 | | Re: Response to Misinformation (Some other perspectives on the tragedy)
|
|
(...) Didn't those folks actually go in and buy land from people who they sincerely and with good foundation believed to be the rightful owners at the time (1) rather than settle lands from which the previous owners had been evicted, which is the (...) (23 years ago, 15-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP statement on terrorist attacks
|
|
(...) Not an overreaction nor deliberate maliciousness. Just stating my opinion that the LP Statement is moot. The LP must know that their opinion in this crises is moot. Whether or not you like it, the majority of the country could care less about (...) (23 years ago, 15-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Response to Misinformation (Some other perspectives on the tragedy)
|
|
(...) let me add to this then - there has _always_ been a jewish settlement in Israel. Way before 1948. And since the late the 1880s, there has been a secular-jewish settlemens in Israel as well. So the UN did not give "a third group" a land that (...) (23 years ago, 15-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP statement on terrorist attacks
|
|
(...) Or as disproof either. You are correct sir. Insert a "necessarily" in the appropriate place so my statement reads: That an opinion is being ignored doesn't *necessarily* make it wrong or even irrelevant. I would say that these particular (...) (23 years ago, 15-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP statement on terrorist attacks
|
|
(...) Well, not unless it's being ignored *because* it's wrong or even irrelevant; that is, the fact that an opinion is ignored cannot be taken as proof that it's being ignored for political reasons. Dave! (23 years ago, 15-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP statement on terrorist attacks
|
|
(...) No. Their loss. But that doesn't make it less valid an opinion or less valid as input to the common people who ought to make their stance known to their congressmen, who ultimately have to bear responsibility for funding and approving. That an (...) (23 years ago, 15-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP statement on terrorist attacks
|
|
(...) I don't think that's what he was saying at all. He has said that the LP has no business making its opinion known. (accusing it of pandering is in essence making that charge) I reject that notion, categorically. The LP has as much right (and (...) (23 years ago, 15-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP statement on terrorist attacks
|
|
(...) Let me take this a step further. Do you really think Dubya or Colin Powell were sitting back waiting to read the LP opinion before they started planning whatever offensive will occur? (23 years ago, 15-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP statement on terrorist attacks
|
|
(...) What (...) so (...) remote. (...) (Scarcasm on) Actually Dave, I'm all for a Republican War against Bin Laden. (scarcasm off). Dave, thank you summing up what I have been saying. (23 years ago, 15-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: LP statement on terrorist attacks
|
|
(...) True enough, but I believe Ed's point was that, given the party composition of Congress, the likelihood of a Libertarian Congressional Representative contributing to the forthcoming national policy is quite remote. I don't believe (and please (...) (23 years ago, 15-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
