Jan Matthieu wrote: > > > To make one basic thing clear: This is NOT about "the Jews" [=Jan's term] > > -- as little as it is about "the Muslims". > > To make it even clearer, because you are not only not reading what is > written, but clearly trying to put what I write in a false light: my term > was 'Jews' not 'the' Jews
Actually, as everyone can check in the archive, you DID write "the Jews": On Friday, 16 Aug 2002 12:59:44 +0200, Jan Matthieu wrote: >>> The ongoing attempt >>> to put the 9/11 attacks in the shoes of the Jews is such a fairy tale, >>> until verified and properly founded. ^^^^^^^^ It's also clear that you used this formulation in order to smear those who question the official story as anti-Semites. But since you wrote that, you should at least stand by it, instead of denying your own words. It is indeed difficult to argue with such dishonest persons. > there is not the slightest proof US or Israeli were involved; There are lots of evidence, and I provided various links. You still didn't provide from your "tons of evidence". All you have is a dogma. > > The cannon fodder is pretty irrelevant, as are the pretexts that got them > > into the mission. > > That's about the biggest nonsense I have read about the 9/11 attacks. So the > perpetrators are irrelevant... and their motives also... tell that to any > court in the world, a new approach to criminal law. As you said before, the perpetrators are dead. So one must prosecute the string-pullers, which BTW is what the US claims to do by bombing Afghanistan. The problem with the US approach is that they do it _without_ good evidence -- and THAT is indeed "a new approach to criminal law"; one that Jan Matthieu supports, unfortunately. > The stories about pullers of strings are cheap > conspiracy theories which are never substantiated. Tell that to those who bombed innocent civilians under the pretext of prosecuting the string-pullers. > On the contrary, if Belgium would do an intervention with the best of > intentions I am sure the people at whatreallyhappened would find a way to > prove we did it to our own advantage. It would be a good start if Belgium would compensate the decades of theft and exploitation in the Congo (or at least stop the ongoing exploitation). Nobody could validly complain about that. Chris
