On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 15:34:49 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 13:14:24 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 02:28:44 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
.. .

Bull hockey! These terrorists are not starving, poverty ridden,
ignorant,
desperate, etc. etc. That is garbage. Quit trying to make terrorism
sound
as
though it's our fault. What tripe.

John H

John, sit down. What I'm about to say may shock you to the point where
you
will need medical attention. Ready?

I agree with you. But (and there's always a but), I agree with a tiny
part
of what you said: "...as though it's our fault...". I agree that it's
not
our fault. But, in fact, the terrorists *are* disenfranchised, just
like
the
groups of wannabe gangstas you see on street corners in OUR inner
cities.
However, the disenfranchised will always aim their wrath at the most
obvious
symbol of affluence, which, in this case, is US.

If you'd occasionally listen to grown-up news sources, you'd know that
real
people in the Middle East acknowledge that their leaders have failed
miserably when it comes to making a better world for future
generations.
As
you know, various social movements in America which began 100 years
ago
have
still not taken hold completely. Welcome to the real world. While we
wait
for the Middle East to deal with its problems, we will be the target
of
anger.


Doug, is it possible that you could make a post without a personal
attack?
Do
you think personal attacks, a la Harry, lend credibility or stature to
your
posts?

Perhaps we are in complete agreement. How do you define
'disenfranchised'
as you
are using it above?

I am glad to see someone post something that does not lay terrorism at
the
feet
of Bush or the United States. Finally.

John H

I assume that you were personally insulted by my comment about "grown-up
news sources". If so, that's not my problem - it's yours. I stated a
fact,
John. The sources I suggest are often those without pictures, sometimes
articles in magazines you have to go out of your way to find. Oh well.

Disenfranchised - one definition: People who are faced with either
endless
unemployment, or an employment outlook which offers nothing but menial
labor
and no upward path for various reasons. Some of the reasons may be beyond
the person's control.


It's not within your power, Doug, to make me feel insulted. Your personal
attacks simply demean your message. They reflect on you, not on the person
you
are attacking.

John H

Look at it this way, John: It's blatantly obvious from your comments that
you think terrorists - ALL terrorists - are in the game because of hatred.
This is like saying that every single member of the Crips (the L.A. street
gang) has the exact same motivation. But, according to a number of reports
I've read & heard, including some which included interviews with our own
military personnel, terrorist groups are attracting people who have little
or no political awareness, or whose political aims are totally out of synch
with Al Qaeda's. They just want to blow stuff up. No different than aimless
youth right here in this country.


"All terrorists" were your words, not mine. I should have been more specific. I
wasn't referring to the kids in the game for the excitement, I was referring to
the cadre, those providing the funds, equipment, and incentives. Those are not
poor, destitute, disenfranchised individuals who, with a little money and
cooperation from the United States, would become nice guys again.

Also, their motivations cannot be blamed on Bush, his administration, or the
"selfishness" of this country, as some would imply. The "current round" of
terrorism, as one of your compatriots referred to it, is a continuation of
activities that have been ongoing.

Golly, you made a post without a personal attack. Good job. I knew you could do
it.

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!