...
Brian wrote:

"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" <dirk@neopax.com> wrote in message
news:2usap8F2eha2qU1@uni-berlin.de...
Brian wrote:
"Dirk Bruere at Neopax" <dirk@neopax.com> wrote in message
news:2us2diF2f4l05U1@uni-berlin.de...
Paul Burridge wrote:

It's a funny old world where a guy can get re-elected
having
taken
his
country to war over nothing but a Big Lie. A
precedent-creating
"pre-emptive strike" where there was no actual threat!
We all
make
mistakes, but the least we'd expect if we make a mistake
of
that
magnitude would be to get the sack and spend the next
few
years in
prison. Instead, his actions have been *endorsed* by the
electorate!
Oh well; it's your business, I guess. I just hope the
same
thing
doesn't happen here in Britland in 6 months' time.
Anyway, thank God it's all over. No more OT political
postings!
Yippee!!

Well, here's a prediction for Bush's next term.
A vast increase in global terrorism, total alienation of
the
Islamic
world,
severe decrease in freedom in the West, and at least one
major
NBC
attack on a
Western or US city.

Add to that a the breakup of Iraq and much of it going
Islamic
Fundamentalist,
with a Turkish invasion of the North.

Indecisive war with Iran, but without significant US
ground
troops
(leading to
accelerated Iranian nuclear programs). Pakistan's
Musharraf
assassinated
and the
nation going Islamic Fundie (more so than at present).

Problems with China as it becomes the new New Cold War
bogeyman and
scapegoat.
The US verges on bankruptcy with massive devaluation of
the
dollar.
Oil
prices
continue to rise due to ME instability. Recognition that
peak
oil
production has
occurred earlier than expected due to such problems.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

You guys are pathetic. Your guy didn't win, because
you
didn't come up with someone better, or have a better
plan.
Kerry was such a zero, he had very little effect on
this
election.
This was more a race between Bush and Bush. His good
points versus his bad points. If your party would've
had
someone with something better, had a better vision
for
this
country, was a motivator instead of a divider, you
would've
probably won hands down. All Kerry could do was try
to
discredit Bush, because Kerry (and his party), had
nothing
better to offer. Sorry guys, you missed a golden
opportunity.
Even though you have lost, you still spread your vile
garbage.
You are like kids, that don't know how to grow up.

My party is in my sigline.
And if you took the trouble to check you'll discover I'm
British.

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

And if you took the trouble to look, you would see that I was
responding
to what Dirk Bruere wrote.

Er... the Democrats are not my party.
The Consensus is.
Additionally, we shall see who is right in 4yrs (or sooner).
My predictions are on record.
Care to make some of your own?

--
Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

I predict that your predictions are all wet. Many of the
Nay sayers, underestimate Bush's intellenence (which
is where they make their biggest mistake). You are
in good company though, because Bin Laden and
Saddam Hosain (and the Democrates), made the
same mistake. We both seem to agree though,
that this is a very dangerous world that we live in.
Taking the passive approach, will only increase
our danger. No one knows what the future will bring,
but I would rather take my chances with Bush than
Kerry, any day.
Brian

Well, I couldn't agree more. If robber were to rob a bank then he/she
wouldn't get very far going the passive approach, they'll need a big gun
or something. Similarly, if the Bush administration wants America to
have domination and prosperity at the expense of other nations then it
certainly cannot take the passive approach either. The robber could be
faced with a threat from the victim and so it would be an safety
advantage for the robber to carry a weapon and use it if necessary. So I
have to agree, the passive will only increase the danger to Americans.

Oh yes, that is a real good comparison, a robber to a terroriest.
It's people
with your kind of mentallity that gives terroriest the oppertunity
and time, to
do anything they want. I'm sure you think that all you have to do is
to get the
U.N., to put pressure on them and they will stop (you live in a
fantasy world).
It's people that think like you, that give them all the time and
resources they
need, to train and infiltrate our country, to use the most potent
weapon they
can buy or steal on us. As time goes by, they will get more and more
potent
weapons. We have to stop them now, whatever it takes. Yes we pay a
price
for our actions now, but we will pay a much bigger price later, if
we don't stop
them now. If your reasoning power is so weak that you can't see
this, then
I feel sorry for you, and the rest of the world (if there is a lot
more like you).

Brian

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 12:30:57 +0000, Paul Burridge
<pb@notthisbit.osiris1.co.uk> wrote:

It's a funny old world where a guy can get re-elected having taken his
country to war over nothing but a Big Lie. A precedent-creating
"pre-emptive strike" where there was no actual threat! We all make
mistakes, but the least we'd expect if we make a mistake of that
magnitude would be to get the sack and spend the next few years in
prison. Instead, his actions have been *endorsed* by the electorate!
Oh well; it's your business, I guess. I just hope the same thing
doesn't happen here in Britland in 6 months' time.
Anyway, thank God it's all over. No more OT political postings!
Yippee!!

Anyhow, this is *not* the end of the world, as some would have you
believe.

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/041103/1/3o8sn.html

which looks like the obvious outcome: everyone will find a way to get
along with the big gorilla. Now if Arafat goes, maybe there could
finally be a peaceful Palestinian state, and at least some of the
reason for all this hassle could go away.

John

 

[Frank Bemelman]

"Brian" <bellis350@comcast.net> schreef in bericht news:Ss2dnX92rOWn9xTcRVn-

I feel sorry for you, and the rest of the world (if there is a lot
more like you).

Stop quoting like an idiot, and yes, there is entire world like
him.


--
Thanks, Frank.
(remove 'x' and 'invalid' when replying by email)

 

[Chaos Master]

(Paul Burridge (pb@notthisbit.osiris1.co.uk) IN
<9cjho0d0i55c3tbjf2vmhtaj33ett772f2@4ax.com&gt ON sci.electronics.design AT Wed,
03 Nov 2004 12:30:57 +0000:

It's a funny old world where a guy can get re-elected having taken his
country to war over nothing but a Big Lie. A precedent-creating

"There's nothing better than a good lie."

Ah... Bush won!

[]s
--
Chaos MasterŽ, posting from Brazil.
"When there's nothing left to process, not even a bit,
the CPU must reset, and 0000:0000 should be hit."

http://marreka.no-ip.com | http://tinyurl.com/46vru | http://renan182.no-ip.org
| http://marreka.blogspot.com (in Portuguese)

 

[Paul Hovnanian P.E.]

Paul Burridge wrote:

It's a funny old world where a guy can get re-elected having taken his
country to war over nothing but a Big Lie. A precedent-creating
"pre-emptive strike" where there was no actual threat! We all make
mistakes, but the least we'd expect if we make a mistake of that
magnitude would be to get the sack and spend the next few years in
prison. Instead, his actions have been *endorsed* by the electorate!
Oh well; it's your business, I guess. I just hope the same thing
doesn't happen here in Britland in 6 months' time.
Anyway, thank God it's all over. No more OT political postings!
Yippee!!

The beauty of our system is that it take a lot more than one person
(even in the Oval Office) to really screw things up. In spite of Bush
being on a short leash of the fundamentalist christians, the business
interests in the GOP will be vigilant in making sure that they don't go
too whacko.

Keep in mind that all the things which the Christian right are fighting
against (abortion, gay marriage benefits, etc.) are things that big
business has seen fit to provide, even out of their own pockets when
necessary.

--
Paul Hovnanian mailtoaul@Hovnanian.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
Error: Keyboard not attached. Press F1 to continue.

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 07:55:21 +1100, "Adam. Seychell"
<invald@invalid.com> wrote:

Well, I couldn't agree more. If robber were to rob a bank then he/she
wouldn't get very far going the passive approach, they'll need a big gun
or something. Similarly, if the Bush administration wants America to
have domination and prosperity at the expense of other nations then it
certainly cannot take the passive approach either.

Prosperity is not a zero-sum game, and the US does not need to be
prosperous at anyone's expense. The history of the world is exactly
opposite: the more that democracy, education, and health spread, the
better off everyone is. America's "hegemony" is the spread of
democracy; call that domination if you will. If the US wanted to be
the permanent, exclusive superpower, it would want the rest of the
world to stay sunk in poverty, communism, and religious
fundamentalism; that's not what's happening.

John

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 01:06:17 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:43:33 -0800, John Larkin wrote:

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 12:30:57 +0000, Paul Burridge
pb@notthisbit.osiris1.co.uk> wrote:

It's a funny old world where a guy can get re-elected having taken his
country to war over nothing but a Big Lie. A precedent-creating
"pre-emptive strike" where there was no actual threat! We all make
mistakes, but the least we'd expect if we make a mistake of that
magnitude would be to get the sack and spend the next few years in
prison. Instead, his actions have been *endorsed* by the electorate!
Oh well; it's your business, I guess. I just hope the same thing
doesn't happen here in Britland in 6 months' time.
Anyway, thank God it's all over. No more OT political postings!
Yippee!!

Anyhow, this is *not* the end of the world, as some would have you
believe.

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/041103/1/3o8sn.html

which looks like the obvious outcome: everyone will find a way to get
along with the big gorilla. Now if Arafat goes, maybe there could
finally be a peaceful Palestinian state, and at least some of the
reason for all this hassle could go away.


Well, yeah, people have known about protection money for years.

"You have free will. You're free to obey me and live, or to disobey
me and die."

No. You are free to deal with me or not, and you will if it suits your
interests. Just leave the skyscrapers alone, OK?

John

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:53:34 +0100, "Frank Bemelman"
<f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote:

I hope it's not that bad. But it boggles the mind that the
(worldwide) most hated man get chosen *again*. The first time
was a mistake, okay, shit happens. But *again* !

This is interesting:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/11/03/do0302.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2004/11/02/ixopinion.html


John

 

[Clarence]

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote in message
news:nogjo056b0la5m9nc7hii0fkou69ikknma@4ax.com...

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:53:34 +0100, "Frank Bemelman"
f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote:


I hope it's not that bad. But it boggles the mind that the
(worldwide) most hated man get chosen *again*. The first time
was a mistake, okay, shit happens. But *again* !


This is interesting:


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/11/03/do0302.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2004/11/02/ixopinion.html


John

Is so hard to see that only one writer got it into print?

 

[Rich Grise]

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 21:50:59 -0800, John Larkin wrote:

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:53:34 +0100, "Frank Bemelman"
f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote:


I hope it's not that bad. But it boggles the mind that the
(worldwide) most hated man get chosen *again*. The first time
was a mistake, okay, shit happens. But *again* !


This is interesting:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/11/03/do0302.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2004/11/02/ixopinion.html

Ah. Patriotism. The last refuge of the scoundrel.

Thanks for another demonstration of the workings of the nazi dupe mind.

Signed,
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 06:36:26 +0000, Clarence wrote:

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote in message
news:nogjo056b0la5m9nc7hii0fkou69ikknma@4ax.com...
On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:53:34 +0100, "Frank Bemelman"
f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote:


I hope it's not that bad. But it boggles the mind that the
(worldwide) most hated man get chosen *again*. The first time
was a mistake, okay, shit happens. But *again* !


This is interesting:


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/11/03/do0302.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2004/11/02/ixopinion.html


John

Is so hard to see that only one writer got it into print?

Yeah, they're all supposed to toe the party line now, since the nazi
got reelected.


Thanks for rewording the problem, such that the rest of the dupes have
an additional rationalization in their arsenal.

Signed,
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 21:09:41 -0800, John Larkin wrote:

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 22:36:12 -0600, "Brian" <bellis350@comcast.net
wrote:


John, is this guy Rich for real? Or is he just pulling our chain?
I just can't imagine someone being so hateful and stupid. He
must belong to the Michael Moore gang.



I don't know. There are some people who honestly believe you can only
get something by taking it away from somebody else, and that everybody
wants to do just that. It's an obviously silly notion, but widely
believed.

Michael Moore got *very* rich selling the concept!

But how can you proclaim compassion, while tacitly endorsing mass
murder?

Or do I not deserve an explanation, since I'm one of the troublemakers?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Rich Grise]

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 20:26:32 -0800, John Larkin wrote:

On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 01:06:17 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:43:33 -0800, John Larkin wrote:

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 12:30:57 +0000, Paul Burridge
pb@notthisbit.osiris1.co.uk> wrote:

It's a funny old world where a guy can get re-elected having taken his
country to war over nothing but a Big Lie. A precedent-creating
"pre-emptive strike" where there was no actual threat! We all make
mistakes, but the least we'd expect if we make a mistake of that
magnitude would be to get the sack and spend the next few years in
prison. Instead, his actions have been *endorsed* by the electorate!
Oh well; it's your business, I guess. I just hope the same thing
doesn't happen here in Britland in 6 months' time.
Anyway, thank God it's all over. No more OT political postings!
Yippee!!

Anyhow, this is *not* the end of the world, as some would have you
believe.

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/041103/1/3o8sn.html

which looks like the obvious outcome: everyone will find a way to get
along with the big gorilla. Now if Arafat goes, maybe there could
finally be a peaceful Palestinian state, and at least some of the
reason for all this hassle could go away.


Well, yeah, people have known about protection money for years.

"You have free will. You're free to obey me and live, or to disobey
me and die."


No. You are free to deal with me or not, and you will if it suits your
interests. Just leave the skyscrapers alone, OK?

OK, if you're just talking about John Larkin vs. Rich Grise, then you and
I are merely having a pissing contest. Personally, in the twin towers
scenario, I'd have gone for surgical assassination, although given the context,
the taking down of the financial nexus could very well have been intended
as a surgical strike, from the POV of the "terrorists."

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Terry Pinnell]

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote:

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:53:34 +0100, "Frank Bemelman"
f.bemelmanx@xs4all.invalid.nl> wrote:


I hope it's not that bad. But it boggles the mind that the
(worldwide) most hated man get chosen *again*. The first time
was a mistake, okay, shit happens. But *again* !


This is interesting:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/11/03/do0302.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2004/11/02/ixopinion.html


John

I zealously avoid political threads here, but that dangerously
ill-informed article spurs me to respond.

My recollection is that the BBC and all mainstream Press were solid in
their outrage and condemnation of the 9/11 terrorists. Grief and
sympathy did not however stop them (and intelligent people everywhere)
from rationally trying to analyse the underlying complex causes.

--
Terry Pinnell
Hobbyist, West Sussex, UK