Text 21124, 150 rader
Skriven 2006-01-06 11:20:26 av Peter Knapper (3:772/1.0)
     Kommentar till en text av Frank Scheidt (1:123/140)
Ärende: [1/2] Lack of Gratitude
===============================
Hi Frank,

 PK> Not really... I was trying to point out that almost identical
 PK> situations were referenced by yourself as extreme ends of the
 PK> descriptive scales, IE you seem to have a really hard time showing
 PK> balance in your arguments. To me, when someone appears to not show
 PK> balance in an argument, then I really feel a need to question any
 PK> summation they are trying to do. Its not so much that I disagree with
 PK> them, I just like to find out HOW they came to that conclusion.  

 FS> It seems to be *you* who cannot understand the difference between 
 FS> peacetime mass-murder (WTC bombing) and wartime attacks against 
 FS> an enemy 

Simply because I see that situation as different to the way you describe, IE it
did not happen during peace-time. Now who is not understanding the difference.

The reality is Frank we could discuss this all day long and get nowhere, simply
because you refuse to acknowledge that another person has a viewpoint that is
different to your viewpoint.




 FS> "Balanced"?  Do you mean that I should give equal "credit" to 
 FS> murderers as to patriots?

 PK> Equal "credit" for the RATIONAL of their stance, NOT for the actions
 PK> that resulted from that stance. Again, if you dont KNOW how your enemy
 PK> reached a decsion, then you do not really KNOW your enemy.

 FS> For one thing we cannot know the reason the WTC murderers had for 
 FS> doing such an evil thing. 

Well people dont do things without having a reason for doing it, and the reason
for 911 is pretty darned obvious to many people, except perhaps Frank. It was
simply a retaliation against the US for activities the USA has been carrying
out that were against the people that carried out the 911 attacks. But I am
fairly sure we have been over this before...

 FS> IOW we cannot know what their rationale was for doing it. 

I think that may be more because you do not wish to see the reasons...


 PK> I see, if your oponents beliefs do not fit into Frank's view of the
 PK> world, then they must be terrorists. Just how more 
 PK> one-eyed can you get Frank? 
 FS>  
 FS> I believe I've pointed out before that I have *two* eyes ...

Then please try opening BOTH of them for a change.


 FS> Did I say that?  

 PK> As indicated above, its simply the way you present your "case", it
 PK> comes out as so one-sided, that any logical thinker just has to query
 PK> what you really mean. If your statements contained details that
 PK> explained the reason for your beliefs, then we 
 PK> might have a much easier
 PK> time tring to understand what you are saying.

 FS> You approve of the murders of the innocent people in the WTC?  

You will never find any message from me anywhere that says I approved of that,
its simply your one-eyed viewpoint that convinced yourself that I must have
said it.


 FS> You need a "reason" for my hatred of murderers?!?!? 

Absolutely not, in fact on that point alone we are quite similar. Our
difference comes done to identifyng WHAT and WHO is or is not a murderer.


 FS> *I*, OTOH, deal only with reality. 

My problem with that is your definition of Reality is only a partial reality,
because you APPEAR to ignore the other side of the coin...


 PK> No State declared war. However, if you consider all the people of El
 PK> Qaeda to be a nation then they have declared war.

 FS> Al Qaeda is not a nation.  

Slight divergence here, what (in your thoughts) is the difference between a
country and a nation? In asking this I am thinking that the North American
Indian "Nation" is a term that has been used in the past and I am pretty
certain there is no North American Indian country as such.

So I can agree that Al Qaeda is not a country or an inhabitant of a single
country, but are they not a nation of people similar to the North American
Indian?



 PK> then ergo - There really IS a Holy war Frank. 
 PK> Those events carry quite
 PK> a bit more credibility than that presented by a single person in a
 PK> Fidonet Echo. 

 FS> Which nation declared it?  

Al Qaeda.


 FS> See above ... a single individual, not 
 FS> heading a nation, cannot declare war.

 PK> Bin Laden sure did in the video's released. If Bin Laden does not
 PK> lead, or head your "terrorist" group, then why are 
 PK> the US so interested in catching him?  

 FS> Do you think we're interested in catching that murderer because 
 FS> he "declared war"?  

I doubt that is the primary reason.

 FS> For one thing I don't think he actually said that.

As I do not speak their lanaguage I can't be 100% sure what was on the tapes, I
can only take the english spoken comments surrounding the showing of those
tapes, and as long as they are correct then I am happy to accept it was said by
Bin Laden. 


 FS> Sure there's another perspective -- as I've pointed out it cannot 
 FS> be explained properly ...

 PK> And which party do you think is failing there then...

 FS> Huh?  Do you mean political party, i.e., Democrats or 
 FS> Republicans?

Trying to be obtuse again eh Frank. Ok, let me clarify the question for you - 

Relating to YOUR statement above -

 FS> Sure there's another perspective -- as I've pointed out it cannot 
 FS> be explained properly ...

Now WHO has failed to properly explain the other perspective.

Cheers..........pk.


--- Maximus/2 3.01
 * Origin: === Maxie BBS.  Ak, NZ +64 9 444-0989 === (3:772/1)