Subject:
|
Re: Some other perspectives on the tragedy
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 Sep 2001 18:56:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
346 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:
> In lugnet.general, Dave Johann writes:
>
> OK. I just can't let this go. Its absolutely absurd to say things like this!
Nope. Just saying what I feel right now. Absurd is hijacking jets with the
intent to run them into office buildings. My response is certainly not absurd in
light of this act.
>
> > I don't fully agree. No more terrorists=no more terrorist acts.
>
> This sounds pretty similar to "No jews=supreme Aryan state" to me.
Not at all. It's more like 'no misguided Aryans=no Aryan nation'. Being Jewish
is not like being a terrorist and I am offended that you'd even make such an
inference. I have many Jewish friends that are dear to me. I have no such
terrorist friends.
>
> > Somehow, these
> > fanatics need to understand 'Don't mess with us, or we'll take you down
> > permanently'.
>
> Who are you threatening to "take down"? Some random muslim perhaps? Or maybe
> the whole lot? Do you include my muslim friends here in Australia, or that
> "piece of s**t" Palesinian guy selling papers on the streets of NYC?
> '
Of course not. I'm normally a very cantered happy guy. I have Muslim friends who
are just as upset about these acts as I am. I have no beef with the Muslim
community at large. I have a BIG beef with the terrorist fanatical Muslims that
perpetrated this diabolical act. This is where my rage is directed.
> > Right now, we're a laughing stock in Iraq because Saddam is still
> > doing as he pleases.
>
> Is GWB not doing as he pleases? And I doubt the ordinary Iraqis would be
> laughing while scrounging for food.
If GWB were doing what he pleased, Bin Laden wouldn't be breathing right now.
Most times, those that scrounge for food don't do much laughing. Again, these
were not the people I was referring to.
> > Is this fair or right? Nope. Think about the last time he
> > stepped out of line.
>
> Yeah, I remember, didn't some huge country with heaps of money get scared
> because they thought they may have to pay a bit more for their oil?
Nope. We stepped in becasue Saddam decided Kuwait couldn't be trusted with all
that oil, so he decided to take it off their hands. They asked for assistance,
and we responded. In the end, he torched the oil wells and caused an ecological
disaster. We put out the oil fires. I take it you'd rather we just let the
madman continue beating up on neighboring countries? Should the US take a cue
from him and absorb Canada just because we feel French is a silly language? I
think not.
> > Some amount of violence is needed to keep the fanatics of
> > the world in check.
>
> No violence is ever "needed", and I'm pretty sure no-one will ever change my
> mind on that one.
So we just let the killers kill and cross our fingers that they won't do it
again? Nice dream.
> ROSCO
-Dave
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Some other perspectives on the tragedy
|
| (...) OK. I just can't let this go. Its absolutely absurd to say things like this! (...) This sounds pretty similar to "No jews=supreme Aryan state" to me. (...) Who are you threatening to "take down"? Some random muslim perhaps? Or maybe the whole (...) (23 years ago, 13-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
66 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
