OT Canadians now in the race to the bottom.
 

I am not the slightest bit jealous of anybody at all.
cuhulin

OT Canadians now in the race to the bottom.
 

On Feb 25, 10:22 am, wrote:
And if you are in the Detroit area and you want to drive to Canada,you
have to go South to go North.
cuhulin
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""""""""""
There are two other places on the border where you have to go north to
go south. What are they?

OT Canadians now in the race to the bottom.
 

Miami and El Paso?
cuhulin

OT Canadians now in the race to the bottom.
 

On Feb 25, 12:20 pm, wrote:
Miami and El Paso?
cuhulin
""""""""""""""""""""""
Nope

OT Canadians now in the race to the bottom.
 

So,how how about that Toronto snow?
cuhulin

OT Canadians now in the race to the bottom.
 

On Feb 25, 3:22 pm, wrote:
So,how how about that Toronto snow?
cuhulin

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" ""
W'ere too far north. It is sunny and clear here temp 32.

Puzzle answers:
(1) The Northwest Angle.
This is a piece of Minnesota that is cut off from the US. It is
a peninsula that juts into the Lake of the Woods in Ontario. You have
to drive north in Manitoba and then turn south to get into the Angle.

(2) Point Roberts, Washington
This is the south part of a peninsula that juts into Boundary
Bay south of Vancouver. You have to cross the border at Blaine, Wash.
and drive north through British Columbia and then west and then south
to get there. It is about 30 miles, as I recall, by road and school
busses do it twice a day.

(OT) : Canadians Partners in The-War-on-Terror
 

X-No-Archive:

In article om,
"wf3h" wrote:

Moonlight Mile wrote:

The U.S. attacked Afghanistan w/o proper cause,

other than 3000 dead americans, i suppose...

Afghanistan did not kill those 3000 people. Terrorists, who had _some_
association with al Qaeda did that.

killing not one person
known to be directly connected with the 9/11 attacks.

we destroyed the taliban who supported, aided, abetted and conspired
with those who did. those involved in a conspiracy are just as guilty
as those who implement it....a basic fact of law...

There is no evidence that the Taliban aided, abetted, and conspired with the
9/11 terrorists. The terrorists were Egyptian. Trained by Al Qaeda? Maybe? To do
what? Not known with certainty. The U.S. assumed ( unequivocally asserted ) that
the training was to hijack airplanes. What al Qaeda/bin Laden has clearly stated
is that the U.S. stop supporting oppressive regimes in the Middle East and in
other Muslim countries. It may seem paradoxical, but if these "pro-American"/
unpopular regimes were overthrown or voted out of office, not much would change
except the U.S. would probably no longer be attacked by so-called extremists.
Muslim nations would have every reason to make peace with us, trade with us
(oil). The problem is that we would be unable to control and dominate them.
Afghanistan was being bombed by the U.S. in the 1990s. 9/11 was not an
unprovoked attack. It is probably true that 9/11 was a convenient excuse to
invade and control Afghanistan so that we could build and control pipelines to
transport oil and gas from the east side of the Caspian Sea, pipelines planned
to run through Afghanistan. It is also true that Iraq was attacked so we could
control their resources, build pipelines through Iraq. The neo-conservatives
never dreamed that the price would be so high in American lives or $. An Afghan
or Iraqi life is not worth anything to a neo-conservative.

It seems that the U.N.'s approval is not very important anymore. When denied it,
the U.S. claims the right to attack anyone, anytime, for any reason. When the
U.N. Security Council members are bullied and bribed into approval, the hides
behind that. Case in point: Iran _does_ absolutely have the right to enich
uranium for peaceful purposes. The U.S. claims Iran is doing so to make nuclear
weapons, but the U.S. has absolutely no proof that Iran is planning to build
nuclear weapons. Still, U.N. S.C members are bullied/bribed into passing
resolutions to impose sanctions on Iran. No proof is required. The U.S. is
simply not required to provide proof.

All reasons for attacking
Iraq _again_ (March 20, 2003) have been discredited, and we're still there
after
nearly 4 years. The Iraqis are worse off now than they were under Saddam.
We've
imposed a puppet goverment

?? a govt elected by the people in elections monitored by the UN...

The election was contrived and staged by the U.S. Only those having the American
"seal of approval" could play the game. In short, Jalal Talabani was hand-picked
by the U.S. Do you really think the Iraqis would have elected a Kurd as
President? Compare Iraq to Nicaragua whose is President now President Daniel
Ortega. Ortega would probably have been elected as President of Nicaragua way
back in the 1980s if The U.S., under our second most recently mentally ill (the
only qualification required to be nominated as Republican Presidential candidate
is that he be mentally ill) Republican President (Ronald Wilson Reagon =666)
waged a civil war which against Ortega/Nicaragua and the people fully understood
that that civil war would continue if they (fairly/U.N monitored) elected
Ortega. So the U.S. has a long, unpleasant history of imposing governments, that
the people don't want, on other countries.


oh i forgot. he hates arabs.

I hate no one. I distrust my government and have no faith in the "wisdom" of the
American people. They elected Reagon twice, Bush twice. I got some land in FL...
Case closed!


I just have no idea what it takes to get through to people like you.

you cant even get thru to yourself. it's no wonder you can't reach
anyone else.

Insult me if you must. But read Blum's "Rogue State:" A Guide..."

At this point, pardon me if I do what I came to this NG to do...i.e. learn more
about SW.

MM

"Insults, like violence, are the last resort
of the incompetent."--Freud ( I think )

(OT) : Canadians Partners in The-War-on-Terror
 

X-No-Archive:

In article . com,
"wf3h" wrote:

Moonlight Mile wrote:
X-No-Archive:

In article . com,
"wf3h" wrote:


this is the type of idiocy racism breeds. moonlight, a racist to the
core, can't believe arab muslims would invent a genocidal fascist
ideology, so he places the blame on the US.

Thank you for your thoughful response. But I truly have no idea why you
_I'm_ a
rascist

ever hear of the bigotry of low expectations? you refuse to
acknowledge the inherent fascism of islam. you simply can't believe
the dune coons could be intelligent enough to invent such an idea.

Or the bigotry of unrealistic, high expectations? Now, use of the term "dune
coons", especially in the context you use it, _is_ rascist. You are white,
middle or upper-middle class, probably have not read a variety of opinions, talk
only to people you already agree with. You learn more by talking to people you
disagree with, if they are reasoned in their thinking.

Now, Bush and the neo-cons, and possibly you, _are_ fascists, defined as: (in
general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.


you're a racist.

How so? Because I'm open to other people's points of view and do not accept the
status quo?


. Clearly you can either read or write and have no knowledge of
history.
How typically American! It would seem to me that _you_ are the racist--you
blame
Arab/Muslim people for the problems we've created for ourselves.

proof we created these problems??

I've provided the title of a very good reference book by William Blum. That's a
start. Read it critically, but be open to what Blum writes.


why...none. none at all. arab invasions of europe were taking place
before the US even existed. seems you don't know that. isabella and
ferdinand expelled the muslims (and the jews) from spain in 1492...a
year with other ramifications...

The invasions went both ways. I seem to remember something about some "crusades"
or something like that.



It should be, but is apparently not, that I embrace no religious.

fundamentalism comes in many forms. america hatred is one.

A second, more dangerous form of fundamentalism, is the "America Right Or Wrong"
attitude that so many Americns have. We are now, as at no other time in U.S.
history, a "lumbering, bellicose, dimwitted giant." It _is_ true that the U.S.
had engendered much good will towards us during WWII---we immediately began
squandering that good will through unwanted foreign interventions. American
hubris and jingoism will be our downfall as we're beginning to see now. I don't
hate America. But, I refuse to accept America as it is. We're headed in a very
immoral (I hate to use that word) and dangerous direction. It's neo-cons and
PNAC that are taking us there. Please! Read about PNAC. Just Google on "PNAC",
click on the links provided and read.


Having exposed your ignorance, it's best that you not post in response to
any
other post in any NG at any time. Lock your door and hide from the facts!


says the inveterate racist....let me know if you run out of bed
sheets...

I'm not going to insult you in the childish manner you've insulted me. I'll note
that you claim to see in me what you, in fact, recognize and dislike in yourself.

We're almost certainly going to lose, not just in Iraq, but in Afghanistan.
We've already lost the hearts and minds of those peoples. Our "coalition of the
willing" is becoming less willing.

Now, respond if you must. But I'm going to do what I came to do in this
NG...read and learn more about SW.

Nice corresponding with you,
MM

(OT) : Canadians Partners in The-War-on-Terror
 

Moonlight Mile wrote:
X-No-Archive:

In article . com,
"wf3h" wrote:

ever hear of the bigotry of low expectations? you refuse to
acknowledge the inherent fascism of islam. you simply can't believe
the dune coons could be intelligent enough to invent such an idea.

Or the bigotry of unrealistic, high expectations?

how about the reality of EQUAL expectations? that concept seems to be
alien to your fundamentalist way of thinking.

Now, use of the term "dune
coons", especially in the context you use it, _is_ rascist.

absolutely. it's the way you think. i just leave the dead cats on the
doorstep.

You are white,
middle or upper-middle class

now let me see...son of a pittsburgh steel worker...laid off 3 times
in last 5 years as semiconductor industry collapsed

IOW you've more more cliches than brains, which helps to explain the
way you (don't) think.


, probably have not read a variety of opinions, talk
only to people you already agree with. You learn more by talking to people you
disagree with, if they are reasoned in their thinking.

says the guy who's never read anything but noam chomsky. says the guy
who mouths every left wing cliche as if they were engraved on tablets
from mt sinai...

Now, Bush and the neo-cons, and possibly you, _are_ fascists, defined as: (in
general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

chuckle i haven't voted republican since i voted for john anderson
against ronald reagan. but, as you try to warp your befuddled brain
around concepts that require independent thinking, i smell the burning
rubber...


you're a racist.

How so? Because I'm open to other people's points of view and do not accept the
status quo?

what 'other' people? you've never read qutb. you've never read azzam.
you don't know the history of the kharijites or the wahabis or the
salafis. you speak from an exclusively far left, white, western point
of view. you're a prime example of what said called an
'orientalist'...

oh. you don't know who said was. pity.

you also regurgitate the tired cliches of baran and wallerstein...but
i'm sure you don't know them, either.

for an update, try tariq ramadan. he's as stullifed and cliche ridden
as you are, but he's more articulate.



. Clearly you can either read or write and have no knowledge of
history.
How typically American! It would seem to me that _you_ are the racist--you
blame
Arab/Muslim people for the problems we've created for ourselves.

proof we created these problems??

I've provided the title of a very good reference book by William Blum. That's a
start. Read it critically, but be open to what Blum writes.

i suggest YOU start with qutb and ramadan. see how little of your own
book of cliches actually belongs to you.



why...none. none at all. arab invasions of europe were taking place
before the US even existed. seems you don't know that. isabella and
ferdinand expelled the muslims (and the jews) from spain in 1492...a
year with other ramifications...

The invasions went both ways. I seem to remember something about some "crusades"
or something like that.

ever read bernard lewis? no? pity, that.

the crusades were not a major event at the time they happened to most
arabs. they aren't mentioned in most documents from the time. they
were ignored, being a minor penetration of a vast empire.

that hardly compares to the muslim invasion of austria in 1683 when
they damn near destroyed vienna

but at least you're finally starting to admit that OTHER people
besides americans can misbehave. there's hope for you yet.


It should be, but is apparently not, that I embrace no religious.

fundamentalism comes in many forms. america hatred is one.

A second, more dangerous form of fundamentalism, is the "America Right Or Wrong"
attitude that so many Americns have.

irrelevant. which is 'more' dangerous is irrelevant to the fact that
BOTH are wrong.

We are now, as at no other time in U.S.
history, a "lumbering, bellicose, dimwitted giant."

and the cliches reach a tidal wave...a tsunami of incoherence...

It _is_ true that the U.S.
had engendered much good will towards us during WWII---we immediately began
squandering that good will through unwanted foreign interventions.

as opposed to islamist fascist aggression in afghanistan...soviet
imperialist aggression in afghanistan and korea...UK intervention in
the suez resulting in US intervention to force the UK to withdraw

IOW you have ignored about 90% of history in favor of 1 idea that you
think explains everything

that's fundamentalism

American
hubris and jingoism will be our downfall as we're beginning to see now. I don't
hate America. But, I refuse to accept America as it is. We're headed in a very
immoral (I hate to use that word) and dangerous direction. It's neo-cons and
PNAC that are taking us there. Please! Read about PNAC. Just Google on "PNAC",
click on the links provided and read.

why not try reading about the 'council on national policy'...a group
that truly DOES practice behind the scenes politics.

you take CURRENT policy and try to project it into the past as if this
were ALWAYS the case. it simply isn't. as i said, you have 1 idea.
america is evil. so you think it's ALWAYS been evil and is UNIQUELY
evil. no other country before or since has been evil.

and that is wrong. wrong, wrong, wrong.



says the inveterate racist....let me know if you run out of bed
sheets...

I'm not going to insult you in the childish manner you've insulted me. I'll note
that you claim to see in me what you, in fact, recognize and dislike in yourself.

sorry, sport. if you're a racist, as you are, then i'm gonna call you
on it. you're as much a racist as any s. baptist who believed that the
white man's burden was god's destiny for the west. you believe in the
white man's burden in your own way.

if we DO lose in afghanistan it will be because of the degeneracy of
islam, not the problems of the US.

(OT) : Canadians Partners in The-War-on-Terror
 

Moonlight Mile wrote:
X-No-Archive:

In article om,
"wf3h" wrote:
The U.S. attacked Afghanistan w/o proper cause,

other than 3000 dead americans, i suppose...

Afghanistan did not kill those 3000 people. Terrorists, who had _some_
association with al Qaeda did that.

ah, the racist rigidity of the fundamentalist mind.

he believes that the nation state is the only way to judge historical
events, not realizing that the nation state was invented in 1648.

uh, where do you think AQ was based (by the way...do you KNOW what 'al
qaeda' means?).

so, yes, afghanistan did attack us.


killing not one person
known to be directly connected with the 9/11 attacks.

we destroyed the taliban who supported, aided, abetted and conspired
with those who did. those involved in a conspiracy are just as guilty
as those who implement it....a basic fact of law...

There is no evidence that the Taliban aided, abetted, and conspired with the
9/11 terrorists.

other than, of course, AQ was based in afghanistan and bin laden knew
of, and approved the plan which was formulated by sheikh khalid
mohammed...also AQ...

The terrorists were Egyptian.

uh, no. 15/19 were saudi arabians.

Trained by Al Qaeda? Maybe? To do
what? Not known with certainty. The U.S. assumed ( unequivocally asserted ) that
the training was to hijack airplanes.

guess he's never read about the flight school training the terrorists
took...

What al Qaeda/bin Laden has clearly stated
is that the U.S. stop supporting oppressive regimes in the Middle East

is there any other kind? and what is 'support'? we had no relations
with libya yet they were as murderous as any. we had no relations with
the sudan yet they caused a civil war which killed 300,000. the french
had $10B in oil contracts with hussein...

yet you think ONLY the US 'supports' (sic) these regimes.

and bin laden's remedy? why...islamist fascism...a goal you have NEVER
condemned. why?

because you're a racist. that's why.

and in
other Muslim countries. It may seem paradoxical, but if these "pro-American"/
unpopular regimes were overthrown or voted out of office, not much would change
except the U.S. would probably no longer be attacked by so-called extremists.

more racist day dreams. if you READ qutb or azzam you KNOW they've
been planning to attack the west for 60 years.

but, no. you prefer the white man's burden. you prefer to think of
yourself heroically standing astride history, defending the ignorant
savage muslims....who are too stupid to invent fascist ideologies.

Muslim nations would have every reason to make peace with us

uh, why? why do you think that, because this is YOUR belief it's also
THEIRS? where have they believed in peace? in democratic bangladesh
where they've called for jihad against a democracy? in india where
they do the same?

WHERE is your evidence for your cult belief?

, trade with us
(oil). The problem is that we would be unable to control and dominate them.
Afghanistan was being bombed by the U.S. in the 1990s.

and we helped liberate them from soviet imperialist aggression...

9/11 was not an
unprovoked attack. It is probably true that 9/11 was a convenient excuse to
invade and control Afghanistan so that we could build and control pipelines to
transport oil and gas from the east side of the Caspian Sea

jesus...is there ANY cliche that you won't vomit?

i guess you didn't know the taliban visited the US in 1994 to discuss
a pipeline...long BEFORE the war. and it's been 5 years since we
liberated afghanistan and there's no pipeline. you seem to ignore the
evidence in favor of cliche of the moment.

, pipelines planned
to run through Afghanistan. It is also true that Iraq was attacked so we could
control their resources, build pipelines through Iraq.

well let's see. we've spent $300B to get oil worth a few billion that
we can't extract for 25 years.

yes, i can see you know as little about math as you do about history.

It seems that the U.N.'s approval is not very important anymore.

except, of course, the taliban killed the UN high commissioner in
iraq...

When denied it,
the U.S. claims the right to attack anyone, anytime, for any reason. When the
U.N. Security Council members are bullied and bribed into approval, the hides
behind that. Case in point: Iran _does_ absolutely have the right to enich
uranium for peaceful purposes.

gee. al baradei seems to think they're hiding things...why didn't the
iranians tell him about the enrichment facility at natanz? i'm a
physical chemist and can tell you that was, to put it mildly, a
significant oversite.

The U.S. claims Iran is doing so to make nuclear
weapons, but the U.S. has absolutely no proof that Iran is planning to build
nuclear weapons. Still, U.N. S.C members are bullied/bribed into passing
resolutions to impose sanctions on Iran. No proof is required. The U.S. is
simply not required to provide proof.

other than the fact that, as the IAEA has stated, the iranians have
lied.

oh...incidentally...if the UN is such a US puppet, how many UN troops
are in iraq?

precisely zero. none.

so, again, your point is squarely on top of your head.


All reasons for attacking
Iraq _again_ (March 20, 2003) have been discredited, and we're still there
after
nearly 4 years. The Iraqis are worse off now than they were under Saddam.
We've
imposed a puppet goverment

?? a govt elected by the people in elections monitored by the UN...

The election was contrived and staged by the U.S

the UN didn't think so. in fact, no one but you believes that.

.. Only those having the American
"seal of approval" could play the game. In short, Jalal Talabani was hand-picked
by the U.S. Do you really think the Iraqis would have elected a Kurd as
President?

who would they have elected? arab islamic ideology forbids democracy,
let alone nationalism

Compare Iraq to Nicaragua

irrelevant.


.. So the U.S. has a long, unpleasant history of imposing governments,
that
the people don't want, on other countries.

perhaps you'd prefer we hand germany back to the nazis? the japanese
back to the 'bushido' culture? that what you're advocating?

or afghanistan to the islamist fascists?



oh i forgot. he hates arabs.

I hate no one. I distrust my government and have no faith in the "wisdom" of the
American people. They elected Reagon twice, Bush twice. I got some land in FL...
Case closed!

and muslims have done what with their first democracy in the middle
east? murdered 40,000 of their own people. but you ignore
that...because you don't particularly care about arabs, or what drives
islamist ideology. you can't conceive of anything that isn't related
to the 'white mans burden'.



I just have no idea what it takes to get through to people like you.

you cant even get thru to yourself. it's no wonder you can't reach
anyone else.

Insult me if you must. But read Blum's "Rogue State:" A Guide..."

and YOU should read arab writers instead of white western ones. you're
a prime example of what said called an 'orientalist'.