[[email protected]]

I can't let this thrilling exchange die on the Google vine.

In the vanishing "Islamists..."thread II suggested that instead of
taking up the remote causes of remote people you concentrate on the
Latinos in the South- West of your country that you conquered and
settled.. You reprisal was that i should take up the cause of my local
Squamish band

I said
I'm not a fighter for anyone's "legitimate claims"- you are. I'm just
pointing to you a really big cause to fight for in your own home , not
miine or of the Israelis.. Who knows , the Squamish and the
Palestinians might be next in line once you set an example and settle
the fate of California , Texas and New Mexico with the new Mexican
President.

You answered:
There's that presumption again, and so soon after I told explicitly that
"pointing out flaws on one side isn't necessarily an endorsement of the
other." Perhaps in your line of work it's better to not listen to the
other side of the conversation, making you the Dr. House of audio and
world politics but without the miraculous track record.

I am relieved to hear (and so I am sure will be the government of
Israel) that deep, deep down you're merely pointing the faults of one
side without endorsing the other. I am sure that you will be able to
point me to where and when you pointed the faults of that other side
for balance. Otherwise you might appear to have a somewhat slanted
vision or would it be stunted expression?

Who is Dr. House and in what branch of human endeavour did he achieve a
"miraculous track record". And how exactly do you know what my track
record is. For all you know it may be just as miraculous as that of
your Dr. House.

When you're not too busy notify me of the start of your campaign to
free Arizona and New Mexico of Yankee opression.

Please don't stop this correspondence. I'm beginning to enjoy it.
Ludovic Mirabel




..

[MiNe 109]

In article .com,
" wrote:

I can't let this thrilling exchange die on the Google vine.

In the vanishing "Islamists..."thread II suggested that instead of
taking up the remote causes of remote people you concentrate on the
Latinos in the South- West of your country that you conquered and
settled.. You reprisal was that i should take up the cause of my local
Squamish band

I said
I'm not a fighter for anyone's "legitimate claims"- you are. I'm just
pointing to you a really big cause to fight for in your own home , not
miine or of the Israelis.. Who knows , the Squamish and the
Palestinians might be next in line once you set an example and settle
the fate of California , Texas and New Mexico with the new Mexican
President.

You answered:
There's that presumption again, and so soon after I told explicitly that
"pointing out flaws on one side isn't necessarily an endorsement of the
other." Perhaps in your line of work it's better to not listen to the
other side of the conversation, making you the Dr. House of audio and
world politics but without the miraculous track record.

I am relieved to hear (and so I am sure will be the government of
Israel) that deep, deep down you're merely pointing the faults of one
side without endorsing the other. I am sure that you will be able to
point me to where and when you pointed the faults of that other side
for balance. Otherwise you might appear to have a somewhat slanted
vision or would it be stunted expression?

Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket attacks as war
crimes.

Balance is a false value these days and can be a trap in a situation
like ours in which government propaganda leads to war.

Who is Dr. House and in what branch of human endeavour did he achieve a
"miraculous track record". And how exactly do you know what my track
record is. For all you know it may be just as miraculous as that of
your Dr. House.

Unlikely, as he has the advantage of being fictional. He's a
diagnostician who holds that face to face conversation with the patient
is unnecessary, instead relying on test results and medical histories
for information.

When you're not too busy notify me of the start of your campaign to
free Arizona and New Mexico of Yankee opression.

Please don't stop this correspondence. I'm beginning to enjoy it.

As you've enlightened me to the plighted of the oppressed aboriginals of
the northwest, I prefer to concentrate on the resurgence of the First
Nations.

Stephen

[ScottW]

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

I can't let this thrilling exchange die on the Google vine.

In the vanishing "Islamists..."thread II suggested that instead of
taking up the remote causes of remote people you concentrate on the
Latinos in the South- West of your country that you conquered and
settled.. You reprisal was that i should take up the cause of my local
Squamish band

I said
I'm not a fighter for anyone's "legitimate claims"- you are. I'm just
pointing to you a really big cause to fight for in your own home , not
miine or of the Israelis.. Who knows , the Squamish and the
Palestinians might be next in line once you set an example and settle
the fate of California , Texas and New Mexico with the new Mexican
President.

You answered:
There's that presumption again, and so soon after I told explicitly that
"pointing out flaws on one side isn't necessarily an endorsement of the
other." Perhaps in your line of work it's better to not listen to the
other side of the conversation, making you the Dr. House of audio and
world politics but without the miraculous track record.

I am relieved to hear (and so I am sure will be the government of
Israel) that deep, deep down you're merely pointing the faults of one
side without endorsing the other. I am sure that you will be able to
point me to where and when you pointed the faults of that other side
for balance. Otherwise you might appear to have a somewhat slanted
vision or would it be stunted expression?

Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket attacks as war
crimes.

I must have missed that one as well.


Balance is a false value these days and can be a trap in a situation
like ours in which government propaganda leads to war.

I agree.....so many want to sit on the sidelines simply assuring that
its
a fair fight with no commitment to the outcome.
Take a side, and stand and be counted.

ScottW

[MiNe 109]

In article .com,
"ScottW" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

I can't let this thrilling exchange die on the Google vine.

In the vanishing "Islamists..."thread II suggested that instead of
taking up the remote causes of remote people you concentrate on the
Latinos in the South- West of your country that you conquered and
settled.. You reprisal was that i should take up the cause of my local
Squamish band

I said
I'm not a fighter for anyone's "legitimate claims"- you are. I'm
just
pointing to you a really big cause to fight for in your own home ,
not
miine or of the Israelis.. Who knows , the Squamish and the
Palestinians might be next in line once you set an example and settle
the fate of California , Texas and New Mexico with the new Mexican
President.

You answered:
There's that presumption again, and so soon after I told explicitly
that
"pointing out flaws on one side isn't necessarily an endorsement of the
other." Perhaps in your line of work it's better to not listen to the
other side of the conversation, making you the Dr. House of audio and
world politics but without the miraculous track record.

I am relieved to hear (and so I am sure will be the government of
Israel) that deep, deep down you're merely pointing the faults of one
side without endorsing the other. I am sure that you will be able to
point me to where and when you pointed the faults of that other side
for balance. Otherwise you might appear to have a somewhat slanted
vision or would it be stunted expression?

Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket attacks as war
crimes.

I must have missed that one as well.

Oh, well. It was in reply to you.

Balance is a false value these days and can be a trap in a situation
like ours in which government propaganda leads to war.

I agree.....so many want to sit on the sidelines simply assuring that
its a fair fight with no commitment to the outcome.
Take a side, and stand and be counted.

Election day coming soon.

Stephen

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

ScottW wrote:
MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

I can't let this thrilling exchange die on the Google vine.

In the vanishing "Islamists..."thread II suggested that instead of
taking up the remote causes of remote people you concentrate on the
Latinos in the South- West of your country that you conquered and
settled.. You reprisal was that i should take up the cause of my local
Squamish band

I said
I'm not a fighter for anyone's "legitimate claims"- you are. I'm just
pointing to you a really big cause to fight for in your own home , not
miine or of the Israelis.. Who knows , the Squamish and the
Palestinians might be next in line once you set an example and settle
the fate of California , Texas and New Mexico with the new Mexican
President.

You answered:
There's that presumption again, and so soon after I told explicitly that
"pointing out flaws on one side isn't necessarily an endorsement of the
other." Perhaps in your line of work it's better to not listen to the
other side of the conversation, making you the Dr. House of audio and
world politics but without the miraculous track record.

I am relieved to hear (and so I am sure will be the government of
Israel) that deep, deep down you're merely pointing the faults of one
side without endorsing the other. I am sure that you will be able to
point me to where and when you pointed the faults of that other side
for balance. Otherwise you might appear to have a somewhat slanted
vision or would it be stunted expression?

Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket attacks as war
crimes.

I must have missed that one as well.


Balance is a false value these days and can be a trap in a situation
like ours in which government propaganda leads to war.

I agree.....so many want to sit on the sidelines simply assuring that
its
a fair fight with no commitment to the outcome.

I thought that I'd heard this somewhere else...

http://www.eagleforum.org/psr/2003/s...srsept03.shtml

republospeak: "Stand and be counted."

Where did this phrase come from? Hm.

Why, it's directly from the bible! (And toopid claims not to be
religious!)

http://www.padfield.com/1997/goodmen.html

Note the last paragraph: "Do not allow evil to triumph. Do not do sit
by and do nothing. Stand up and be counted, speak up against evil and
speak out against evil men and their sinful deeds."

They forgot the disclaimer: except when the evil is perpetrated by a
certain political party. Then speaking out is misdirected or
unpatriotic or traitorous or even worse. LOL!

Take a side, and stand and be counted.

Yes, dear.

[[email protected]]

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

I can't let this thrilling exchange die on the Google vine.

In the vanishing "Islamists..."thread II suggested that instead of
taking up the remote causes of remote people you concentrate on the
Latinos in the South- West of your country that you conquered and
settled.. You reprisal was that i should take up the cause of my local
Squamish band

I said
I'm not a fighter for anyone's "legitimate claims"- you are. I'm just
pointing to you a really big cause to fight for in your own home , not
miine or of the Israelis.. Who knows , the Squamish and the
Palestinians might be next in line once you set an example and settle
the fate of California , Texas and New Mexico with the new Mexican
President.

You answered:
There's that presumption again, and so soon after I told explicitly that
"pointing out flaws on one side isn't necessarily an endorsement of the
other." Perhaps in your line of work it's better to not listen to the
other side of the conversation, making you the Dr. House of audio and
world politics but without the miraculous track record.

I am relieved to hear (and so I am sure will be the government of
Israel) that deep, deep down you're merely pointing the faults of one
side without endorsing the other. I am sure that you will be able to
point me to where and when you pointed the faults of that other side
for balance. Otherwise you might appear to have a somewhat slanted
vision or would it be stunted expression?

Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket attacks as war
crimes.

Balance is a false value these days and can be a trap in a situation
like ours in which government propaganda leads to war.

Who is Dr. House and in what branch of human endeavour did he achieve a
"miraculous track record". And how exactly do you know what my track
record is. For all you know it may be just as miraculous as that of
your Dr. House.

Unlikely, as he has the advantage of being fictional. He's a
diagnostician who holds that face to face conversation with the patient
is unnecessary, instead relying on test results and medical histories
for information.

When you're not too busy notify me of the start of your campaign to
free Arizona and New Mexico of Yankee opression.

Please don't stop this correspondence. I'm beginning to enjoy it.

As you've enlightened me to the plighted of the oppressed aboriginals of
the northwest, I prefer to concentrate on the resurgence of the First
Nations.

Stephen

=========================================

MNe strikes out:

" Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket attacks as
war
crimes.

I missed it and so apparently did Hezbollah. Do quote it again. It will
sure make them quake in their sandals and stop.
Ludovic Mirabel

[MiNe 109]

In article .com,
" wrote:

=========================================

MNe strikes out:

" Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket attacks as
war crimes.

I missed it and so apparently did Hezbollah. Do quote it again. It will
sure make them quake in their sandals and stop.
Ludovic Mirabel

Well, no pleasing Dr. House of International Affairs.

Stephen

[[email protected]]

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MNe strikes out:

" Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket attacks as
war crimes.

I missed it and so apparently did Hezbollah. Do quote it again. It will
sure make them quake in their sandals and stop.
Ludovic Mirabel

Well, no pleasing Dr. House of International Affairs.
Stephen

======================================

You're right- watching you striving pathetically to be witty does not
raise spirits. .
Instead of making a spectacle of yourself shaking a clown's cap with
bells on it qive us that memorable admonition to Hezbollah you claim
you once made. Don't keep us on tenterhooks guessing: truth or
fiction?
Regards Ludovic M.
Ludovic Mirabel

[MiNe 109]

In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MNe strikes out:

" Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket attacks as
war crimes.

I missed it and so apparently did Hezbollah. Do quote it again. It will
sure make them quake in their sandals and stop.
Ludovic Mirabel

Well, no pleasing Dr. House of International Affairs.
Stephen

======================================

You're right- watching you striving pathetically to be witty does not
raise spirits.
Instead of making a spectacle of yourself shaking a clown's cap with
bells on it qive us that memorable admonition to Hezbollah you claim
you once made. Don't keep us on tenterhooks guessing: truth or
fiction?

If you're accusing me of lying, this conversation is over.

Stephen

[[email protected]]

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MNe strikes out:

" Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket attacks as
war crimes.

I missed it and so apparently did Hezbollah. Do quote it again. It will
sure make them quake in their sandals and stop.
Ludovic Mirabel

Well, no pleasing Dr. House of International Affairs.
Stephen

======================================

You're right- watching you striving pathetically to be witty does not
raise spirits.
Instead of making a spectacle of yourself shaking a clown's cap with
bells on it qive us that memorable admonition to Hezbollah you claim
you once made. Don't keep us on tenterhooks guessing: truth or
fiction?

If you're accusing me of lying, this conversation is over.

Stephen

Accuse--nothing. Just waiting to read your memorable admonition to
Hezbollah. (with reference to thread and date). The suspense is killing
me.
Ludovic M.

[MiNe 109]

In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MNe strikes out:

" Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket attacks as
war crimes.

I missed it and so apparently did Hezbollah. Do quote it again. It
will
sure make them quake in their sandals and stop.
Ludovic Mirabel

Well, no pleasing Dr. House of International Affairs.
Stephen

======================================

You're right- watching you striving pathetically to be witty does not
raise spirits.
Instead of making a spectacle of yourself shaking a clown's cap with
bells on it qive us that memorable admonition to Hezbollah you claim
you once made. Don't keep us on tenterhooks guessing: truth or
fiction?

If you're accusing me of lying, this conversation is over.

Stephen

Accuse--nothing. Just waiting to read your memorable admonition to
Hezbollah. (with reference to thread and date). The suspense is killing
me.

Google 'Hezbollah' and 'war crime' and me as author.

Stephen

[[email protected]]

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MNe strikes out:

" Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket attacks as
war crimes.

I missed it and so apparently did Hezbollah. Do quote it again. It
will
sure make them quake in their sandals and stop.
Ludovic Mirabel

Well, no pleasing Dr. House of International Affairs.
Stephen

======================================

You're right- watching you striving pathetically to be witty does not
raise spirits.
Instead of making a spectacle of yourself shaking a clown's cap with
bells on it qive us that memorable admonition to Hezbollah you claim
you once made. Don't keep us on tenterhooks guessing: truth or
fiction?

If you're accusing me of lying, this conversation is over.

Stephen

Accuse--nothing. Just waiting to read your memorable admonition to
Hezbollah. (with reference to thread and date). The suspense is killing
me.

Google 'Hezbollah' and 'war crime' and me as author.

Stephen

Found zero, zilch, wild goose chase.
Why instead of all this mystery and misery you don't requote yourself
with the name of the thread and date? Simple isn't it?
Ludovic Mirabel

[MiNe 109]

In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MNe strikes out:

" Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket attacks
as
war crimes.

I missed it and so apparently did Hezbollah. Do quote it again.
It
will
sure make them quake in their sandals and stop.
Ludovic Mirabel

Well, no pleasing Dr. House of International Affairs.
Stephen

======================================

You're right- watching you striving pathetically to be witty does not
raise spirits.
Instead of making a spectacle of yourself shaking a clown's cap with
bells on it qive us that memorable admonition to Hezbollah you claim
you once made. Don't keep us on tenterhooks guessing: truth or
fiction?

If you're accusing me of lying, this conversation is over.

Stephen

Accuse--nothing. Just waiting to read your memorable admonition to
Hezbollah. (with reference to thread and date). The suspense is killing
me.

Google 'Hezbollah' and 'war crime' and me as author.

Found zero, zilch, wild goose chase.
Why instead of all this mystery and misery you don't requote yourself
with the name of the thread and date? Simple isn't it?

That's odd. Try: hezbollah war crime group:rec.audio.opinion

No wild goose chase, I just did so and found the post.

Stephen

[ScottW]

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MNe strikes out:

" Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket attacks
as
war crimes.

I missed it and so apparently did Hezbollah. Do quote it again.
It
will
sure make them quake in their sandals and stop.
Ludovic Mirabel

Well, no pleasing Dr. House of International Affairs.
Stephen

======================================

You're right- watching you striving pathetically to be witty does not
raise spirits.
Instead of making a spectacle of yourself shaking a clown's cap with
bells on it qive us that memorable admonition to Hezbollah you claim
you once made. Don't keep us on tenterhooks guessing: truth or
fiction?

If you're accusing me of lying, this conversation is over.

Stephen

Accuse--nothing. Just waiting to read your memorable admonition to
Hezbollah. (with reference to thread and date). The suspense is killing
me.

Google 'Hezbollah' and 'war crime' and me as author.

Found zero, zilch, wild goose chase.
Why instead of all this mystery and misery you don't requote yourself
with the name of the thread and date? Simple isn't it?

That's odd. Try: hezbollah war crime group:rec.audio.opinion

No wild goose chase, I just did so and found the post.

He'd prefer to feel empowered by seeing if he can make you jump
through a hoop.
I jumped..feel good?

Anyway, message id:


"Yes, I'm against Hezbollah war crimes. Those rockets are so inaccurate
that to use them in any populated area constitutes targeting civilians.

Too bad Israel forgot its previous experience in invading Lebanon and
replicated the mistake.

American-made cluster bombs are bad, too."

So his condemnation includes blaming Israel for the conflict
and a zinger at the US for good measure.
I should have expected no less.

ScottW

[[email protected]]

ScottW wrote:
"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MNe strikes out:

" Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket attacks
as
war crimes.

I missed it and so apparently did Hezbollah. Do quote it again.
It
will
sure make them quake in their sandals and stop.
Ludovic Mirabel

Well, no pleasing Dr. House of International Affairs.
Stephen

======================================

You're right- watching you striving pathetically to be witty does not
raise spirits.
Instead of making a spectacle of yourself shaking a clown's cap with
bells on it qive us that memorable admonition to Hezbollah you claim
you once made. Don't keep us on tenterhooks guessing: truth or
fiction?

If you're accusing me of lying, this conversation is over.

Stephen

Accuse--nothing. Just waiting to read your memorable admonition to
Hezbollah. (with reference to thread and date). The suspense is killing
me.

Google 'Hezbollah' and 'war crime' and me as author.

Found zero, zilch, wild goose chase.
Why instead of all this mystery and misery you don't requote yourself
with the name of the thread and date? Simple isn't it?

That's odd. Try: hezbollah war crime group:rec.audio.opinion

No wild goose chase, I just did so and found the post.

He'd prefer to feel empowered by seeing if he can make you jump
through a hoop.
I jumped..feel good?

Anyway, message id:


"Yes, I'm against Hezbollah war crimes. Those rockets are so inaccurate
that to use them in any populated area constitutes targeting civilians.

Too bad Israel forgot its previous experience in invading Lebanon and
replicated the mistake.

American-made cluster bombs are bad, too."

So his condemnation includes blaming Israel for the conflict
and a zinger at the US for good measure.
I should have expected no less.

ScottW

Thank you Scott W. Now that you dug out this shining example of
evenhandedness and objectivity I can understand why MNe was so
reluctant to simply quote it black on white. If this sounds "sarcastic"
and "condescending" it is intended.

Yes Sharon invaded Lebanon once before in a partially successful
attempt to get rid of the PLO terror on the Israeli Northern border -
terror directed against a country 20 miles wide at its waist. Yes he
closed his eyes to the war crime of his Christian Lebanese allies. He
was investigated by an Israeli court and condemned for it. Just like
the Arab League condemned Arafat ' resistance fighters" for pushing an
old partially paralysed man in a wheelchair overboard into the drink.
If this also sounds "sarcastic" and "condescending" it is also
intended.

The 2nd invasion of Lebanon took place after several years of (as you
say)" ... Those rockets are so inaccurate that to use them in any
populated area constitutes targeting civilians. You then go on to
castigate Israel for "repeating its mistakes", using "cluster bombs"
and so on

Just curious: suppose Mexican terrorists start lobbing missiles into
the border communities in Texas succeding from time to time in killing
a schoolkid or two with their teachers . Just suppose the Mexican
government is either impotent or unwilling or both to do much about it.
Just suppose America responds.. Just suppose Canadian Mnes
evenhandedly condemn the war crimes of both sides. What would you have
to say Mr. Mne?

Till you tell me I'll still be condescending and sarcastic
Intentionally Ludovic Mirabel

[MiNe 109]

In article 7A9Wg.2434$fl.1390@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article
.com,
" wrote:

MNe strikes out:

" Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket
attacks
as
war crimes.

I missed it and so apparently did Hezbollah. Do quote it
again.
It
will
sure make them quake in their sandals and stop.
Ludovic Mirabel

Well, no pleasing Dr. House of International Affairs.
Stephen

======================================

You're right- watching you striving pathetically to be witty does
not
raise spirits.
Instead of making a spectacle of yourself shaking a clown's cap
with
bells on it qive us that memorable admonition to Hezbollah you
claim
you once made. Don't keep us on tenterhooks guessing: truth or
fiction?

If you're accusing me of lying, this conversation is over.

Stephen

Accuse--nothing. Just waiting to read your memorable admonition to
Hezbollah. (with reference to thread and date). The suspense is
killing
me.

Google 'Hezbollah' and 'war crime' and me as author.

Found zero, zilch, wild goose chase.
Why instead of all this mystery and misery you don't requote yourself
with the name of the thread and date? Simple isn't it?

That's odd. Try: hezbollah war crime group:rec.audio.opinion

No wild goose chase, I just did so and found the post.

He'd prefer to feel empowered by seeing if he can make you jump
through a hoop.
I jumped..feel good?

Good for you. I'd have felt better if you had remembered my response.

Anyway, message id:


"Yes, I'm against Hezbollah war crimes. Those rockets are so inaccurate
that to use them in any populated area constitutes targeting civilians.

Too bad Israel forgot its previous experience in invading Lebanon and
replicated the mistake.

American-made cluster bombs are bad, too."

So his condemnation includes blaming Israel for the conflict
and a zinger at the US for good measure.
I should have expected no less.

That's the balance Ludo wants from me.

My condemnation is clear and unqualified.

Stephen

[MiNe 109]

In article .com,
" wrote:

ScottW wrote:
"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article
.com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article
.com,
" wrote:

MNe strikes out:

" Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket
attacks
as
war crimes.

I missed it and so apparently did Hezbollah. Do quote it
again.
It
will
sure make them quake in their sandals and stop.
Ludovic Mirabel

Well, no pleasing Dr. House of International Affairs.
Stephen

======================================

You're right- watching you striving pathetically to be witty
does not
raise spirits.
Instead of making a spectacle of yourself shaking a clown's cap
with
bells on it qive us that memorable admonition to Hezbollah you
claim
you once made. Don't keep us on tenterhooks guessing: truth or
fiction?

If you're accusing me of lying, this conversation is over.

Stephen

Accuse--nothing. Just waiting to read your memorable admonition to
Hezbollah. (with reference to thread and date). The suspense is
killing
me.

Google 'Hezbollah' and 'war crime' and me as author.

Found zero, zilch, wild goose chase.
Why instead of all this mystery and misery you don't requote yourself
with the name of the thread and date? Simple isn't it?

That's odd. Try: hezbollah war crime group:rec.audio.opinion

No wild goose chase, I just did so and found the post.

He'd prefer to feel empowered by seeing if he can make you jump
through a hoop.
I jumped..feel good?

Anyway, message id:


"Yes, I'm against Hezbollah war crimes. Those rockets are so inaccurate
that to use them in any populated area constitutes targeting civilians.

Too bad Israel forgot its previous experience in invading Lebanon and
replicated the mistake.

American-made cluster bombs are bad, too."

So his condemnation includes blaming Israel for the conflict
and a zinger at the US for good measure.
I should have expected no less.

ScottW

Thank you Scott W. Now that you dug out this shining example of
evenhandedness and objectivity I can understand why MNe was so
reluctant to simply quote it black on white. If this sounds "sarcastic"
and "condescending" it is intended.

There you go. I am not reluctant, I just feel the need to dig up proof I
said what I did.

Since you're intentionally "sarcastic" and "condescending" I feel no
need to look past your ill will to address your arguments with respect.

So, bye!

Stephen

[George M. Middius]

MiNe 109 said:

Since you're intentionally "sarcastic" and "condescending" I feel no
need to look past your ill will to address your arguments with respect.

With respect, I'm curious why you don't apply that rubric to your
"debates" with Mr. Krooger.





--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[ScottW]

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
" wrote:

ScottW wrote:
"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article
.com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article
.com,
" wrote:

MNe strikes out:

" Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket
attacks
as
war crimes.

I missed it and so apparently did Hezbollah. Do quote it
again.
It
will
sure make them quake in their sandals and stop.
Ludovic Mirabel

Well, no pleasing Dr. House of International Affairs.
Stephen

======================================

You're right- watching you striving pathetically to be witty
does not
raise spirits.
Instead of making a spectacle of yourself shaking a clown's cap
with
bells on it qive us that memorable admonition to Hezbollah you
claim
you once made. Don't keep us on tenterhooks guessing: truth or
fiction?

If you're accusing me of lying, this conversation is over.

Stephen

Accuse--nothing. Just waiting to read your memorable admonition to
Hezbollah. (with reference to thread and date). The suspense is
killing
me.

Google 'Hezbollah' and 'war crime' and me as author.

Found zero, zilch, wild goose chase.
Why instead of all this mystery and misery you don't requote yourself
with the name of the thread and date? Simple isn't it?

That's odd. Try: hezbollah war crime group:rec.audio.opinion

No wild goose chase, I just did so and found the post.

He'd prefer to feel empowered by seeing if he can make you jump
through a hoop.
I jumped..feel good?

Anyway, message id:


"Yes, I'm against Hezbollah war crimes. Those rockets are so inaccurate
that to use them in any populated area constitutes targeting civilians.

Too bad Israel forgot its previous experience in invading Lebanon and
replicated the mistake.

American-made cluster bombs are bad, too."

So his condemnation includes blaming Israel for the conflict
and a zinger at the US for good measure.
I should have expected no less.

ScottW

Thank you Scott W. Now that you dug out this shining example of
evenhandedness and objectivity I can understand why MNe was so
reluctant to simply quote it black on white. If this sounds "sarcastic"
and "condescending" it is intended.

There you go. I am not reluctant, I just feel the need to dig up proof I
said what I did.

Since you're intentionally "sarcastic" and "condescending" I feel no
need to look past your ill will to address your arguments with respect.

Sounds like how I feel with ssshhhh and Fox...
though characterizing their behavior as sarcastic
and condescending and comparing them to Ludovic seems a great
injustice.

ScottW

[ScottW]

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article 7A9Wg.2434$fl.1390@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article .com,
" wrote:

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article
.com,
" wrote:

MNe strikes out:

" Perhaps you missed my condemnation of Hezbollah rocket
attacks
as
war crimes.

I missed it and so apparently did Hezbollah. Do quote it
again.
It
will
sure make them quake in their sandals and stop.
Ludovic Mirabel

Well, no pleasing Dr. House of International Affairs.
Stephen

======================================

You're right- watching you striving pathetically to be witty does
not
raise spirits.
Instead of making a spectacle of yourself shaking a clown's cap
with
bells on it qive us that memorable admonition to Hezbollah you
claim
you once made. Don't keep us on tenterhooks guessing: truth or
fiction?

If you're accusing me of lying, this conversation is over.

Stephen

Accuse--nothing. Just waiting to read your memorable admonition to
Hezbollah. (with reference to thread and date). The suspense is
killing
me.

Google 'Hezbollah' and 'war crime' and me as author.

Found zero, zilch, wild goose chase.
Why instead of all this mystery and misery you don't requote yourself
with the name of the thread and date? Simple isn't it?

That's odd. Try: hezbollah war crime group:rec.audio.opinion

No wild goose chase, I just did so and found the post.

He'd prefer to feel empowered by seeing if he can make you jump
through a hoop.
I jumped..feel good?

Good for you. I'd have felt better if you had remembered my response.

Anyway, message id:


"Yes, I'm against Hezbollah war crimes. Those rockets are so inaccurate
that to use them in any populated area constitutes targeting civilians.

Too bad Israel forgot its previous experience in invading Lebanon and
replicated the mistake.

American-made cluster bombs are bad, too."

So his condemnation includes blaming Israel for the conflict
and a zinger at the US for good measure.
I should have expected no less.

That's the balance Ludo wants from me.

No, I'm sure that condemning Israel for defending
itself is not what he had in mind.

My condemnation is clear and unqualified.

Are you calling for unilateral prosecution of Hezbollah leaders
and those who supply them with rockets?

Or would you insist prosecution for everyone mentioned
in your post?

ScottW

[MiNe 109]

In article EWbWg.2453$fl.718@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

Me:
Since you're intentionally "sarcastic" and "condescending" I feel no
need to look past your ill will to address your arguments with respect.

Sounds like how I feel with ssshhhh and Fox...
though characterizing their behavior as sarcastic
and condescending and comparing them to Ludovic seems a great
injustice.

No, they're more insulting and ironic. They have other things in common
with Ludo, including the ability to argue both sides at the same time.

Stephen

[MiNe 109]

In article T%bWg.2455$fl.275@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article 7A9Wg.2434$fl.1390@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

snip

Anyway, message id:


"Yes, I'm against Hezbollah war crimes. Those rockets are so inaccurate
that to use them in any populated area constitutes targeting civilians.

Too bad Israel forgot its previous experience in invading Lebanon and
replicated the mistake.

American-made cluster bombs are bad, too."

So his condemnation includes blaming Israel for the conflict
and a zinger at the US for good measure.
I should have expected no less.

That's the balance Ludo wants from me.

No, I'm sure that condemning Israel for defending
itself is not what he had in mind.

Me either. Good thing I didn't do that.

My condemnation is clear and unqualified.

Are you calling for unilateral prosecution of Hezbollah leaders
and those who supply them with rockets?

Why unilateral? Do mean a war-crimes prosecution in international court?
I wouldn't mind that, but it would take another invasion to enforce.

Or would you insist prosecution for everyone mentioned
in your post?

Only if it includes you and Ludo.

Stephen

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net
wrote:

MiNe 109 said:

Since you're intentionally "sarcastic" and "condescending" I feel no
need to look past your ill will to address your arguments with respect.

With respect, I'm curious why you don't apply that rubric to your
"debates" with Mr. Krooger.

He's insane.

Stephen

[ScottW]

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article T%bWg.2455$fl.275@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article 7A9Wg.2434$fl.1390@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

snip

Anyway, message id:


"Yes, I'm against Hezbollah war crimes. Those rockets are so inaccurate
that to use them in any populated area constitutes targeting civilians.

Too bad Israel forgot its previous experience in invading Lebanon and
replicated the mistake.

American-made cluster bombs are bad, too."

So his condemnation includes blaming Israel for the conflict
and a zinger at the US for good measure.
I should have expected no less.

That's the balance Ludo wants from me.

No, I'm sure that condemning Israel for defending
itself is not what he had in mind.

Me either. Good thing I didn't do that.

My condemnation is clear and unqualified.

Are you calling for unilateral prosecution of Hezbollah leaders
and those who supply them with rockets?

Why unilateral? Do mean a war-crimes prosecution in international court?
I wouldn't mind that, but it would take another invasion to enforce.

So....why hasn't the ICC taken up this issue?
In fact...I don't think I've even heard it brought up though I
have heard suggestions Israeli leaders be charged.

ScottW

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

ScottW wrote:
"MiNe 109" wrote in message

There you go. I am not reluctant, I just feel the need to dig up proof I
said what I did.

Since you're intentionally "sarcastic" and "condescending" I feel no
need to look past your ill will to address your arguments with respect.

Sounds like how I feel with ssshhhh and Fox...
though characterizing their behavior as sarcastic
and condescending and comparing them to Ludovic seems a great
injustice.

Except for one thing, toopid: I reply to what you say. You say the
stupid things and get called on them.

When you say really, really dumb things (several times daily) and get
called on them, sarcasm may indeed upset you. But your arguments are
left tattered in every case.

But you have yet to realize that you get your ass handed to you in
virtually every argument. You're not that bright.

You're a political moron. That's what makes it so much fun.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

ScottW wrote:
"MiNe 109" wrote in message

There you go. I am not reluctant, I just feel the need to dig up proof I
said what I did.

Since you're intentionally "sarcastic" and "condescending" I feel no
need to look past your ill will to address your arguments with respect.

Sounds like how I feel with ssshhhh and Fox...
though characterizing their behavior as sarcastic
and condescending and comparing them to Ludovic seems a great
injustice.

Except for one thing, toopid: I reply to what you say. You say the
stupid things and get called on them.

When you say really, really dumb things (several times daily) and get
called on them, sarcasm may indeed upset you. But your arguments are
left tattered in every case.

But you have yet to realize that you get your ass handed to you in
virtually every argument. You're not that bright.

You're a political moron. That's what makes it so much fun.

[MiNe 109]

In article ZqcWg.2457$fl.124@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article T%bWg.2455$fl.275@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article 7A9Wg.2434$fl.1390@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

snip

Anyway, message id:


"Yes, I'm against Hezbollah war crimes. Those rockets are so inaccurate
that to use them in any populated area constitutes targeting civilians.

Too bad Israel forgot its previous experience in invading Lebanon and
replicated the mistake.

American-made cluster bombs are bad, too."

So his condemnation includes blaming Israel for the conflict
and a zinger at the US for good measure.
I should have expected no less.

That's the balance Ludo wants from me.

No, I'm sure that condemning Israel for defending
itself is not what he had in mind.

Me either. Good thing I didn't do that.

My condemnation is clear and unqualified.

Are you calling for unilateral prosecution of Hezbollah leaders
and those who supply them with rockets?

Why unilateral? Do mean a war-crimes prosecution in international court?
I wouldn't mind that, but it would take another invasion to enforce.

So....why hasn't the ICC taken up this issue?
In fact...I don't think I've even heard it brought up though I
have heard suggestions Israeli leaders be charged.

I don't know the source of the rule banning targeting civilians. Geneva
Convention? This sort of regional conflict might fall between the legal
cracks, but enforcement is the main problem.

Inaccurate missiles, mines, cluster-bombs should have rules banning
their use. The trend is going the other way at the moment. There's
obviously a lot of politics (why isn't Saddam tried internationally?).

Stephen

[George M. Middius]

MiNe 109 said:

Since you're intentionally "sarcastic" and "condescending" I feel no
need to look past your ill will to address your arguments with respect.

With respect, I'm curious why you don't apply that rubric to your
"debates" with Mr. Krooger.

He's insane.

Agreed.™ LOt"S.™




--

"Christians have to ... work to make the world as loving, just, and supportive as is possible."
A. Krooger, Aug. 2006

[ScottW]

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ZqcWg.2457$fl.124@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article T%bWg.2455$fl.275@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article 7A9Wg.2434$fl.1390@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

snip

Anyway, message id:


"Yes, I'm against Hezbollah war crimes. Those rockets are so inaccurate
that to use them in any populated area constitutes targeting civilians.

Too bad Israel forgot its previous experience in invading Lebanon and
replicated the mistake.

American-made cluster bombs are bad, too."

So his condemnation includes blaming Israel for the conflict
and a zinger at the US for good measure.
I should have expected no less.

That's the balance Ludo wants from me.

No, I'm sure that condemning Israel for defending
itself is not what he had in mind.

Me either. Good thing I didn't do that.

My condemnation is clear and unqualified.

Are you calling for unilateral prosecution of Hezbollah leaders
and those who supply them with rockets?

Why unilateral? Do mean a war-crimes prosecution in international court?
I wouldn't mind that, but it would take another invasion to enforce.

So....why hasn't the ICC taken up this issue?
In fact...I don't think I've even heard it brought up though I
have heard suggestions Israeli leaders be charged.

I don't know the source of the rule banning targeting civilians. Geneva
Convention? This sort of regional conflict might fall between the legal
cracks, but enforcement is the main problem.

Doesn't criminalization come before enforcement?


Inaccurate missiles, mines, cluster-bombs should have rules banning
their use. The trend is going the other way at the moment. There's
obviously a lot of politics (why isn't Saddam tried internationally?).

A show for support of the new government.

ScottW

[MiNe 109]

In article ZOcWg.2465$fl.261@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ZqcWg.2457$fl.124@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article T%bWg.2455$fl.275@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article 7A9Wg.2434$fl.1390@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

snip

Anyway, message id:


"Yes, I'm against Hezbollah war crimes. Those rockets are so
inaccurate
that to use them in any populated area constitutes targeting
civilians.

Too bad Israel forgot its previous experience in invading Lebanon
and
replicated the mistake.

American-made cluster bombs are bad, too."

So his condemnation includes blaming Israel for the conflict
and a zinger at the US for good measure.
I should have expected no less.

That's the balance Ludo wants from me.

No, I'm sure that condemning Israel for defending
itself is not what he had in mind.

Me either. Good thing I didn't do that.

My condemnation is clear and unqualified.

Are you calling for unilateral prosecution of Hezbollah leaders
and those who supply them with rockets?

Why unilateral? Do mean a war-crimes prosecution in international court?
I wouldn't mind that, but it would take another invasion to enforce.

So....why hasn't the ICC taken up this issue?
In fact...I don't think I've even heard it brought up though I
have heard suggestions Israeli leaders be charged.

I don't know the source of the rule banning targeting civilians. Geneva
Convention? This sort of regional conflict might fall between the legal
cracks, but enforcement is the main problem.

Doesn't criminalization come before enforcement?

Yep, Geneva Convention:

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE020252006

Inaccurate missiles, mines, cluster-bombs should have rules banning
their use. The trend is going the other way at the moment. There's
obviously a lot of politics (why isn't Saddam tried internationally?).

A show for support of the new government.

'Show' like 'show trial'?

Stephen

[ScottW]

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ZOcWg.2465$fl.261@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ZqcWg.2457$fl.124@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article T%bWg.2455$fl.275@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article 7A9Wg.2434$fl.1390@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

snip

Anyway, message id:


"Yes, I'm against Hezbollah war crimes. Those rockets are so
inaccurate
that to use them in any populated area constitutes targeting
civilians.

Too bad Israel forgot its previous experience in invading Lebanon
and
replicated the mistake.

American-made cluster bombs are bad, too."

So his condemnation includes blaming Israel for the conflict
and a zinger at the US for good measure.
I should have expected no less.

That's the balance Ludo wants from me.

No, I'm sure that condemning Israel for defending
itself is not what he had in mind.

Me either. Good thing I didn't do that.

My condemnation is clear and unqualified.

Are you calling for unilateral prosecution of Hezbollah leaders
and those who supply them with rockets?

Why unilateral? Do mean a war-crimes prosecution in international court?
I wouldn't mind that, but it would take another invasion to enforce.

So....why hasn't the ICC taken up this issue?
In fact...I don't think I've even heard it brought up though I
have heard suggestions Israeli leaders be charged.

I don't know the source of the rule banning targeting civilians. Geneva
Convention? This sort of regional conflict might fall between the legal
cracks, but enforcement is the main problem.

Doesn't criminalization come before enforcement?

Yep, Geneva Convention:

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE020252006

Great...when will the charges be brought?


Inaccurate missiles, mines, cluster-bombs should have rules banning
their use. The trend is going the other way at the moment. There's
obviously a lot of politics (why isn't Saddam tried internationally?).

A show for support of the new government.

'Show' like 'show trial'?

It was supposed to be a show but seems to have
morphed into a circus.
Still, its an Iraqi circus.

ScottW

[[email protected]]

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article EWbWg.2453$fl.718@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

Me:
Since you're intentionally "sarcastic" and "condescending" I feel no
need to look past your ill will to address your arguments with respect.

Sounds like how I feel with ssshhhh and Fox...
though characterizing their behavior as sarcastic
and condescending and comparing them to Ludovic seems a great
injustice.

No, they're more insulting and ironic. They have other things in common
with Ludo, including the ability to argue both sides at the same time.

Stephen
================================

Mine strikes out: " Since you're intentionally "sarcastic" and
"condescending" I feel no
need to look past your ill will to address your arguments with respect.

But lo and behold; One hour later the same Mine takes up the Mirabel
topic once again in a polemic with ScottW
" No, they're more insulting and ironic. They have other things in
common
with Ludo, including the ability to argue both sides at the same time."

Stephen

Not to flattering , is he now? So much for "respect" He wants freedom
to enlarge on my failings- but any answer will be too brutal for his
delicate, sensitivities.

This is not a kindergarten though. I don't care if he answers or stays
in a huff. I'll say whatever I have to say in a manner that suits me
(short of gutter language because that does not suit me) .

But I can't help thinking that Miine got into a big, big temper tantrum
about my writing manners to avoid answering a simple question that I
posed:

"Just curious: suppose Mexican terrorists start lobbing missiles into
the border communities in Texas succeding from time to time in killing
a schoolkid or two with their teachers . Just suppose the Mexican
government is either impotent or unwilling or both to do much about it.

Just suppose America responds.. Just suppose Canadian Mnes
evenhandedly condemn the war crimes of both sides. What would you have
to say Mr. Mne?

Just as he did his best to dodge quoting his message about Hezbollah
that he said would but knew very well would not redeem reams and reams
of previous and subsequent postings apologising for and excusing the
"resistance fighters". He wanted his assertion but did not care for
anyone else to see the detail.

Just my suspicious, sarcastic nature. And my brutal debating manners
that dear, old, delicate Mine had never encountered in the RAO before.

What can I do to apologise? I know: I'll just ignore Mr. Mine's hurt
feelings and promise him to watch his further advances into
evenhadedness. And I'll comment on them SOS. He may forgive me one day.
Ludovic Mirabel.

[MiNe 109]

In article AMfWg.2481$fl.1145@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ZOcWg.2465$fl.261@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ZqcWg.2457$fl.124@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article T%bWg.2455$fl.275@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message
...
In article 7A9Wg.2434$fl.1390@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

snip

Anyway, message id:


"Yes, I'm against Hezbollah war crimes. Those rockets are so
inaccurate
that to use them in any populated area constitutes targeting
civilians.

Too bad Israel forgot its previous experience in invading Lebanon
and
replicated the mistake.

American-made cluster bombs are bad, too."

So his condemnation includes blaming Israel for the conflict
and a zinger at the US for good measure.
I should have expected no less.

That's the balance Ludo wants from me.

No, I'm sure that condemning Israel for defending
itself is not what he had in mind.

Me either. Good thing I didn't do that.

My condemnation is clear and unqualified.

Are you calling for unilateral prosecution of Hezbollah leaders
and those who supply them with rockets?

Why unilateral? Do mean a war-crimes prosecution in international
court?
I wouldn't mind that, but it would take another invasion to enforce.

So....why hasn't the ICC taken up this issue?
In fact...I don't think I've even heard it brought up though I
have heard suggestions Israeli leaders be charged.

I don't know the source of the rule banning targeting civilians. Geneva
Convention? This sort of regional conflict might fall between the legal
cracks, but enforcement is the main problem.

Doesn't criminalization come before enforcement?

Yep, Geneva Convention:

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE020252006

Great...when will the charges be brought?

I don't who brings the charges in these situations. The court itself?

Inaccurate missiles, mines, cluster-bombs should have rules banning
their use. The trend is going the other way at the moment. There's
obviously a lot of politics (why isn't Saddam tried internationally?).

A show for support of the new government.

'Show' like 'show trial'?

It was supposed to be a show but seems to have
morphed into a circus.
Still, its an Iraqi circus.

Not much to be proud of.

Stephen

[MiNe 109]

In article . com,
" wrote:

I don't care if he answers or stays
in a huff.

Bye!

[paul packer]

On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 19:28:07 GMT, MiNe 109
wrote:

In article EWbWg.2453$fl.718@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

Me:
Since you're intentionally "sarcastic" and "condescending" I feel no
need to look past your ill will to address your arguments with respect.

Sounds like how I feel with ssshhhh and Fox...
though characterizing their behavior as sarcastic
and condescending and comparing them to Ludovic seems a great
injustice.

No, they're more insulting and ironic. They have other things in common
with Ludo, including the ability to argue both sides at the same time.

Stephen


Maybe he feels the contrary argument isn't being well enough
represented by yourself and others. There's nothing like fairness.

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
(paul packer) wrote:

On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 19:28:07 GMT, MiNe 109
wrote:

In article EWbWg.2453$fl.718@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

Me:
Since you're intentionally "sarcastic" and "condescending" I feel no
need to look past your ill will to address your arguments with respect.

Sounds like how I feel with ssshhhh and Fox...
though characterizing their behavior as sarcastic
and condescending and comparing them to Ludovic seems a great
injustice.

No, they're more insulting and ironic. They have other things in common
with Ludo, including the ability to argue both sides at the same time.

Stephen


Maybe he feels the contrary argument isn't being well enough
represented by yourself and others. There's nothing like fairness.

That's a kind way of saying he's arguing against what he wishes I said.

Stephen

[Arny Krueger]

"MiNe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
(paul packer) wrote:

On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 19:28:07 GMT, MiNe 109
wrote:

In article EWbWg.2453$fl.718@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

Me:
Since you're intentionally "sarcastic" and
"condescending" I feel no need to look past your ill
will to address your arguments with respect.

Sounds like how I feel with ssshhhh and Fox...
though characterizing their behavior as sarcastic
and condescending and comparing them to Ludovic seems
a great injustice.

No, they're more insulting and ironic. They have other
things in common with Ludo, including the ability to
argue both sides at the same time.

Stephen


Maybe he feels the contrary argument isn't being well
enough represented by yourself and others. There's
nothing like fairness.

That's a kind way of saying he's arguing against what he
wishes I said.


Hmm, sort of what you, Jenn, and Middius do around here all the time.

[MiNe 109]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
(paul packer) wrote:

On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 19:28:07 GMT, MiNe 109
wrote:

In article EWbWg.2453$fl.718@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

Me:
Since you're intentionally "sarcastic" and
"condescending" I feel no need to look past your ill
will to address your arguments with respect.

Sounds like how I feel with ssshhhh and Fox...
though characterizing their behavior as sarcastic
and condescending and comparing them to Ludovic seems
a great injustice.

No, they're more insulting and ironic. They have other
things in common with Ludo, including the ability to
argue both sides at the same time.

Stephen


Maybe he feels the contrary argument isn't being well
enough represented by yourself and others. There's
nothing like fairness.

That's a kind way of saying he's arguing against what he
wishes I said.


Hmm, sort of what you, Jenn, and Middius do around here all the time.

No, that's not generally the case. It occurs to me that Ludo might spend
more time arguing what he wishes were the opposite side than he does
arguing his own.

Stephen

[[email protected]]

MiNe 109 wrote:
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MiNe 109" wrote in message

In article ,
(paul packer) wrote:

On Sun, 08 Oct 2006 19:28:07 GMT, MiNe 109
wrote:

In article EWbWg.2453$fl.718@dukeread08,
"ScottW" wrote:

Me:
Since you're intentionally "sarcastic" and
"condescending" I feel no need to look past your ill
will to address your arguments with respect.

Sounds like how I feel with ssshhhh and Fox...
though characterizing their behavior as sarcastic
and condescending and comparing them to Ludovic seems
a great injustice.

No, they're more insulting and ironic. They have other
things in common with Ludo, including the ability to
argue both sides at the same time.

Stephen


Maybe he feels the contrary argument isn't being well
enough represented by yourself and others. There's
nothing like fairness.

That's a kind way of saying he's arguing against what he
wishes I said.


Hmm, sort of what you, Jenn, and Middius do around here all the time.

No, that's not generally the case. It occurs to me that Ludo might spend
more time arguing what he wishes were the opposite side than he does
arguing his own.

Stephen
===========================

Mr. Mine threatened once again to leave the playfield, clutching his
Snickers. It did not last long. He rerepeats his "positively last
appearance" act shaking his little fist all over again. Personally I'd
prefer to haunt the bad dreams of more interesting opponents but one
takes the best available.

The last two (dis)appearances were, oh so original, devices for not
having to comment on this allegorical situation:.

"Just curious: suppose Mexican terrorists start lobbing missiles into
the border communities in Texas succeeding from time to time to kill
a schoolkid or two with their teachers . Just suppose the Mexican
government is either impotent or unwilling or both to do much about it.
Just suppose America responds. Just suppose Canadian Mines
evenhandedly condemn the war crimes of both sides. What would you have
to say Mr. Mine?"

Mr. Mine must have had in mind Wittgensteins dictum:: "Of what one can
not speak of that one remains silent.". He declared himself insulted
and said he'd quit. In silence of course.

Of course my imaginary Canadian Mr. Mines would call the response
"disproportionate" if it were not exactly ONE Mexican kid and ONE
teacher for ONE each of the Texans.

To drop more names Rochefoucauld in his "Maxims" had a word for my
imaginary Canadian Mr Mines and the actual American Mine.: "Good Lord
gave us the strength to bear the misfortunes of others".

There is nothing new about the Mine's attitude. In the old days it was
called isolationism. The theoretical groundwork is to keep repeating:
"The good side is not perfect either so the best for us is to stay out
of it"
In the old days Pearl Harbour put a stop to that. Nowadays even 9/11 is
not enough. We're progressing.

He complains that: "... Ludo might spend
more time arguing what he wishes were the opposite side than he does
arguing his own.

This is how I see of your views. Don't complain about my unfairness and
my other sins. : What ARE your views?
Ludovic Mirabel

[MiNe 109]

In article . com,
" wrote:


The last two (dis)appearances were, oh so original, devices for not
having to comment on this allegorical situation:.

No, they weren't. You were on notice, and I bid you good-bye without
reading the allegory.

I don't have a comment on the allegory, BTW. There are many colorful
Texan similes concerning hypothetical situations. Call any with which
you are familiar with to mind now, please.

Stephen