On 11-Nov-2004, Dan Valleskey valleskey at comcast dot net wrote:

I think I will have to stay home for the next four years.

Better you should act. Don't let the religious right corrupt
your long-defended Constitution. Never allow the government to
be a corrupt user of its power - at home or internationally.

The use of strawman enemies by politicians and rulers is well
documented. Nothing like an enemy conspiracy to unite the
stupid lemmings around those leaders. The US governments and
media have been portraying Arabs and Islamists in bad light for
decades. They've now replaced the communists as the rallying
cry. Not justified.

Mike

On 10-Nov-2004, "Michael Daly" wrote:

...did in the Baltics?

Oops - make that the Balkans.

Sorry - typing to fast.

Mike

On 11-Nov-2004, ospam (Larry Cable) wrote:

I am actually stating that there is a civil war happening in Islam [...]
Just because you don't want to recognize it doesn't make it any less
true.

Not much gunfire for a civil war. It is certainly true that there is a lot
of anti-western propaganda in those countries. However, that doesn't mean
it's a war and it doesn't justify the Yanks jumping in with guns blazing.

If you want to see a lot of propaganda, follow the US media.

What he really was is a threat to the Gulf Oil Supplies. Last
time I looked the world still ran on oil.

No more so than the US. Is that what this is all about- oil? That's what
a lot of folks have been claiming. Not me - but oil is part of it.

But Saddam continued to violate the Cease Fire Agreement, so why should
we not punish him for those violations?

Bush and his cronies said nothing about this before invading. Remember
my comments about honesty? You can't justify an illegal action after the
fact and expect anyone to take you seriously. You have to deal with
the facts of what was said and done in the first place.

BTW - the accepted way to deal with Saddam was through the UN... something
the US can't seem to deal with. This is part of what really frustrates
the rest of the world - the US always wants to have everything done their
way - no International Court of Justice, no Kyoto Accord, no acceptance of
NAFTA and WTO rulings against the US etc. If you want to live in your own
little world, then erect a big fence and stay inside. If not, you have to
learn to deal with others.

Oh come on now, how stupidly far back are you going to go back.

It isn't me, Larry - it's the Arab community in the Middle East. _They_ go that
far back, whether you like it or not. _You_ have to deal with that. Ignoring
it will not solve any problem. Acknowledging that will allow you to grasp the
magnitude of the problem.

BTW, I don't believe that the US participated in any of the Crusades.

Are you trying to claim that no US citizens have European roots?

OK. The Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor,
does that justify me talking some stupid 12 year old into blowing himself up in
local toyota dealship?

Some folks have longer memories than others. It did take your country a long
time to deal with the interned Japanese-Americans. Both Americans and Japanese
are rich - money heals all wounds. Muslims counrties are filled with poor
people. Go figure.

Kurds were
slaughtered with American-bought technology

Bull****, back this up with some hard facts.

Go look up where Saddam got his helicopters for one.

Mike

I
Wait, isn't that just in the Netherlands? Did a train blow up in Spain? Aren't
the French clamping down of Islamic Schools, which I believe your country is
going to do also? Haven't there been several terrorist plans broken up by
British Intellegence services?
Are all these actions really unneeded or do most Europeans feel that immigrants
from the Islamic world pose a threat to Western European Civilization?

The French are trying to keep church and state apart and so want no
religious symbols in Schools which are state run. The USA is having
difficulty keeping church and state apart despite its constitution I
would argue

SYOTR
Larry C.

--
Dave Manby
Details of the Coruh river and my book "Many Rivers To Run" at
http://www.dmanby.demon.co.uk

"riverman" wrote in message ...
I mean it. Four more years of President Bush could mean a lot of our
wilderness gets opened up to development and timber harvesting. I haven't
been this worried for the wildlands since James Watt.

--riverman

I have read, and reread, and posted follow ups along this thread. I
have found it stimulating and enlightening to listen to all your
input. But I have come up with a question, which I am not finding an
answer.

You say, you mean this and that, but what do you mean by "wilderness"?
It sounds like you are located near the Grand Canyon, where the air is
becoming more polluted. Others speak of the Giant Redwoods, and
Denali. But it seems to me the wilderness is already gone according to
the Souix, and Shoshone, Utes, and Blackfeet, and all the other
hundreds of tribes, many which have dissapeared as well. Even what we
call wilderness would not be so, if seen through their eyes. It seems
to me, that wilderness is something we conceive of in our own mind,
depending on our own particular interest and bias.

Who is living in the White House, has little to do with the remaining
wilderness, and the preservation of our particular corner. My
relatives were ejected in the early 1900s, from Cade's Cove in what is
now Great Smokey Mtn Nat. Park. The great enviromentalist President T.
Roosevelt decided to set aside this area of wilderness, for everyone
to enjoy. Now for my relatives this really ruined the wilderness
experience, and for the mass of humanity that decends on the loop road
during the peak tourist season, I can't see that this is much of a
wilderness experience either. Yet, there are mountains and trees,
flowering dales, and everyone seems to enjoy the vista.

Is the wilderness only to do with the big places, with big mtns, and
big trees, and big canyons. Could it be that we who are content to
paddle, should not learn to appreciate the wilderness in small
places,and be willing to share this with others. Instead of getting
involved in the blame game, and trying to hang our lack of ability to
observe the wilderness all around us on the current President, which
really just detracts from the solitude of our hidden places with all
the shouting!

The wilderness is gone, since even before the Mayflower landed. With
the first man setting foot in the wild place, we started changing it,
even if it was a mocassin clad foot on the Bering Strait. It is just a
matter of degree, and how fast it is changing. For the buffalo it
changed real fast. They were unable to adapt, we must adapt, or go the
way of the buffalo. Being a romantic about the wild places sounds
great, but will not change history. Having grown up in the 60's, and
played hippie for awhile, I love the Liberals with all their romantic
idealism. However that era is also gone. We have to learn to adapt,
and compromise, even on the enviroment, and we all will survive.

Is this dribble? Yes, but you tell me about what you mean by
"wilderness", and if we all start talking about that, then we will be
talking about what we really want to be talking about and changing.
Then the politicians will listen. That's what politicians do, is
listen (take Polls), and talk (I think we know about that part),
because they like to be popular (majority vote). Is any of this wrong,
no, it's just the way it is, and that is reality! Otherwise there is
just all this squealing in the wind, that they all tune out and turn
off, which is not what any of us want for our living place!


Thanks for bringing up the subject, no offense meant to any one.
Let's just make sure the song we are singing is what we really want to
be singing, and learn to sing in harmony. None of us are irrelevant,
nore should we be irreverent, and we should always respect the
President. Whomever he is, because he represents us all whether we
like it or not. If we fail on any of these, we will only hurt those,
and that which we love the most, the place we live!

Thanks, Tinkerntom, aka KnesisKnosis, Life, Live it!