Re: OT: We got it up!

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 08:59:23 -0700, John Larkin wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 15:39:38 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
> <eatmyshorts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>>The point was, "terrorism" is the last line of defense of a people
>>who are being invaded by the inexorable US war machine.
>
> That's absurd. The first attempt to bring down the WTC was in 1992.

Kinda about the time Israel was occupying the Sinai Peninsula by
force?

> Islamic terrorists have been bringing down planes and ships for
> decades. These guys aren't acting on the behalf of, or for the welfare
> of, any people but themselves. They want to be the Taliban, to rule
> absolutely without anyone's vote or consent, to keep their women down
> and send their young men off to die, leaving that many more young
> women for themselves.

They want us to get off their back so that they can run their
sovereign state in tha manner of their own choosing, just like
we did. We threw off the chains of the King, and we jumped in
to defend Europe from Hitler - can't you see, from their Point
of View, that we're indistinguishable from Hitler, on our jihad
of conquest?

When somebody sends a hundred billion dollars' worth of weapons
of mass destruction, and a hundred and fifteen thousand soldiers,
into your back yard, isn't that an invasion?

Who _cares_ what they want? They are not us. In the US, there are
laws against discrimination. (or, there used to be - nowadays, it
seems, you can discriminate against people who look like ay-rabs.)
But we made a decision a couple hundred years ago, and wrote it
into the constitution - we are not a theocracy. If somebody else
wants to be a theocracy, isn't that their right? Didn't women,
in their own right, get the right to vote? Didn't the slaves get
emancipated by their own wherewithal, and the help of one
sane president? If the women of the muslimic countries want to
throw off the chains of their oppressors, maybe they could follow
the example of Lady Mo - seduce the soldiers, and when they fall
asleep, cut their throat.

What sickness is it that impels you to meddle in other peoples'
internal affaris?

>>Those people are fighting for their _lives_. The US is murdering
>>people. The US is now king planetary bully.
>
> Shiites are killing Sunni women and children in food markets to repel
> the US bully? Absurd.

Well, aren't those people grown-ups? Are we big uncle sugardaddy to
the whole fucking _WORLD?_ We're not supposed to be, you know. That's
the part about Freedom that so horrifies the neonazis - "Freedom is
Good, as long as you're free in _MY_ style." They think that "Freedom"
means "Free to be just like us, if you've got the proper white skin
and embrace _our_ values, and to hell with Allah".

>>Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity.
>
> My father and uncles fought for the peace you enjoy. Neither Germany,
> Japan, Austria, nor Italy have attacked anyone since.

Maybe that's because Germany, Japan, Austria, and Italy have somehow,
along the line, acquired "SANITY"?

Freedom means, "I might disagree with you, but you have a right to
be as foolish as you choose to be, and it's not my place to retrain
you, unless you ask me to." My dear ol' Dad, rest his soul, used to
quip, "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the
death your right to remain uninformed."

Personally, I don't totally embrace that philosophy - I will continue
to attempt to inform you of your own stupidity. And warmongering is
just plain bad.

Who cares who started it? Let's be the bigger man and end it! It's
in our power, you know. "OK, sorry about invading you and murdering
your women and children - if we stop invading you and murdering your
citizens, will you stop fighting back?"

What do we have to lose, but our immortal souls?

Thanks,
Rich

.