Subject:
|
Re: A question of remembrance...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 5 May 2001 03:22:00 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
894 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> I appreciate your concern for my morals and my tax dollars. However... I
> want to stay narrow and not specific to this issue.
> What is a terrorist?
> Divorce it from the context. I gave a definition already but admit that it
> may need modification which is why I am asking you.
> Is it appropriate to initiate the use of force as a means to achieve
> political objectives?
> Divorce it from the context. My answer is never. (this is the standard
> libertarian stance)
Simple question: Why do you take the side of the oppressor? Divorce that
from the context too.
Dan
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| (...) Three part answer: - I'm not taking sides when I say one side is worse than the other... we are talking shades of black, after all, not black vs. white. - Oppressor is such a loaded word, really. You haven't demonstrated that either side in (...) (23 years ago, 5-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: A question of remembrance...
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Daniel Jassim writes: <snip> I appreciate your concern for my morals and my tax dollars. However... I want to stay narrow and not specific to this issue. What is a terrorist? Divorce it from the context. I gave a (...) (23 years ago, 4-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
197 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
