Re: Your moment of Zen - brought to you by OBL


"kuff (Isaac Adams)" <kuff00@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1137707641.280607.298060@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Count 1 wrote:
> > "kuff (Isaac Adams)" <kuff00@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:1137705005.117557.198460@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > > Count 1 wrote:
> > > > > I'm not saying the US necessarily considers OBL to be a (trans)
> > > > > national leader
> > > >
> > > > Actually that's exactly what you were saying.
> > > > "You might have been a bit hasty in treating him as though he were
one
> > by
> > > > declaring 'war' on him, eh?"
> > >
> > > Use the clarified version
> >
> > If you wish to change your comment (you've been doing a lot of that
lately,
> > have you considered thinking before you type?) and have me reply to it
then
> > you're going to have admit your original was flawed.
>
> I'll change it (sometimes) when I realize you don't understand what I'm
> saying.

>From my pov, you'll change it when you realize its indefensible. And like I
said, its an increasingly common pattern with you lately.


> It's odd you'd think an updated version didn't already imply the
> previous version was flawed - either by the sender or the receiver.

What's really odd about my behaviour is I still assume you'll act honorably
in these threads; with the courage to admit your mistakes and apologize for
your unjustified insults.

Call me an optimist.


> > which you seemed to accept before but now see
> > > fit to snip:
> > >
> > > "You might have been a bit hasty in treating him as though he were one
> > > by declaring 'war' on his 'country', eh?"
> > >
> > > >
> > > > - only that it may have been a mistake to treat him as
> > > > > though he were one.
> > > >
> > > > Then maybe you should demonstrate how they have. So far everything
> > you've
> > > > raised doesn't support your argument.
> > >
> > > See the clarified version.
> >
> > Still doesn't help. War wasn't declared on his country.
>
> 'country' - in ' marks. Let me clarify the statement yet again since
> you don't seem to get it.

> Version 3: You might have been a bit hasty in treating him as though he
> were one by declaring 'war' on his imaginary nation, eh?

> Now I can maybe clarify it even more for you by dropping the ' marks
> around 'war'. You snipped this question away that could do that:

OK - so you're saying your final question/comment is;
***
You might have been a bit hasty in treating him as though he were one by
declaring war on his imaginary nation, eh?
***

Is that right or are you going to change it again?

The flaw in your question is found in the premise, so it really doesn't
matter how many variants you wish to present. You can portray this as
something I don't understand if it gives you comfort, but if you're not
willing to understand the answer I've provided then I think we're done here.

One more time....No declaration has been made against him or any national
entity, either in reality or in his imagination, which lends itself to the
idea that the US has bestowed upon him the title of a national leader. The
rhetorical declaration of a war on terror doesn't 'treat him as though he
were one'. It is, in essence, simply empty rhetoric, a place holder to
describe various military actions against various targets, and I don't think
reasonable people, including muslims (and even OBL himself), see OBL as a
leader because of this rhetoric.


> - - - - - - - - - -
> > Its not a declaratin of war against OBL,
> > much as you want to portray it as such.
>
> And the terrorists' leader was?
>
> (And are you now allowing that it is a de facto DoW?)
> - - - - - - - - - -
>
> The germane question from the two is: And are you now allowing that it
> is a de facto DoW?

I snipped it rather than answer "no". The only answer possible considering
its a nonsequitur.


> Here's the original message if you need help reconstructing the
> context:
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.islam/msg/550e86ae5a938d7c
>
> > You might have been a bit hasty in treating him as though he were one
> > by declaring 'war' on him, eh?
>
> >
> > Why are you still so confused about these matters?
> >
> >
> >
> > > > Remember I have advocated treating 911 as a
> > > > > criminal matter in part because treating it as a "war"
unecessarily
> > > > > elevates the status of OBL.
> > > >
> > > > Your history of advocacy is as varied as it is inconsistent.
> > >
> > > That your way of agreeing with my statement without seeming to agree
> > > with me?
> >
> > No. Its a caveat to putting too much faith in anything you say. I think
> > OBL's status is significantly diminished by calling him a war monger
rather
> > than a simple 'criminal'.
> >
> > But I suppose to those who think Islamic terrorists are heroes and
McVeigh
> > was a freedom fighter calling OBL a warmonger would give him a rise in
> > status. But then those types tend to be highly misanthropic.
>
> 'Warmonger' doesn't quite do it I don't think.

I suppose you'd choose 'hero'.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Your moment of Zen - brought to you by OBL
    ... War wasn't declared on his country. ... were one by declaring 'war' on his 'country', ... Now I can maybe clarify it even more for you by dropping the ' marks ... 'Warmonger' doesn't quite do it I don't think. ...
    (alt.religion.islam)
  • Re: 2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
    ... I do not see the Dems telling anyone to shove it. ... Obama is doing exactly what the GOP would do and so did Clinton. ... Congress has to pay for those wars and there are some war resolutions ... you're claiming the Taliban didn't harbor OBL and was never ...
    (rec.boats)
  • Re: 2nd Kook Seeks GOP Nomination
    ... Obama is doing exactly what the GOP would do and so did Clinton. ... Congress has to pay for those wars and there are some war resolutions ... you're claiming the Taliban didn't harbor OBL and was never ...
    (rec.boats)
  • Re: The USA did not fund nor create Al-Qaeda
    ... United States - and who were forgotten when that war was over? ... In a 1996 interview with uber-dhimmi Robert Fisk OBL stated that he ... The US did fund opposition to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. ... During that era many Arabs milled about on the Paki side of the border ...
    (rec.aviation.military)
  • Re: What happened to Mark Fox?
    ... and 1441 authorizing all member states to wage war against Iraq and US ... First declaration of war against Iraq (Public Law 102-1) ... UN Security Council resolution 1441 declaring Iraq in violation of its ...
    (alt.politics)