At 12:31 PM 3/20/2004 +0100 John Doe wrote:
>I am stunned. Over 200,000 *civilians* were killed in that conflict, and you
>still consider that "little to no evidence" of genocide? How many civilians
>would have to been killed before you call it genocide?
My operating definition of genocide is:
From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Terrorists Win in Spain
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 20:48:17 -0500
At 04:20 PM 3/18/2004 +0100 John Doe wrote:
>So,
- Original Message -
From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 7:48 PM
Subject: Re: Terrorists Win in Spain
> At 04:20 PM 3/18/2004 +0100 John Doe wrote:
> >So, Joh
At 04:20 PM 3/18/2004 +0100 John Doe wrote:
>So, John, >200k civilian deaths is "little to no evidence" for you? Then how
>many civilians should have been killed before you accept that ethnic
>cleansing happened? Couple of millions?
Just for the record, I said that there was "little to no eviden
From: "Robert Seeberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Terrorists Win in Spain
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:48:13 -0600
- Original Message -
From: &
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Terrorists Win in Spain
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 15:23:06 -0800
>
> You don't have to apologize Doug. It's no biggie. But, in
> Canada disagreeing
> with the Bus
> From: Mike Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > Let's say, Kerry wins the US
> > Presidential elections. He is going to dramatically alter the
> > US response to terrorism. Would that too count as a win for Al-Qaeda?
>
> They'll think it is.
Likewise a victory for ShrubFuhrer will be a victory for
- Original Message -
From: "Alberto Monteiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 8:34 AM
Subject: Mexico [was: Terrorists Win in Spain]
> JDG wrote:
> >
> > (As an aside, I don
Travis Edmunds wrote:
>
> >From: Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Subject: Re: Terrorists Win in Spain
> >Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 23:42:08 -
Alberto Monteiro wrote:
>
> JDG wrote:
> >
> > (As an aside, I don't think that *anyone* would call Mexico one of our
> > strongest "allies". Indeed, Mexico recently withdrew from their formal
> > military alliance with us (this alliance also includes Haiti, St. Kitts and
> > Nevis, and Venezue
- Original Message -
From: "Travis Edmunds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 11:26 AM
Subject: Re: Terrorists Win in Spain
>
> >From: Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: Killer Bs Disc
>
> You don't have to apologize Doug. It's no biggie. But, in
> Canada disagreeing
> with the Bush admin, there was certainly a backwash against
> us down south.
> And I would be very interested in ANY American opinions on this.
I thought we made it VERY clear in the South Park Movie!?!?!!!
From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Terrorists Win in Spain
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 08:06:06 -0500
Doug,
You mention that while a majority of the worl
From: Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Terrorists Win in Spain
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 23:42:08 -0800
Travis wrote:
Being a proud Canadian, I take offense to that
From: "Horn, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Terrorists Win in Spain
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 18:25:56 -0600
Isn't that the entire point of terrorism
JDG wrote:
>
> (As an aside, I don't think that *anyone* would call Mexico one of our
> strongest "allies". Indeed, Mexico recently withdrew from their formal
> military alliance with us (this alliance also includes Haiti, St. Kitts and
> Nevis, and Venezuela, for what it was worth.) Mexico
Doug,
You mention that while a majority of the worlds democracies supported the
war in Iraq, many of their peoples did not. Yet, is this not an argument
in my favor about the strength of our coalition? With the mild
exception of Switzerland, every modern democracy in the world sets policy
th
Julia wrote:
What the government of S.A. does and what its people would like it to do
are not necessarily the same thing.
This could be said of many governments.
That's true, but if you took the S.A. governments POV the houseguest
analogy wouldn't even apply.
--
Doug
__
Travis wrote:
Being a proud Canadian, I take offense to that Doug. We are STILL (not
WAS) one of your staunchest allies. Nothing has changed in that respect.
And I challenge you to prove me wrong.
As a side note, I would be interested in hearing some American thoughts
on the Canada-USA relati
Doug Pensinger wrote:
>
> John wrote:
>
> > Do you have any evidence that the presence of US troops in Iraq is
> > proving a stronger recruiting tool for Al Qaeda than the presence of US
> > troops in the Muslim Holy Land in Saudi Arabia?
>
> It's obvious to me John. We were in S.A. at their in
At 06:34 PM 3/16/2004 + Alberto Monteiro wrote:
>And it's also ironic that in the USA you made a lot of jokes with
>frenchpeople, and those that chickened were the so-called macho
>spanish :-)
I think you're right, Alberto the French clearly must have felt that
they were being outdone, be
> From: Travis Edmunds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> whatsoever. Which is not true. As you might know, the bombings
themselves
> may have started a dangerous new trend in terrorism. Namely,
influencing
> the politics of whole countries. And the potential ramifications
of that
> are grim indeed. Not
Travis Edmunds wrote:
>
> It is sad really that Spain has bent under pressure. Like the subject line
> says: "Terrorists WIN..." And that's the team I was hoping would lose.
>
And it's also ironic that in the USA you made a lot of jokes with
frenchpeople, and those that chickened were the so-calle
From: Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Terrorists Win in Spain
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 22:34:32 -0800
John wrote:
It is worth noting the a majority of the worl
From: "ritu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Killer Bs Discussion'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Terrorists Win in Spain
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:32:06 +0530
Travis Edmunds wrote:
> It is sad
At 10:31 AM 16/03/04 +0530, you wrote:
Mike Lee wrote:
> > Let's say, Kerry wins the US
> > Presidential elections. He is going to dramatically alter the
> > US response to terrorism. Would that too count as a win for
> Al-Qaeda?
>
> They'll think it is.
They as in AQ?
I am not so sure of that. I
John wrote:
It is worth noting the a majority of the world's industrialized
democracies supported us in Iraq.
It's also worthy of noting that most of the _people_ in those nations did
not support us in Iraq, including the people of Spain. It's also worthy
of noting that some of the countries w
Travis Edmunds wrote:
> It is sad really that Spain has bent under pressure. Like the
> subject line
> says: "Terrorists WIN..."
Juan Cole's latest entry rebuts this charge rather comprehensively:
http://www.juancole.com/2004_03_01_juancole_archive.html#107942407001890
750
Professor Cole als
Mike Lee wrote:
> > Let's say, Kerry wins the US
> > Presidential elections. He is going to dramatically alter the
> > US response to terrorism. Would that too count as a win for
> Al-Qaeda?
>
> They'll think it is.
They as in AQ?
I am not so sure of that. I know they'll say it, often and l
> Let's say, Kerry wins the US
> Presidential elections. He is going to dramatically alter the
> US response to terrorism. Would that too count as a win for Al-Qaeda?
They'll think it is.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
From: Alberto Monteiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Terrorists Win in Spain
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 01:04:05 +
JDG wrote:
>
> Incredible, Al Qaeda attacks Spain ju
John D. Giorgis wrote:
> >> But does he mean mostly just the ETA, or does he mean all
> terrorism?
> >
> >I have no idea and wouldn't be able to hazard a guess until
> he has been
> >in office for some time.
>
> I have seen reports this morning that the Socialists are
> already vowing to
> "
Russell Chapman wrote:
> ritu wrote:
> > So the Spaniards voted for the socialist party. How exactly
> does that
> > translate into a victory for terrorists? Zapatero has said that the
> > struggle against terrorism would remain a top priority for Spain.
>
> Only a couple of days before the att
At 06:18 PM 3/15/2004 +0530 ritu wrote:
>> But does he mean mostly just the ETA, or does he mean all terrorism?
>
>I have no idea and wouldn't be able to hazard a guess until he has been
>in office for some time.
I have seen reports this morning that the Socialists are already vowing to
"bring th
--- ritu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So the Spaniards voted for the socialist party. How
> exactly does that
> translate into a victory for terrorists? Zapatero
> has said that the
> struggle against terrorism would remain a top
> priority for Spain.
>
> Ritu
Well, the attacks seem pretty clear
ritu wrote:
So the Spaniards voted for the socialist party. How exactly does that
translate into a victory for terrorists? Zapatero has said that the
struggle against terrorism would remain a top priority for Spain.
Only a couple of days before the attack the popular party (or however
you say that
Erik Reuter asked:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 01:43:05PM +0530, ritu wrote:
>
> > translate into a victory for terrorists? Zapatero has said that the
> > struggle against terrorism would remain a top priority for Spain.
>
> But does he mean mostly just the ETA, or does he mean all terrorism?
I
At 10:45 PM 3/14/2004 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote:
>I wouldn't place all the blame (for the election results) on the
>terrorists - or is my recollection that there was little popular support
>for the Spanish government's backing of the Iraq [war] incorrect?
Yes nevertheless, the ruling Party
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 01:43:05PM +0530, ritu wrote:
> translate into a victory for terrorists? Zapatero has said that the
> struggle against terrorism would remain a top priority for Spain.
But does he mean mostly just the ETA, or does he mean all terrorism?
--
Erik Reuter http://www.erikr
John D. Giorgis wrote:
> Incredible, Al Qaeda attacks Spain just three days before the
> election, and
> suddenly the voters plump for the opposition
>
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/03/14/spain.blasts.election/index.h
tml
So the Spaniards voted for the socialist party. How exactly
John wrote:
Incredible, Al Qaeda attacks Spain just three days before the election,
and suddenly the voters plump for the opposition
I wouldn't place all the blame (for the election results) on the
terrorists - or is my recollection that there was little popular support
for the Spanish gov
JDG wrote:
>
> Incredible, Al Qaeda attacks Spain just three days before the election, and
> suddenly the voters plump for the opposition
>
It's an expected result. People around the world aren't too worried to help
the USA fight terrorism, if this means that people will die.
Alberto Monteiro
Incredible, Al Qaeda attacks Spain just three days before the election, and
suddenly the voters plump for the opposition
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/03/14/spain.blasts.election/index.html
A very sad day in the War on Terror.
In other news, Iran has kicked IAEA inspectors out of the
43 matches
Mail list logo
