-Caveat Lector- OK, it seems we're on the same page, pretty much, but not that that was what was realy important, I just wasn't sure where you were coming from ... I don't want to get into tariffs either, as that wasn't what this article was about.
Anyway, the advantage of being on [EMAIL PROTECTED] is that a discussion such as this could go on with more than five postings per day per person. The main group is there primarily to present articles and such as an exchange of information, and [EMAIL PROTECTED] is there to allow more of a discussion, as there is no limit. The reason there is a limit on the main group is to allow people who don't want all the crosstalk and such to get the jist of the information exchange, and the reason people post duplicates in both is to allow discussions to thread from those articles in yahoo. Sometimes people first post in the main group, however, and post in yahoo only when they've used up their five, which sort of misses the purpose. But generally the group is slowly getting the idea, at least it seems to me. Of course, it doesn't always follow that way, but pretty soon we're both at five here, and therefore our discussion will have to end for today on this list. If we had this discussion on yahoogroups, then it could go on indefinitely. Whether or not that's a "good thing" is left to the listers, but it isn't limited in posts. In any case, I think this thread has been tied up within the five post per member limit, but neither of us will be able to post much more here today. Think I've used up all of them, myself, or at least four ... lost count. - jt ----- Original Message ----- From: "Edward Britton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Joshua: > > > Hay, don't kill the messenger. I just passed it on. :-) > > > >No, not at all. Am always willing to discuss, but am also posting this to > >[EMAIL PROTECTED], as that is more suited to discussion, and there are no > >message limits (5 for the regular CTRL list on AOL) - there are subscription > >instructions on the bottom of this email if you are not already subscribed > >to both. > > > > I was a member for a brief time back when CTRL AOL was having trouble, but > I unsubbed when postings became largely redundant. I've never much > understood the five postings policy, but then I don't have to pay for the > bandwidth :-) > > > > > > Personally, and while agreeing with you at least in principle (in my > >saner > > > moments), I'm a bit surprised we don't see even more of this > >neo-tribalistic sabre > rattling. > > > >I think we're seeing more of it now than ever, or, in "ever" I mean really > >in the last 20 years or so. > > > > I think so too, but this time it's scary. This time, people "in high > places" are actually considering the unthinkable. > > > > > > As for averting any coming conflict between us WASPS and the "devilish > > > Islamic" world, my solution is relatively simple; stay the hell out of the > > > rest of the world's business unless we or ours are attacked. Then and > >only > > > then will we have any claim to "righteous indignation." (Yes, the > > > preceding statement ignores--temporarily--the potential for retaliation on > > > the basis of our past misdeeds.) > > > >Yep, that's my take. I know it's seen as isolationist, but, holy ... well, > >my goodness, at least it eliminates the potential for further misdeeds, and > >puts that squarely on the table when talking peace. Don't like the US? Don't > >come here. But then again that also makes trade negotiations difficult, > >especially if there are tariffs involved, and I'm not a true libertarian in > >that sense. > > > > Oh, I am :-) Tariffs only serve to limit a form of "dialogue" between > nations who could otherwise be on a minimally equitable footing. Be this > as it may, that's a can of worms beyond the scope of this thread. > > > > > It's complicated to be sure, but at least not selling arms to > >other nations (which goes along with the trade situation - we are the > >largest arms dealer in the world), and without supporting foreign wars in > >any sense, then we do have a leg upon which to stand. Right now all we have > >is a crutch, and that is splintering. > > > > Amen. If we do consider selling arms to other nations, there should be an > all-or-none policy. Either we sell to everybody or we sell to > nobody. Clearly, by selling weapons to Israel without selling the same > weapons at the same prices to, say, the Palestinians, we are sending a > message of political intent/bias: choosing sides, as it were. > > > > > > Nevertheless, and somewhat safely assuming that the hawkish mind will have > > > its way, the issue is not really about fighting a billion Muslims; it's > > > about eliminating a billion Muslims. There's a big, and ominous, > > > difference. I think you missed the suggestion embedded within the > >author's > > > title. > > > >Hmmm ... so the difference is more *convincing* a billion Muslims that > >they're wrong? > > > > Oh, no. Nothing as subtle or comparatively sedate as that. Hawks don't > really care if the enemy is forced "to recognize his error" or not. Hawks > want the enemy to go away--permanently. > > > > > Or maybe I'm missing what it is that you, as the messenger, > >are suggesting. > > > > I'm suggesting that there is growing sentiment among the more conservative > members of our society to develop our own version of the "final > solution." I don't think such would come to pass, mind you, unless there > were another attack of similar or greater consequence upon this > nation. The delicate balance between reason and outright insanity could > well be lost were this to occur. I would also not discount the possibility > that those with the power to do so just might consider "letting" such an > act occur in order to promote their agenda. (I have considered the > likelihood that this is what happened immediately prior to 9-11.) > > > > > > And don't take my own tone there as ominous - I am pretty > >sure that I know what the author is suggesting, but, then what do you, as > >messenger, suggest? > > > > Again, I suggest that (a growing number of) persons of such mind set would > find it perfectly acceptable to obliterate much or all of the "Muslim > world (apply whatever definition which seems appropriate)." I've heard > this prospect mulled over by more than a few persons in a position to > influence public opinion. > > > > > I know we don't always ask that of each other here, and > >not trying to put you on the spot. Or are you rather illustrating the > >author's suggestion as ominous? > > > > Yes. His sentiments, while definitely NOT my own (at least not now :-)), > reflect a growing body of opinion. > > > Edward ><+> > > If you have fifty problems and one of them is government, you have only one > problem. > http://www.global-connector.com/ > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/reality_pump/ > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
