 | | Re: jumping to conclusions
|
|
(...) There are two belligerents in this conflict – you fail to acknowledge that. (...) Shocking is it not? Perhaps we should all just get our news from the Israeli government and its apologists? (...) independent ; “not influenced or controlled in (...) (22 years ago, 27-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Peace in the Mid-East?
|
|
(...) This is a very thinly qualified attack against myself, and obviously more pointedly against Scott. And I DO take offense that you equate any questioning of your unbelievably myopic viewpoints as being the equivalent of siding with terrorists (...) (22 years ago, 29-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Peace in the Mid-East?
|
|
(...) Either side, or just one? betrays a leaning for one side or the (...) That's news to me. The US media isn't "pro-Israel", that's for sure. (...) 1. Scott (and you, I'd imagine) sympathize with the Palestinians. 2. The Palestinians are (...) (22 years ago, 29-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Peace in the Mid-East?
|
|
(...) I am sure Scott can speak for himself, but I can't see why questioning the political motives of either side betrays a leaning for one side or the other. Further, I imagine that Scott is working against the perception that news information in (...) (22 years ago, 29-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Peace in the Mid-East?
|
|
(...) Is that your "informed" impartial opinion? It doesn't bother me that Liberals have certain ideas and opinions-- that's their right. It's when they try and pass them off as impartial and unbiased that sends me. You claim to not have taken sides (...) (22 years ago, 29-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
