On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:04:07 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 13:58:21 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:11:57 -0000, wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 20:19:48 -0500, Eisboch wrote:


Have you ever considered that bin Laden, as an individual, is *not*
important. What is important is the world-wide, religiously based
uprising against anything or anybody not believing in fundamental
Islam.
Bin Laden may be a vocal centerpiece and symbol, but he by himself is
not that important.

If you are saying the jihad will go on without bin Laden, I wouldn't
disagree, but that doesn't make bin Laden unimportant. He's more than a
symbol. He's the man behind the murder of 3,000 Americans, and the fact
that he is still breathing free air says something quite profound about
us, doesn't it?

Yeah, it says we decided not to invade Pakistan.


What's that supposed to mean? That we're honorable for not invading
Pakistan? Uh oh.


Honor was not mentioned in the discussion.

Why do you feel it necessary to change the subject? Do you find
name-calling and derogatory personal attacks 'honorable'?

Don't 'pansy out' on me now.
--
John H

I'm not changing the subject. You have a problem with minor detours that
most competent adults find perfectly normal in conversations.


Your 'minor detours' always seem to occur when you've lost another one.
--
John H