On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, James A. Donald wrote: > On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 11:18:51 -0500, message ID > [EMAIL PROTECTED] You said: > : : "I do care that the US fails to adhere to > : : international law." > implying that US treatment of Saddam violated international > law. > > You also said; > : : "knocking over a crippled tyrant." > implying oh dear, that terrible big bully USA is kicking a poor > little cripple in his poor little wheelchair, think of the poor > little Saddam falling out of his wheelchair. > > These images are not appropriate to someone who claims to > believe what you just claimed to believe, and you were not > saying what you claimed you were saying. > > As the thread title says, I am anti war, you support Saddam.
James, you are simply full of shit. I don't believe you're incapable of seeing the difference between calling Saddam a crippled tyrant and "support[ing] Saddam". I do believe you're willfully attempting to twist other people's words, and not even doing a good job of it. "A equals A" reasoning is for high school. If you look at the words I typed, instead of your fantasy-land model of reality, you might notice that you're making a fool of yourself. > I did not suggest killing all the ragheads, and in other forums > I have regularly argued against claims about Islam or arabs > that would rationalize and justify such an action. I have no idea what you've said in other forums. I merely pointed out what you have said here. > There is ample evidence that the 'anti war' crowd is largely > pro Saddam, evidence in this mailing list, considerably > stronger evidence in the newsgroups, evidence in the streets, > and in the editorials of the BBC and the telegraph, and > evidence in your own utterances. Let us discuss that. There is ample evidence that you fail to argue about what people have _actually said_, impute motive and behaviour where there is none, and point to a grand Ellsworth Toohey-ish conspiracy that needs to be fought, improbably enough, by a nation-state. > Dean at least has a legitimate excuse to be unhappy about the > capture of Saddam, since it queers his chances in the election, > but there are an awful lot of other people distressed about the > capture and coming execution of Saddam. What is your excuse? As I said, you're being boring. I suppose someone had to step up to the task of being the resident Choate. I have some cooking to do. Happy holidays, all! -j -- Jamie Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] A priest, a bear, and a programmer walked into a bar. And the bartender said, "What is this, a joke?"
